Considering that the Prime Directive appeared in TOS, and the moneyless society rot first appeared in TNG, it cannot be be fundamental, let alone more fundamental than the PD.
Another take on "there's no money in the 24th century"
- Thread starter hxclespaulplayer
- Start date
While we're getting a nice long thread out of concept, the economics system of the show's in-universe was really a minor aspect. There more mention of Deanna's chocolate fetish.
Sisko's father enjoys cooking for people, so he has place he can do that on a large scale. Some people like cooking and some like doing it on a large scale regardless the money. Cooking without a replicator is an artform by the 24th century.
Jake could have replicated the exact baseball card for nothing, but some humans still have a certain sentimental attachment to original articles. So Jake decides to find a way to purchase said baseball card or find a way to trade for it.
On the Shore Leave Planet, Sulu found what seemed like an authentic firearm. It was replicated, but to such detail as it seemed like an original to even a collector like him and Captain Kirk. Federation replicators don't seem to be quite as detailed, or there is just a number of collectors of antiques in human society. McCoy and Spock both gave Kirk birthday presents that were hundreds of years old because Kirk has a "fondness for antiques". Judging from his apartment he has a collection of antiques including weapons.
McCoy probably has access to some form of money as he's known to deal with some form of smugglers that are getting Romulan Ale across the border. An illegal drink in Federation space. This liquid cannot be replicated in Federation space. If it can be replicated at all. What are the limits of replicators?
That may be the one area that evades humanity. Antiques are a limited. There are only so many made and fewer than that survive to their modern times. At least authentic antiques. Their are likely replicated versions of just about anything, but Federation science either is not up the task or the idea is that item has a history, and you can't replicate history (accurately).
Jake could have replicated the exact baseball card for nothing, but some humans still have a certain sentimental attachment to original articles. So Jake decides to find a way to purchase said baseball card or find a way to trade for it.
On the Shore Leave Planet, Sulu found what seemed like an authentic firearm. It was replicated, but to such detail as it seemed like an original to even a collector like him and Captain Kirk. Federation replicators don't seem to be quite as detailed, or there is just a number of collectors of antiques in human society. McCoy and Spock both gave Kirk birthday presents that were hundreds of years old because Kirk has a "fondness for antiques". Judging from his apartment he has a collection of antiques including weapons.
McCoy probably has access to some form of money as he's known to deal with some form of smugglers that are getting Romulan Ale across the border. An illegal drink in Federation space. This liquid cannot be replicated in Federation space. If it can be replicated at all. What are the limits of replicators?
That may be the one area that evades humanity. Antiques are a limited. There are only so many made and fewer than that survive to their modern times. At least authentic antiques. Their are likely replicated versions of just about anything, but Federation science either is not up the task or the idea is that item has a history, and you can't replicate history (accurately).
That's exactly what makes or breaks the (perceived) value of antique items.
The replicators do seem to have trouble with organics:
Well, The Miminum Wage Act is pretty socialist. If I understand socialism correctly.
It's saying that no matter the job, everyone will earn the exact same pay level. So, if your job is a lot more labor intensive and demanding, than certain other jobs, you'll still earn the same amount.
'I've heard people complain a little about that, and some political types flat out say it's communist/socialist.
But on the other hand, you have the hard capitalism. Where corporate execs earn 6 figures, (plus the same in bonuses) and then expect the regular workers to toil under minimum wage, under stressful conditions, even when the company is failing.
Anyone remember the Hostess Scandal --
But the funny thing is there are people who consider this type of system completely normal, and consider minimum wage laws dangerous.
So you have the Earth type socialism, where everyone, regardless of their job or status, has the same type of access to goods from a replicator, or the Ferengi style capitalism, where exploitation is considered a normal by-product.
But the market and everyone is "free".
The replicators do seem to have trouble with organics:
I don't understand why Picard wasted perfectly good caviar on a Klingon. It's like taking a Bajoran to a night club or a Vulcan to a comedic show. (Actually, you can switch those three around and it won't lessen the incongruity.
)
^ Picard knows enough about Klingons to be able to speak and swear like one, but he obviously doesn't know jackshit about Klingon *food*. Apparently he never thought to ask Worf what Klingons like to eat...
I remember a few Klingon meals where they seem to be eating seafood. The "final meal" in 10-forward before Riker went aboard a BOP on a exchange program, looked like seafood.
So, perhaps Picard made an (wrong) assumption that Kurn would enjoy fish eggs.
Actually, it looked like someone had emptied the garbage can of a restaurant on the table.
That's not really socialism. "To each according to their contribution." The more you contribute, the more you should be rewarded. It's with communism that you get the whole "to each according to their need", but then communism depends on a post scarcity society where money is no longer a thing. Actually, a lot of socialists have a problem with things like welfare because they see it as a quick fix designed to delay revolution, and because it perpetuates the notion that the working class depends on handouts from the capitalists when in fact it's the capitalists who leach off the working class.
A socialist wouldn't necessarily have a problem with an exec earning a 6 figure salary, because management is an important part of any business. What they would definitely have a problem with is the exec continuing to earn money based on the labor of others even after they've left the company because they still own a large part of it in the form of stock. They'd also want the exec to be chosen democratically and based on merit rather than by shareholders and cronyism.
If we're going by today's definitions, which are probably insufficient to describe a fictional economy, the most accurate descriptor might be a scandinavian-style social democracy, but taken a whole lot further. It's not exactly socialism, because there's still private ownership (vineyards and restaurants and the like), but there are enough social services in place that no one has to interact with private enterprise if they don't want to. What I'd really want to know is how Sisko's dad came to own the restaurant, and more importantly the land that it's built on (if he does in fact own the land). If he doesn't actually own the property, but instead has been awarded permission to run it for some period of time by some state committee, then that would be more in line with some form of socialism.
I think either we accept St as it is or we don't. Either way there's not much to discuss. If the former for obvious reasons, if the latter because once you deny a fantasy to be as it defines itself then you should stop watching it. The no money principle is so fundamental to ST that I don't understand how people that refuse it can even stand watching the series. You may as well say that you don't accept the concept of Warp speed or of inter stellar starships.
Except that it's not, there evidence that there are monetary exchanges going on, purchases being made, income being earned.
It's not just a case of there being "no money," something else is going on.
When approached by the show's writers to describe the no money economy so they could then incorporate it into scripts, Roddenberry was incapable of describing it. Now the writers of the show lived in a society with a market economy, this is why (despite Roddenberry's wishes) money and monetary reference keep making their way into the various episodes.
Last edited:
That would involve not just a minimum wage, but also a hypothetical maximum wage.
True, management is definitely important, but there are some stories ou there that just seem insane.
Hostess was about to file for bankrupcy, cut the regular worker's salaries, but still voted to give their CEOs big bonuses, on top of their already huge salaries.
I'm not completely knocking them, we don't know all of the facts. Maybe their job is hard, but seriously-- Bonuses are given out when a company is struggling and files for bankruptcy
That would involve not just a minimum wage, but also a hypothetical maximum wage.
That would really be socialist, almost crossing the border into almost communist area.
One thing I've always noticed with Trek, is that it will drop hints in one subject, then contradict it in others.
The one thing I like about today's shows and other shows, is that they're being more careful to create a full history and detailed explanation of things and just stick with them.
Game of Thrones created a detailed history of characters and events from the past, that don't even appear in the main story, but they're so detailed, they appear like real history in the story .
