RSS iconTwitter iconFacebook icon

The Trek BBS title image

The Trek BBS statistics

Threads: 141,358
Posts: 5,503,204
Members: 25,121
Currently online: 535
Newest member: almehtabshaikh

TrekToday headlines

IDW Publishing March 2015 Comics
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Paramount Star Trek 3 Expectations
By: T'Bonz on Dec 17

Star Trek #39 Sneak Peek
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Star Trek 3 Potential Director Shortlist
By: T'Bonz on Dec 16

Official Starships Collection Update
By: T'Bonz on Dec 15

Retro Review: Prodigal Daughter
By: Michelle on Dec 13

Sindicate Lager To Debut In The US Next Week
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12

Rumor Mill: Saldana Gives Birth
By: T'Bonz on Dec 12

New Line of Anovos Enterprise Uniforms
By: T'Bonz on Dec 11

Frakes: Sign Me Up!
By: T'Bonz on Dec 11


Welcome! The Trek BBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans. Please login to see our full range of forums as well as the ability to send and receive private messages, track your favourite topics and of course join in the discussions.

If you are a new visitor, join us for free. If you are an existing member please login below. Note: for members who joined under our old messageboard system, please login with your display name not your login name.


Go Back   The Trek BBS > Welcome to the Trek BBS! > General Trek Discussion

General Trek Discussion Trek TV and cinema subjects not related to any specific series or movie.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old February 17 2014, 01:02 AM   #16
urbandefault
Captain
 
urbandefault's Avatar
 
Location: Chicken pot, chicken pot, chicken pot pie!
Re: "The economics of the future are somewhat different..."

JirinPanthosa wrote: View Post
You also have to think, though, that seating at Sisko Sr's restaurant goes to his friends and the well connected before they go to the general public.
Why do you say that?
__________________
"GARY BUSEY!" - Gary Busey
urbandefault is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17 2014, 01:05 AM   #17
Merry Christmas
Vice Admiral
 
Merry Christmas's Avatar
 
Location: tantalizing t'girl's techno temenos
Re: "The economics of the future are somewhat different..."

PhoenixClass wrote: View Post
There is a safety net in the US, but you are overstating your case in terms of how effective and robust it is. If it was, the US would look a lot more like Star Trek than it does.
The safety net is what it is, part of the problem with it being overloaded is that it really seem to have been design to catch people when they fall, but not so much to continue to hold them for protracted period of time. All the while more people need to be caught on their way down.

There are people who stay in the system only a short period of time, catch their breath and reenter society and work force, clearing the way for new arrivals.

People who make no real effort to leave the social service and charity system are the ones bogging it down. And I'm very much aware that there is a separate group of people with mental problems and who have addictions to drug and alcohol, who need a entirely different kind of help.

They need to be in mental hospitals and treatment facilities, but there they are in the shelters and the charity kitchens. Largely (but not exclusively) they are the source of the violence in the shelters that leads others to staying on the streets for their own safety, but where they also won't be getting any help.

Sometimes I've tried to get teens and twenty-somethings to come inside, but they're scared of "the crazies." And by law we can't keep the crazies out, we have to wait until the preventible trouble start..

Excuse me if I vented.

Merry Christmas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17 2014, 01:25 AM   #18
JirinPanthosa
Rear Admiral
 
Re: "The economics of the future are somewhat different..."

urbandefault wrote: View Post
JirinPanthosa wrote: View Post
You also have to think, though, that seating at Sisko Sr's restaurant goes to his friends and the well connected before they go to the general public.
Why do you say that?
A small nice restaurant can only service so many people at once. If it's a popular restaurant and there's no money cost, the demand is going to far outweigh the supply.

So either he decides who's going to get in by random draw, or he picks based on who he would prefer be in the restaurant. Which is his friends, his local regulars, and people he wants to make connections with.

When there is no physical currency, influence becomes currency.

@T'Girl

I agree with you there. The problem with the social safety net in the US is that it's not preventative. It doesn't step in until the damage is already done.
JirinPanthosa is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17 2014, 02:10 AM   #19
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: "The economics of the future are somewhat different..."

urbandefault wrote: View Post
T'Girl wrote: View Post
RunawayStarShip wrote: View Post
... no one is really at risk of death from starvation or disease, and it does jive with the no poverty thing ...
That's one way, I came up years ago with a future United Earth safety net, or what my friends called the cement floor, it's a point below which society simply wouldn't let you fall any further. Mostly from the thread Imagining the Federation governmental structure.

