Another take on "there's no money in the 24th century"

[CorporalCaptain]

Canonically, it's not the Federation that has no money, it's humanity.

I'm not following.

Earth is just another Federation member world, after all. Sure, the capital buildings and Starfleet Command are there, but it's not like Earth's a special case. And there must be hundreds of thousands of aliens living on Earth. So how could humans have no money, but not the rest of those beings?

And if Earth is such a paradise, then why would anyone want to leave it?

What I mean is, it's never been said outright, AFAIK, that the Federation doesn't use money. Only that humans don't use money. You said: "....is that if the Federation really does have no money..." Based on canon, the Federation does use money: Federation credits. So, it really could be that Earth isn't typical of Federation worlds.

As far as "In the Cards" goes, it seems like an attempt by Moore et al. to kind of split the difference between all the canonical references and make Earth/humans the one with no money, instead of the whole Federation. It's generally been the case that when characters say that there's no money, they're human. For example, it's Kirk or Picard visiting the past and talking to present-day humans or people of the relatively near future.

The part in Star Trek: First Contact about money is:

PICARD: There are twenty-four decks. Almost seven hundred metres long.
LILY: It took me six months to scrounge up enough titanium just to build a four-metre cockpit. ...How much did this thing cost?
PICARD: The economics of the future are somewhat different. ...You see, money doesn't exist in the twenty-fourth century.
LILY: No money! That means you don't get paid.
PICARD: The acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force in our lives. ...We work to better ourselves ...and the rest of humanity. Actually we're rather like yourself and Doctor Cochrane.

Picard didn't explain how the Federation economy worked. Since he said that they work to better humanity, that makes it sound like he's talking about how humanity functions. The Federation economy has never been fully explained. Warp drive has never been fully explained either.

 

[Orphalesion]

@Orphalesion. To build a life with someone, start something new somewhere new. Only do it without the economic stressors that tear lives apart.

Exactly. That's the idea of moneyless society Star Trek. Without it every member of our society would be able to live up to their full potential.

 

[bbjeg]

...
I think the credits and accounts often mentioned only show up when the Federation barters with non-Federation members (Ds9, the Farpoint aliens, the Tribble salesman).
I could see Starfleet/the Federation giving a stipend to personnel regularly in contact with non-Federation members...

I always wondered if the Federation took advantage of their replicator technology by creating currency to barter. Is currency like gold pressed latinum replicable?

And if Earth is such a paradise, then why would anyone want to leave it?

To seek the unknown, adventure, escape boredom... Let alone that one man's paradise can be another man's hell....

Really? You had the opportunity to say 'to seek out new life and new civilizations' and you didn't.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

Is currency like gold pressed latinum replicable?

No, latinum can't be replicated.

 

[bbjeg]

^Well, paper currency is, but now that I think of it, I wouldn't be surprised if it were against the prime directive to replicate currency. Money surpluses cause poverty.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ Remember what I said earlier: My interpretation of this whole nasty business is that the Federation credit literally has no physical form, it's all electronic. You can't replicate something that has no form.

And I suppose it might, conceivably, be possible for normal everyday life on Earth (not the Federation, just Earth) to continue without money. Obviously the Federation has money - maybe it's just Earth that doesn't. Despite the earlier observation that Earth is just a normal Federation member like any other. Meaning: "In the Cards" was inaccurate in that it's not humanity that doesn't use money, it's Earth. Earth != humanity. (Aliens probably make up a sizable proportion of Earth's population.)

We know that members of the Federation are basically left to run their own local affairs however they choose (provided they abide by Federation law) - this can probably extend to economies as well. If people want to sit around all day and vegetate on the holodeck, they can, but only so far as they stay on Earth while doing so.

 

[MacLeod]

I'm sticking with the "no money = no paper bills/coins, it's all electronic" system.

It has the advantage of being supported by onscreen evidence, such as the frequent mentions of "Federation credits" and putting things on people's "accounts" and all that.

Perhaps, as some of us might see us move to a cash less society within our lives.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^ I've already done exactly that.

 

[CorporalCaptain]

Meaning: "In the Cards" was inaccurate in that it's not humanity that doesn't use money, it's Earth. Earth != humanity. (Aliens probably make up a sizable proportion of Earth's population.)

