Sir, you gravely misinterpret “money” here. What is meant, or is in fact true, is commerce. Money is but a tool of commerce as are ledgers. By your own article, money has value because we believe it does. So you see, this quote surely didn’t mean that the role of government is to provide that value, and that something different was meant. As a you are a lawyer, I find your perspective on government shocking. Commerce, i.e. how we all make our livelihood, shall be overrun by pirates and despots without the rule of law and we shall surely return to feudalism.
Your invocation of the founding fathers is also fanciful and also overlooks the importance of commerce. The right to vote was granted to land owners because they were the ones who could participate in commerce.
The reason for the electoral college is not for a lack of trust in the people, but for a necessity of republicanism, in contrast to federal rule. The lack of trust you pick up on was of people representing the interests of people far removed from one’s community. Representative democracy was intended to be paired with states rights and local government influencing daily life more substantially than federal law.
And yet, federation was recognized as necessary, again, to regulate and protect, you guessed it, commerce. The modern formation of the EU is perfectly illustrative. Sure, you can find criticism but like everything, it is a work in progress and if it fails it won’t be the last time in history it is attempted.