The primary problem with the system of barter is the relative lack of liquidity. Money changes all this. Money, however, requires trust. The statements of the issuer of a nation's currency must have believability. The leaders of the nation also must have believability.

When you bring your commodity to the market, it is given a value in the currency of trade. Before you hand over your goods, it is well to look closely at what you receive in exchange. If it is a piece of paper, there is a lot of trust required before you can be convinced the exchange was equitable. If you find there has been an attempt to deceive, you may well be unhappy with the trade. Redress is always difficult and expensive. "A deal is a deal," the trader says, "and all exchanges are final."

The benefit of barter is that the objects of trade are available for inspection. Modern trade makes this impossible, and thus there must be trust. There is an opportunity for honest mistakes, and there is ample opportunity for "dishonest mistakes." Modern business is not for the neophyte.

It is well known that the human memory is not reliable. Two people watching the same event will often report different versions to a panel of experts who have staged the event. Much money can be made from this memory mismatch. Enter the written record, in the form of hard clay tablets that preserve the tally markets of transactions for eternity. Ten thousand years is a pittance for the clay tablets, which survive untold generations of accountants.

Transportation and storage have always presented problems, and this is also true of the currency used and the records which preserve the details of each and every event in the corporate world. The money may be handed about in physical form, packed from place to place in a valise or a plastic bag. Because there are plenty of places to lose track of money in motion, there is a market for money transport and storage. The people who operate this type of business are known as bankers, and for a small fee they will place your money (and other valuables) in a secure place in their building, which is called a bank.

Because the money is held in trust, if armed robbers come to take the money by force, the bankers erect a room, called a vault, which is constructed to oppose entry by force. The vault is the inner sanctum of the bank, and in the vault you must place your trust. You may rent your own "room" in the vault, and go there without fee to visit your money whenever you have nightmares that the money is missing. The banks do not pay interest on stored money. They charge a small fee for storing it.

Over a period of time, after a few visits to the vault, confidence builds that the money is safely stored. This is the beginning of your vulnerability. Fraud begins with the establishment of confidence. The people who convert your money to their pockets by stealth or force are called thieves. When they do this with your participation they are called "confidence men," or "con men" in the short version.

People make a career of recording business transactions. They are trained in the methods of accounting, and thus are known as "accountants." When they are honest they perform a valuable service, but when they are dishonest they are thieves or con men.

They are a indeed a special breed. Tests of intelligence ranking the various professions generally place accountants at the top. This knowledge inspires both confidence and a sense of unease.

In the news almost every day is a news item reporting that an accountant has abused the trust placed in the position and the profession. Yesterday it was an accountant in Singapore who wrote fraudulent checks from the company account to himself or his assigns. He is said to be cursed with the gambling addiction. Today it is a man in Muar.

Accounting in its basic functions is rather simple. It may be reduced to just two operations, the debit and the credit, and the consequence of those operations, known as the balance. Debit, credit, balance. Whether the account is for receivables, payables, inventory or payroll, the form is the same, only the column headings are different.

When you put money into your bank account, it is a credit, and the balance goes up. The accountant records the amount, along with the date, and the increase in your balance. If he removes the money for himself when you leave, that is a debit, and the balance decreases accordingly. Naturally he will want to keep this half of the affair, known as an embezzlement, a guarded secret. So long as you remain unaware that the money is missing, the fraud is not a matter of personal or public interest. It stays hidden until the external, independent, auditor arrives.

When the fact that the funds are missing becomes known, the depositor raises a ruckus, and the culprit is soon brought to justice. That happens when there is widespread interest in maintaining the confidence of the public. Every avenue will be exhausted to conceal the fraud. The records may be altered. They may be destroyed. Missing records are a commonplace.

"I didn't do it," is the first response of the accountant, "the money is still there." Inspection soon verifies whether this is true or not. "The money was never deposited," the accountant says, "either the amounts are wrong or the money was given to someone else. I didn't do it. If the money is missing, then it was somebody else who took it."

When an officer of a bank embezzles money, the bank officers must decide whether to quietly replace it from their general fund, or risk losing public confidence by making the news of their man's perfidy known to the media. The confidence of the public is critical to the future of their money transfer and storage business.

The public relations problems of banks are multiplied many-fold by governments around the world. The officers of the political parties who are entrusted to temporarily operate the government must inspire trust. They must be seen to be candid and sincere. If they are suspected of attempting to conceal the truth, protecting the embezzler, then the full faith and credit of the entire country falls.

Governments attempt to generate support for their currency by issuing timely reports on the state of the national economy. The statistics are worthless if their credibility is suspect. No one will want to hold the national currency, and, in spite of every attempt to support it, its value on the open market falls.

Currency traders become wealthy by selling corrupt governments short, because inevitably the true value becomes apparent, and they can cash in for enormous profits. Their gain is at the expense of the people who have allowed the corrupt government to remain in place. The value of everything which is traded in the national currency declines as well. To conceal the erosion from public view, the stock market is manipulated so that it appears that all is well. It is another secret that must be kept at all costs.

But it is a difficult secret to keep. The credibility of the government is essential to the operation of daily business activity, and when this is lost, all is lost. Prudent companies reduce their exposure, new ventures are cancelled, and no one will want to hold the bonds or other credit instruments of the suspect government.

In a democracy the leaders of the governing political party hold positions of trust in the cabinet. They are trusted with public funds. When faith in their honesty is lost, the entire structure of the country erodes as well. The loss of confidence is reflected in the lack of support in coming elections and steadily deteriorating economic statistics.

That is why ministers resign. Not because they have shame. Not because they have regret. Not because they intend to return the money, or otherwise rectify their malfeasance. They resign because failure to do so destroys all faith and confidence in the currency, along with the country. If they fail to resign, it appears that they are being protected, and confidence erodes further.

It gives the appearance that regaining the confidence of the voters and the global neighbors is secondary to keeping the minister in place. The minister's decision not to resign is not a personal one, it is subject to the approval of his party and other political participants, especially the prime minister.

When a minister fails to give up his government position of trust in favor of a man who can restore confidence it is a message to the world that the ministers have decided to place their political and personal fortunes above the welfare of the country. It is tantamount to an admission that the country is in secession from the world community, sequestering the innocent behind the walls with them.