As a much better alternative, I would recommend "debt" by david graeber, which is amazing.
Graeber is controversial. Archeologists hate how he argues by ad hominem and does not appear to understand the works he cites, to make his argument.
I can't speak to his work on finance as a whole. Regarding deep time, his claims about pre-literate society from archeology are not widely supported, they use thin evidence to argue badly.
His anarcho-socialism isn't the concern. It's his lack of historicity, and inability to bring his peers with him on radical ideas which concerns me.
He's dead, he can't defend himself. So there's that.
Is your comment perhaps in reference to the comment ‘ the assumptions and estimates that go into it, I recommend Financial Intelligence by Joe Knight and Karen Berman’ and not the parent comment you’ve replied to?