Why do economists ignore the most important things about money?

Question

Money is a physical object or is treated as if it were a physical object. Physical objects have social properties. Physical objects (money) can be taken from their owners against the will of the owners. (Theft, fraud, robbery, loss, destruction.) Physical objects (money) are amoral. (Money can be used to motivate any behavior whether good or evil.) Small physical objects (money) can be used in ways that cannot be controlled. (Organized crime, bribery, money laundering, tax evasion.) Changes in the ownership of physical objects (money) are two party transactions. Two party interaction is inherently unstable. An advantage in power can be used to gain a still greater advantage. (Wealth increases faster for the wealthy.) Physical objects (money) in trade falsely simulate a zero-sum relationship because what one party gains the other party loses. The supply of one physical object type is independent of the supply of other objects. (Inflation and deflation.) Physical objects can be counterfeited. These properties of physical object monies in whatever form or manifestation (coins, paper, accounts, salt) explain far more human behavior and relationships than do the physical properties of a currency. Why do economists ignore them?

Answer 1

Money is not treated as a physical object.

Money is best defined by its functions (1) unit of account (2) medium of exchange (3) store of value. As you note, many different items have server and serve as money. Bookkeeping entries serve as money.Most of the money in circulation in the US economy is in non-physical form.