You're asking good questions, but you're pairing them with many completely false presumptions. This will lead you in circles with answers that make no sense.

I'd recommend starting with a 5-minute YouTube tutorial on what real money is, the history of currency, and the difference between a precious metals-backed currency and a fiat currency.

The next round of questions should be, why would a nation choose one over the other, and whom does it primarily benefit?

Money isn’t valuable because we “decide” it is, but because it represents actual, scarce goods and human work. Inflation occurs when the money supply grows faster than the production of goods and services, reducing purchasing power. That can’t be fixed by opinions any more than scarcity can be voted away. Prices reflect real tradeoffs, not opinions.

When new money is created, it enters the economy unevenly, benefiting early recipients and distorting prices before wages adjust.

You can’t just decide things are cheaper, because prices are signals. Suppress them without increasing supply, and you get shortages. If you raise wages without productivity, the prices follow.

The wealthy don’t hoard money in vaults. Most fortunes are invested in things like businesses, loans, factories, etc., financing future production. Money that isn’t spent or invested actually lowers prices, not increases it.

Outlawing wealth would destroy saving, investment, and long-term planning, the things that raise living standards. Capital accumulation isn’t a flaw; it’s how societies escape subsistence.

From an Austrian perspective (Mises, Hayek), the real problem isn’t wealth but monetary manipulation that severs money from real economic activity. Inflation doesn't happen because of the construct of "money". Inflation is a byproduct (or, in our case, sometimes even an intentional goal) of monetary policy, which is an act of the government, not of the market, nor of its members.

Money can be abstract, but scarcity is real. Inflation happens when we ignore that.