But the regression theorem requires that the money have value each prior day, even when you get all the way back to the day before the moneystuff became money. Hence the need for an intrinsic value.
I thought the regression theorem came from economists who do not believe in intrinsic value and believe that all value is subjective. I think you may be mixing and matching incompatible economic concepts.
I agree with this. I can't see how the term intrinsic value even makes any sense in this conversation.
There is confusion of what intrinsic value is. It is value that is not exchange value. Subjective if you like, the value is decided by the value scales of the actors on the market. It is used with commodities that come to be used as money. The moneyness of the commodity makes for additional value, compared to only the use value of the commodity outside of its moneyness. If apples are not money, they can be eaten, and may be have the same value as oranges. If apples are money, it will have additional value as medium of exchange. It is really not difficult, but the word intrinsic has a meaning outside the realm of money, therefore confusion.