-You would have access to basic food and water. You won't starve or even go hungry/thirsty.

-You'll have someplace dry, warm, safe and protected to live and sleep, but it might be a open bay arrangement that you share with twenty other people. You won't freeze, cook or be wet.

-There will be clothes on your back and shoes/boots on your feet, a coat too. You won't be naked.

-Local public transit. You won't be walking long distances.

-K through 12 education. You won't be uneducated.

-Free emergency room care. You won't "die in the street."

-Limited "cell phone" communication, also limited "internet" access, You won't be (completely) incommunicado. You get internet information and job openings, but nothing that would be considered entertainment.

Pretty bare bones, beyond this the society gives you nothing, it's designed this way so that you won't want to live out your life here. And there would be societal pressure to not stay at this level.

And make no mistake, this isn't a right or a entitlement, it's social charity.

It's not that society can't give you more, it's that society won't.

Want more? Then "seek to better yourself" through education and hard work. Push yourself.

You want more education, college or tech school? Good, take a test to show you would prosper, then maintain a good grade point average. If you start slacking and get bad grades you'll be shown the door. The world you live in will bend over backward to help you find and keep a job. Even if the job is only vacuuming the floors at Starfleet Academy.

The same with transporter use, replicators, holodecks, vacations, space travel, jumping clubs, restaurants, gourmet foods, cheap liquor , fine wines, stylish threads, condos, houses on the beach, vintage corvettes.

The senoritas no go, if you have no dinero.

MacLeod wrote: View Post
But it's not a stretch to believe that Universal Health Care is the norm ...
No it really isn't, it certainly is one possibility, but there are others.

The non-canon backstory for McCoy in the prime universe is that prior to Starfleet he was a successful civilian doctor, he lost most of his money and property in a divorce. Dialog from Nu-McCoy tells a similar story.

In some ways TOS is a creature of 1960's America, McCoy would have been a doctor in private practice, and would have either directly billed his patients, or their insurance provider. A government "single payer" UHC system wouldn't be part of that future.

And while that may not be what exists in the 23rd century Star Trek universe, it is a possibility.

I agree.

In fact, most, if not all of what you've described is already in place in the US. That people don't take advantage of it is beyond me. No one who wants food, clothing, or shelter has to do without. No one has to "die in the streets," or even live there for that matter. It takes a little bit of initiative (and by "initiative" I mean "get off your butt and go sign up"), but even the poorest among us can have these basic things and maintain their dignity at the same time.



The USA actually has the meanest and stingiest of all Western welfare states. There is no guaranteed housing, food stamps are a political football that are constantly being cut, unemployment insurance is being cut from long-term unemployed as we speak.

The US is FAR from a socially democratic society that guarantees entitlements to the basic necessities, unfortunately.

As for Federation economics, I think it probably is just a robust welfare state beyond which you work to increase your opportunities.
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17 2014, 02:26 AM   #20
PhoenixClass
Lieutenant Commander
 
Re: "The economics of the future are somewhat different..."

T'Girl wrote: View Post
People who make no real effort to leave the social service and charity system are the ones bogging it down.
What percentage of the people in the safety net make up this group?

Incidentally, you didn't sound like you were venting. Just making your point.
PhoenixClass is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17 2014, 04:03 AM   #21
Merry Christmas
Vice Admiral
 
Merry Christmas's Avatar
 
Location: tantalizing t'girl's techno temenos
Re: "The economics of the future are somewhat different..."

sonak wrote: View Post
The USA actually has the meanest and stingiest of all Western welfare states.
That because we're not a welfare state, we have isolated separate welfare programs, we don't have what you might call a integrated system.

The US is FAR from a socially democratic society that guarantees entitlements to the basic necessities, unfortunately.
True it's not, but you need to take into account that there is a significant percentage of the American population that doesn't want the country to one day become a "social democracy society." Obviously we already have some aspect of one, but more than we already have, it just might not happen.