We know that members of the Federation are basically left to run their own local affairs however they choose (provided they abide by Federation law) - this can probably extend to economies as well.

Yeah, I think all this makes sense. But humans run Earth, I would think. I would also think that, if an Earth human doesn't want to be held to the obligations of being an Earth citizen, they would have to change their citizenship.

If people want to sit around all day and vegetate on the holodeck, they can, but only so far as they stay on Earth while doing so.

However, it doesn't necessarily follow that they can't vegetate in jurisdictions where money is required. As Federation citizens, they may have certain rights, even on certain Federation worlds that use money, that would let them do that, and least within certain limits. It depends.

 

[T'Girl]

... every member of our society would be able to live up to their full potential.

Okay, now what does that mean?

Canonically, it's not the Federation that has no money, it's humanity.

I'm not following.

The Federation has hundreds of Members, each of whom might have a somewhat different (or radically different) economic systems from their fellow Members.

Lily: No money! That means you don't get paid?
Picard: The acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force in our lives, we work to better ourselves and the rest of humanity.

Picard never actually says that they don't get paid.

And if Earth is such a paradise, then why would anyone want to leave it?

Perhaps it's less of one than is advertised, Stalin used to refer to Russia of the 1930's as a "worker's paradise."

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

The Federation has hundreds of Members, each of whom might have a somewhat different (or radically different)
economic systems from their fellow Members.

Of course. But races aren't members of the Federation; planets are.

So it doesn't make any sense to say "humans" are a Federation member, because it doesn't work that way. Humans are one of the races who make up the population. But humans can live on, and be considered citizens of, ANY Federation world.

Do you see what the problem is here? To say "humans don't have money" is a non sequitur, because humanity is so spread out. It might be possible to say "EARTH doesn't have money," but you can't pin this down to any one race. Not everyone from Earth is human, and not every human is from Earth. Now do you get the picture?

 

[bbjeg]

^The Kes-Prit was a fine example of a world where one race was about to be welcomed into the Federation but not the planet and then you have species like the Elorian (or Talaxian whom I assumed will be welcomed in the Federation) who no longer have home worlds.

 

[BK613]

The Federation has hundreds of Members, each of whom might have a somewhat different (or radically different)
economic systems from their fellow Members.

Of course. But races aren't members of the Federation; planets are.

So it doesn't make any sense to say "humans" are a Federation member, because it doesn't work that way. Humans are one of the races who make up the population. But humans can live on, and be considered citizens of, ANY Federation world.

Do you see what the problem is here? To say "humans don't have money" is a non sequitur, because humanity is so spread out. It might be possible to say "EARTH doesn't have money," but you can't pin this down to any one race. Not everyone from Earth is human, and not every human is from Earth. Now do you get the picture?

Perhaps they develop the notion early*:

TROI: It unites humanity in a way no one ever thought possible when they realise they're not alone in the universe. Poverty, disease, war. They'll all be gone within the next fifty years.

*(There's prolly some Ent ep that casts doubt on that; Not a big fan so I wouldn't know.)

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

^The Kes-Prit was a fine example of a world where one race was about to be welcomed into the Federation but not the planet

Actually, it wasn't one race. It was one government.

The Kes and the Prytt were both distinct nations - on the same planet - but only one of them wanted to join. This is forbidden under Federation law, which requires that a prospective member world have a single, unified planetary government.

But as I said, this has nothing to do with race. Any given Federation world might have dozens, if not hundreds, of races which make up its population. It is impossible, in Trek's time, to link race with planet. They may have nothing to do with each other!

For example, you might have a Tellarite who lived his or her entire life on Mars, and thus be legally and culturally considered a Martian. Or an Andorian who was born and raised on Vulcan, and is considered *a* Vulcan. Etc. etc.

It doesn't matter what race you are, only what planet you're from.

 

[Nightdiamond]

From the context, it seems likely that Picard the elder distributes his bottles to friends and family; a relationship with him is therefore the "price" of a bottle

That sounds like some type of weird bartering/black male system.

PLEASE tell me you meant to say "blackmail"!

I had a strong feeling the way I spelled it was wrong lol. I meant blackmail.

