Rothbard, Mish and Commodities

Mish quotes Rothbard on the difference between money and commodities:

When the supply of any other good [besides money] increases, this increase confers a social benefit; it is a matter for general rejoicing. More consumer goods mean a higher standard of living for the public; more capital goods mean sustained and increased living standards in the future.

Not quite right. The utility of consumer goods can change suddenly, meaning that resources poured into some inventory, in retrospect, would have been better used elsewhere. The classic case is the horse, which at some point rapidly dropped to zero in utility for major cities. The arrival of electrification for street cars created a different vision of the future, rather suddenly. Crowded cities realized that the large collection of horses and stables simply got in the way, even before the electric street cars had been completely built.

Money is just another good, but the difference between money and other goods is simply that money is lightweight, equilibritates faster, and can reverse its flow in the production line. The arrival of technology change can create the same dynamic between two real goods because the new technology is generally more adaptable. So, somewhere around 1870, price of horses, measured in units of electric motors, went to near zero, rather suddenly.