Idk about "involves" but the ones centered on money certainly

I've heard this from a lot of people but I don't get it. Isn't money just a way of facilitating transactions?

Like I understand not wanting money for individuals, and I support that, but what's wrong with using money for international trade?

Like do only people who live in climates with coffee beans get coffee? Or are the coffee growers just left uncompensated? Or do we come up with some other non-currency way to reward their efforts?

That's certainly an unpopular opinion. You have three opinions that can manifest in terms of an ideal society that can cover the needs here.

One is where all the needs are provided by the state aka directed communism which is the exact system that typically immediately fails (USSR and CCP tried it) and leads to famine. Almost everyone is against this outcome and system.

The second is referring back to bartering which is arguably not more civilized by definition.

The third is a post scarcity world which is not currently the case. Even Star Trek had currency for things beyond their needs. Very few people think we are in a post scarcity world currently.

There is a fourth which is typically held by anarchists which requires people to give up power at even a local level and prejudice to magically disappear so also not a popular opinion in terms of people that think it is possible.

There's also the high level narrative that this must overcome in which people are entitled to the value of their labor. This assures that this is not possible.

There's a lot of discussion to be had here but congrats on finding an opinion that is truly unpopular.