OK, here is a question for readers-
Is there any difference between a ‘rich’ society where money does not circulate and a ‘poor’ one that lacks money?
Let me explain this with an example derived from the practice of medicine. If a person went into cardiogenic shock due to heart muscle damage after a large but initially survivable heart attack, is the person dying for lack of blood?
The correct answer is yes and no. While the effects of cardiogenic shock on the rest of the body are similar to those after a massive loss of blood, there is no significant reduction in the volume of blood after a massive heart attack. However its circulation and oxygenation-decarbonation are so severely disrupted that other organs in the body are functionally starved of blood, or more precisely what blood flow does for them.
Similarly an economic system with lots of ‘money’ but little to no flow of money is as poor as one without it. The value of money is linked to its ability to flow through a network of individuals thereby allowing economic activity. Without flow it is just a useless piece of metal, paper of magnetic state in a computer.