View Single Post
Old December 5 2012, 02:30 PM   #5
Location: Terre Haute, IN. USA
Re: Replicator Economics

Merry Christmas wrote: View Post
JirinPanthosa wrote: View Post
Why should somebody pay latinum for self sealing stembolts when they can just go to a replicator and make them?
I came up with this JirinPanthosa.

Let's say you want one kilogram of antimatter. And you have a replicator connected to a matter/antimatter reactor. How many kilograms of antimatter are you going to "burn" in the m/am reactor to produce one kilogram of antimatter in the replicator. One for one? More?

If your using up five or ten kilos of antimatter, to make one kilo in the replicator, then producing the antimatter some other way makes more sense.

It's the same way with the stem bolts. Trading the land for the stem bolts is 'cheaper" than paying the price of replicating them.

We see people in Star Trek still engaged in mining. So if you need a million tonnes of some metal, it's more desirable to obtain those metals through extracting it from rock, transporting it across interstellar distances, and forming them into a shape --- than having the metal replicated. It's more economical.

That makes perfect sense. When we see replicators used, it is mostly for those basic needs like food and clothing. I always got the idea from watching different Trek episodes that replicators did not eliminate the need for currency, but eliminated poverty by providing a cheap way to meet basic and common needs. No longer were people poor because they did not even have the money for basic things.
Romulan_spy is online now   Reply With Quote