I realised that you'd require them in order to have an objective means of measuring things in a system where the 'money value' is decided by some calculated mechanism.

"money value" is objectively not objective. Why do you think there needs to be a "money value"?

Uhhh, yes you are.. IF money IS a simply a medium of exchange, and it DIDN'T exist prior to 5,000 years ago, then exchanging goods and services would be IMPOSSIBLE

You are literally so stupid that I cojnsider you an object that isn't sentient. Exchange obviously existed before money, it's called trade. Damn you are stupid.

I know the fact that liberal socialists

That's an oxymoron. Liberals are capitalists, social democrats are capitalists who want tight corporate regulation and a welfare state, and socialists are the ones who want no market economy and collective ownership of the means of production. Do you see the very clear difference between those three things? Do you see how each one is more left wing than the last and there is a big fat "social democracy" separating liberalism and socialism? Do you need a diagram or are we good? Look up the definitions if you doubt me.

You don't have the right to free things.

People who are born into wealth don't have the right to free things. People who own assets and collect money without working don't have the right to free things. I don't see why you have a problem with everyone getting free things when you seem cool with a few people getting EVERYTHING for free while there are homeless people starving in the streets.