If you have a consistent utility function over outcomes, you cannot be money-pumped. This is not a utility function over changes in money, it is a utility function over total money.

This actually struck me as a problem with your argument from earlier, though I didn't point it out at that time. I think you plain don't understand expected utility, actually.

In the above, the question is the preference between a mix of (.5(B + 1) + .5(B + 2)) vs. (1(B + 1.49)) and a consistent version of a human (as opposed to an actual human) would prefer the former lottery given at least a hundred bucks in bank B. After that, of course, the amount in B changes. But if you start by putting consistent utilities over the total amount of money, you cannot be money-pumped.