On idealism and exchange value

Every now and then people claim that there is no idealism anymore. If the person is serious about this he might evocate some sixtie-ish love, peace and happiness or maybe even bring up a more religious past were people had higher ideals. The question is of course what idealism is. We use the word idealist when we speak of a dreamer that mistakes his subjective aspirations as something that can change reality. Reality blocks idealism. Reality is equated with some sort of semi-natural law of struggle and egoism. Or more precise, reality is defined as money. The exhange value of an act is what determines the reality/idealism factor. Whenever someone acts without the explicit goal of making big money with it he is called an idealist. The exchange value of an act determines therefore if the action is idealistic or realistic. In a book on education it is for example stated that teachers do not go for the big money and are therefore idealists and that this not money-driven idealism should make us trust the intentions of the teachers. This has some consequences. Those who do things only with the goal of making big money is not to be trusted. We can agree on that. A strange consequence is that only persons that can not be trusted and have no ideals whatsoever are allowed to make big money. An idealist should remain poor by definition. A rich idealist is difficult to picture. The rich person that donates to good causes is seen as someone who wants to pay of his guilt or it is some sort of pr stunt to gain popularity as was commun usage in roman times.