Earlier quoted context omitted.
I believe there isn't a lot of historical evidence that state-backed currencies emerged to deal with undesirable aspects of barter. That's pretty much just a myth people decided made sense, rather than something that happened in history. We mostly don't know why money/currency came into existence, it happened so long ago. There is some evidence that at least in some places it was to fund armies or generally provide m…
There may not be historical evidence, but first principles tell me that most people prefer cash to trading pelts for groceries every week.
That might be true, but your prior comment says
> State-backed central currencies emerged because people in informal economies were bartering to exchange goods and services, which is less efficient than having a standardized medium of exchange, so central authorities issued currency in order to increase the efficiency of the economy.
Which is a much stronger claim and doesn't necessarily follow from the fact that "people prefer cash to trading pelts for groceries".
If you check the wikipedia article on the history of money[1], the first forms of currency wasn't issued by the state. They were informal credit systems, or standardized unit of account (eg. grain, or receipt for grain stored at a granary and later precious metals). State backed versions of the latter came later. Even in the US, prior to the federal reserve, "currency" was IOUs for gold issued by various private banks.