And it's kind of weird. It's like saying, 'if you keep being my friend, I'll keep growing and producing wine for you'. That one reminds me of children playing with lemonade stands.

What I mean is, it's never been said outright, AFAIK, that the Federation doesn't use money. Only that humans don't use money. You said: "....is that if the Federation really does have no money..." Based on canon, the Federation does use money: Federation credits. So, it really could be that Earth isn't typical of Federation worlds.

That would basically mean humans are economically isolated on earth. They may have everything they want as long as they stay on earth, but if they leave it, they'll be destitute.

Jake was an example. He couldn't do anything that involved money. He needed Nog's help.

Not saying it's necessary a bad thing, but only that would be one result or drawback of that system.

 

[Orphalesion]

There is at least some members of the Federation that are quite likely to not use money as well.

The Vulcans - they would see the chasing of material wealth as illogical.
The Betazoids - their inborn empathy for one another would encourage social/socialistic behavior. Possibly the Houses are in charge of a equal distribution of any resources that couldn't be replicated (if indeed they have any meaning beyond mere ceremony)?

On the other hand I could picture the Tellarites as still using money/looking to gain wealth, but I think that's me just projecting fantasy Dwarf cliches onto their "space Dwarf" appearance.

I however think that most worlds in the Federation are post scarcity and so might be similar to Earth. The replicator technology and clean energy resources would be shared among the members. Nog said "you humans" because Jack was a human, I think, not because humans were special in that regard among the Federation.

 

[Horizons96]

I would never pretend to know exactly how it works, but if you asked a person in the 17th-18th centuries to envision the economics and methods of buying items in 2015 you would certainly get a strange and obviously temporally-centric interpretation. Sure, we still use currency in the 21st century to buy things but a person in the 1700s wouldn't of guessed contemporary aspects like PayPal, debit/credit cards, bitcoin or having your payment details saved to 'memory' in the settings of a small handheld device (smartphone) that can be used anywhere in the world to order all manner of things/services to your physical or virtual doorstep.

The thing is, it would be extremely difficult to imagine how it would all work through the lens of our current existence and experience. Not only is the means to provide for basic needs completely different in the 24th century, the distribution of Earth's population is A LOT different after the 21st century (not speaking for other Federation worlds).

Just food for thought...

 

[CorporalCaptain]

What I mean is, it's never been said outright, AFAIK, that the Federation doesn't use money. Only that humans don't use money. You said: "....is that if the Federation really does have no money..." Based on canon, the Federation does use money: Federation credits. So, it really could be that Earth isn't typical of Federation worlds.

That would basically mean humans are economically isolated on earth. They may have everything they want as long as they stay on earth, but if they leave it, they'll be destitute.

Jake was an example. He couldn't do anything that involved money. He needed Nog's help.

Not saying it's necessary a bad thing, but only that would be one result or drawback of that system.

However, the auction that Jake wanted to bid in was a Ferengi auction, and the Ferengi are not Federation members.

The reason I said the following is that there might be some sort of reciprocity between Federation worlds that allows humans to travel throughout the Federation without being literally destitute. I don't believe that it would be in the interest of the Federation for visitation from one Federation world to another to produce economically dire consequences. But AFAIK it's never been addressed in an episode.

If people want to sit around all day and vegetate on the holodeck, they can, but only so far as they stay on Earth while doing so.

However, it doesn't necessarily follow that they can't vegetate in jurisdictions where money is required. As Federation citizens, they may have certain rights, even on certain Federation worlds that use money, that would let them do that, and least within certain limits. It depends.

If you think about it, someone with money would face largely the same problem while on another world as someone without money, if they can't convert their money into the local currency. Federation citizens would all be in pretty much the same boat when traveling through the Ferengi Alliance, no matter how much money they have back home, if they didn't have any latinum.

 

[Mytran]

By the first episode of VOY, the use of latinum seems to have been accepted as universal form of currency: Chakotay accuses Paris of being bribed with it to betray them.

 

[Jedi_Master]

Latinum (since it cannot be replicated) is a galactic form of currency among the various races and governments that still use money.

Does Trek ever delve into how the Klingon or Cardassian economy works? Do they ever mention compensation for Romulans? Seems that the details of how people are paid weren't that important to Trek writers.