In the realm of economics, the relationship between production and money is often misunderstood. This article delves into the idea that money is not something that can be centrally planned or controlled by policymakers. Instead, it emerges naturally as a result of production. The central argument revolves around the notion that focusing on monetary policy distracts from the real driver of economic growth—production itself. While some advocate for government control over money supply, this perspective overlooks the fact that money is merely an instrument reflecting the exchange of goods, services, and labor.

Recently, an opinion piece by Dominic Pino of the Civitas Institute sparked debate about whether politicians should have control over what is termed "money supply." However, this premise assumes that there needs to be a centralized authority managing an exchange medium for commerce to thrive. In reality, without production, money becomes meaningless. It is production that gives rise to the need for money, making any attempt at central planning futile.

Money circulates where production exists, and producers decide which currencies are most suitable for their transactions. For instance, dollars, euros, yen, pounds, and Swiss francs frequently circulate in regions where they are neither the local currency nor legally mandated tender. This phenomenon underscores the truth that production determines the circulation of money, not government policies or economists' plans.

The belief in central planning stems from a misunderstanding of how markets function. Economists who imagine themselves capable of designing optimal monetary policies fail to grasp that money is an outcome of countless decisions made daily across the globe. These experts propose specific rates of money growth, GDP targets, unemployment levels, and inflationary measures, all while ignoring the fundamental role of production in shaping monetary systems.

Despite these theoretical constructs, market realities consistently push back against such notions. Producers seek equal value for their contributions to the market, disregarding artificial constraints like legal tender laws or planned money supplies. Their actions demonstrate that monetary policy is effectively determined by producers rather than bureaucrats or academics.

In conclusion, the question of whether politicians should control money supply is ultimately irrelevant. History and current practice show that central planning fails because it attempts to override the natural interplay between production and money. True economic progress hinges on fostering an environment where production flourishes, allowing money to organically emerge as a tool facilitating trade and exchange.