Things like that not how other Western nations do things has absolutely no impact here.

As for Federation economics, I think it probably is just a robust welfare state beyond which you work to increase your opportunities.
Federation wide? I would say no, it would vary from Member to Member. Some would be literally cradle to grave, other would have next to none.

JirinPanthosa wrote: View Post
So either he decides who's going to get in by random draw, or he picks based on who he would prefer be in the restaurant. Which is his friends, his local regulars, and people he wants to make connections with.
That's an interesting idea, seating by invitation only, Sisko decides, and celebrities come running.

Merry Christmas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17 2014, 05:35 AM   #22
Push The Button
Captain
 
Push The Button's Avatar
 
Location: Smithfield, Rhode Island USA
Re: "The economics of the future are somewhat different..."

Capt. Picard: This is the 24th century. Material needs no longer exist.
Ralph Offenhouse: Then what's the challenge?
Capt. Picard: The challenge, Mr. Offenhouse, is to improve yourself. To enrich yourself. Enjoy it.


Oh, if only we could devote all of our time and effort to self-improvement, instead of wasting it performing tasks that we hate, surrounded by people that annoy us, struggling to stay one step ahead of the next mortgage payment, or out of the homeless shelter.

Put another way, I'd gladly work for free, as long as it was because I wanted to, and not because I had to. Something about spending 50 years with a gun to my head, helping make other people rich, and maybe being able to die at the end of it all with $5 in my checking account if I'm lucky really pisses me off. Every single day.
__________________
Check the circuit!
Mr. Spock, The Cage
(The very first line of dialogue in the series)
Push The Button is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17 2014, 06:03 AM   #23
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: "The economics of the future are somewhat different..."

T'Girl wrote: View Post
sonak wrote: View Post
The USA actually has the meanest and stingiest of all Western welfare states.
That because we're not a welfare state, we have isolated separate welfare programs, we don't have what you might call a integrated system.

The US is FAR from a socially democratic society that guarantees entitlements to the basic necessities, unfortunately.
True it's not, but you need to take into account that there is a significant percentage of the American population that doesn't want the country to one day become a "social democracy society." Obviously we already have some aspect of one, but more than we already have, it just might not happen.

Things like that not how other Western nations do things has absolutely no impact here.

As for Federation economics, I think it probably is just a robust welfare state beyond which you work to increase your opportunities.
Federation wide? I would say no, it would vary from Member to Member. Some would be literally cradle to grave, other would have next to none.

JirinPanthosa wrote: View Post
So either he decides who's going to get in by random draw, or he picks based on who he would prefer be in the restaurant. Which is his friends, his local regulars, and people he wants to make connections with.
That's an interesting idea, seating by invitation only, Sisko decides, and celebrities come running.


We've learned from various episodes that the Federation has certain basic standards and expectations for membership, such as no caste systems and a certain level of civil freedoms. I would hope that the Federation would have a basic standard of social welfare that would apply to all member planets.
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17 2014, 11:25 AM   #24
grendelsbayne
Commander
 
grendelsbayne's Avatar
 
Location: Netherlands
Re: "The economics of the future are somewhat different..."

sonak wrote: View Post
We've learned from various episodes that the Federation has certain basic standards and expectations for membership, such as no caste systems and a certain level of civil freedoms. I would hope that the Federation would have a basic standard of social welfare that would apply to all member planets.
On the other hand, didn't we see any number of relatively primitive outposts/colonies which physically probably simply could not provide the same standard of living as a cushy established world like Earth?
grendelsbayne is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17 2014, 01:22 PM   #25
Merry Christmas
Vice Admiral
 
Merry Christmas's Avatar
 
Location: tantalizing t'girl's techno temenos
Re: "The economics of the future are somewhat different..."

sonak wrote: View Post
We've learned from various episodes that the Federation has certain basic standards and expectations for membership, such as no caste systems
I posted in a another thread recently, if the Bajorians were a powerful and wealth interstellar state, with a strong fleet and hundreds of prosperous colonies, and they wanted the join the Federation. Oh, and they had castes.

And more than wanted, the Federation needed the
Bajorian to join.

Would anyone have even mentioned the thing about the castes?

