>Creating money doesn't create more resource
True, it only creates the promise to work in the future. Whether that promise is worth something is up to the person making the promise.
>it just dilutes the medium of exchange and changes the vector of the capital allocation
That's an odd way of saying "higher interest rates". People do investments. They pay an interest rate according to the profitability of that investment. When there isn't enough aggregate supply to allow both investment and consumption the interest rate is raised until people either stop consuming because they are getting paid interest or because there are so many investments available you only pick the best ones.
> The creation of money itself actually hurts the system where those who had previously been successful in creating wealth through performance of capital allocation or labour and now partially disenfranchised of the full right they had earned to continue this trend.
Money is a promise that someone will work for you. That's not wealth, that's a promise of future wealth. Letting people promise even more future wealth does in no way hurt anyone. You also have to be realistic. If the promise turns out to not be true, then lying to everyone that it's real just makes everything worse because people keep "investing" into a lie.
As I said in other comments. Labor cannot be stored. Simply holding onto money doesn't mean people are still there willing to work for you. Holding onto money in that sense can be self defeating. It's like that economic pie analogy. The pie has to be baked every day. If you don't eat the whole pie it will spoil and go into the trash. Uneaten cake benefits nobody so either stop baking so much cake or eat it before it's gone.
> now partially disenfranchised of the full right they had earned to continue this trend.
Well, as you can see in the pie analogy he has no intention to continue this trend otherwise he would avoid monetary savings because of the labor storage problem.