If powerful Vulcan still had the central command government when the Federation was formed, would the other founders have said no you can't join our community?

Push The Button wrote: View Post
Capt. Picard: This is the 24th century. Material needs no longer exist.
Which is a foolish piece of philosophical fluff, of course material needs still exist.

I truly believe that a lot of what Picard was saying in that episode reflected his own personal philosophy of life, and not an overall blueprint of Humanity the 24th century.
Merry Christmas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17 2014, 01:36 PM   #26
2takesfrakes
Commodore
 
2takesfrakes's Avatar
 
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Re: "The economics of the future are somewhat different..."

In a Welfare State, the problem is, you eventually run out of other people's money.
__________________
"― And she brought forth her firstborn Son, and wrapped Him in swaddling clothes, and laid Him in a manger; because there was no room for them in the inn." (Luke 2:7)
2takesfrakes is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17 2014, 01:50 PM   #27
USS KG5
Vice Admiral
 
USS KG5's Avatar
 
Location: England's green and pleasant land.
Re: "The economics of the future are somewhat different..."

grendelsbayne wrote: View Post
On the other hand, didn't we see any number of relatively primitive outposts/colonies which physically probably simply could not provide the same standard of living as a cushy established world like Earth?
DS9 establishes pretty clearly that Earth is a paradise - not the entire Federation, the colonies doubtless have a harder time, but the colonists are likely chosen competitively, why would you take the lazy or stupid to build a new world?

The reality of our current economies is that we need everyone to work, or think we do, so we pretty much have to make welfare stingy enough that for the majority there is no choice.

In Trek's high tech future you don't, and basic needs like food and housing will be incredibly cheap due to technology. So why be stingy, get fat you workshy chaps, I'll be off in my starship so nuts to you, it makes no difference to me.

The Federation doesn't need to be socialist, you can actually mix social democracy and individual achievement, it isn't impossible.
__________________
I believe in a better world, so I love Star Trek. I have to live in this one, so I love Battlestar Galactica.
USS KG5 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17 2014, 04:38 PM   #28
Merry Christmas
Vice Admiral
 
Merry Christmas's Avatar
 
Location: tantalizing t'girl's techno temenos
Re: "The economics of the future are somewhat different..."

Earth as a paradise, i guess it would be a matter of how you define paradise, a total welfare state wouldn't be my idea of a paradise.

So when Earth is describe as such, to me the fan, that means it isn't a welfare state.

YMMV,

Merry Christmas is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17 2014, 05:13 PM   #29
Nightdiamond
Fleet Captain
 
Nightdiamond's Avatar
 
Location: California
Re: "The economics of the future are somewhat different..."

I remember this from a character from a DS9 episode;

ARISSA: It's not like a Federation world where everything is handed to you.
She had to have gotten that notion from somewhere. This sounds strongly like a welfare state description, but with non of the negative connotations like from today.

With the 'work to better ourselves and humanity' idea combined with no needs or wants statements, poverty being eliminated, and the humans don't possess money--

Trek is strongly suggesting that replicators and other tech are providing all basic needs and even luxury needs.

As if there is a replicator in every home and the energy is easily provided to them.

As a result, with the Federation's philosophy, something like universal healthcare has to be a given in 24th century Earth.

Parts are easily replicated, and the doctors do it to better themselves and humanity.

So, almost everything is free?

Last edited by Nightdiamond; February 17 2014 at 05:37 PM.
Nightdiamond is offline   Reply With Quote
Old February 17 2014, 05:30 PM   #30
sonak
Vice Admiral
 
Location: in a figment of a mediocre mind's imagination
Re: "The economics of the future are somewhat different..."

2takesfrakes wrote: View Post
In a Welfare State, the problem is, you eventually run out of other people's money.


That was a silly slogan when Maggie Thatcher used it to refer to the "problem" with socialism and it's still silly. What does it even mean? Assuming that you have a growing economy and a reasonable tax rate, why would you "run out" of "other people's" money?(putting aside the ridiculous distinction between wealth that is socially produced anyway)
__________________
"why oh why didn't I take the blue pill?"
sonak is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:40 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.6
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
FireFox 2+ or Internet Explorer 7+ highly recommended.