History of Star Trek having no "money"

[Arpy]

How's the original Enterprise outdated? Most of the stuff you claimed was was used for the Abramsverse one, too.

The original "The Cage" Enterprise is outdated. If you don't get that, I can't help you. The overall shape of course remains, but, from TOS on, it got tweaked and updated.

The Abramsverse is unlike most other Trek in that it's basically a live-action comic book.

Well, true, but the fact remains that there is no inconsistency, especially when we consider that the difference between various drives would not be nit picking to a starfleet engineer.

There are no Starfleet engineers.

That the line has a dramatic purpose within the plot is irrelevent, every line has some purpose as delivered, that in no way alters the fact that the inconsistency is based on unfounded assumptions and faulty logic. That is not working to do anything, I have no desire to protect the show's integrity, its an objective assessment of the evidence as shown.

If you want to choose to ignore reality so that the show can fall ass-backwards to making sense, that is your choice, but it's not fully "logical," commander.

I have no way of knowing what was in the heads of the script writers, nor do you, but again irrelevent. The same observation could be made of any two disparate on screen events to fudge the matter. The fact is there is often quoted to be an inconsistency in universe where in fact there is not.

Same issue. We can interpret Khan to mean something other than he does, but that is not his intent. In-universe he's saying, "I saw you [on the bridge, with the rest of those assholes] betraying me," minus the brackets. That's the way it was delivered by the character and presented to us by God (the director).

 

[Spot261]

But it isnt falling ass backwards, Im happy to assess the franchise as being full of inconsistencies. These are not amongst them.

It takes no effort whatsoever to pick holes in the reasoning which suggests they are. They don't need fans to MAKE them work, they work perfectly well all by themselves with a literal reading of happens on screen. Anything else is fudging the facts to fit.

 

[Lance]

Per "Dark Frontier" (VOY), United Earth phased out money sometime in the 22nd century. There is good evidence that they do have ways of conducting monetary transactions when needed, although its unclear if only United Earth doesn't use money or if the Federation is the same way (although First Contact seems to imply that the Federation as a whole doesn't use any form of currency.)

We do know that money exists outside of the Federation, given the Ferengi's interstellar business dealings with lots of other races.

Finally, a lot of the references to human/Starfleet characters using money or being paid can be chalked up to figures of speech (like how in a DS9 show, Jake Sisko says he "sold" a story, even though there no monetary transaction as part of the publishing deal), expressions that outlasted their origin (anything involving off-hand comments about earning ones pay), or stuff like that.

P.S.: This fansite article has some interesting discussion on the topic. This other fansite also discussed the idea. (Note: I'm not saying I agree or disagree with either article partially or in full. Just adding more ideas and discussion points.)

Interesting reading. But, that being said, unless Sarona VIII is under the aegis of the Federation, not confirmed or denied in the episode, then I do still err towards them having the facility to conduct transactions as needed, which (by definition) requires some kind of currency system. Sure some cultures may be willing to accept trade for services, but like the Ferengi I can't imagine all cultures being so amenable.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

Re the Eugenics Wars of the 90's? Yeah I'll put some blame there. What in 1966 lead the writers to believe we'd have earth-shattering Eugenic Breeding Wars less than 30 years later? What genius placed Bladerunner in 2019, while we're at it?

I'm not sure where you got the idea that science fiction stories always have to predict the future with 100% accuracy, but it's a really limiting one. Are you seriously claiming that those stories are somehow invalid just because nothing like them happened in real life?

The original "The Cage" Enterprise is outdated. If you don't get that, I can't help you.

If you can't see the beauty of the original design of the Enterprise, I feel sorry for you.

 

[charliefox]

Allow me to be a bit skeptical. There's no currency yet people still own things, like Sisko's Father's Restaurant or the Picard's family's vineyard. How could that be without a currency of sorts. What if someone decodes that he's entitled to part or that vineyard or to using the kitchen of the restaurant. In a true currencyless economy nobody would own anything, all things would be the property of the collectivity. People would get to use houses and other things they need but never to call them their own. That's where St falls flat on its face.

 

[Spot261]

If you can't see the beauty of the original design of the Enterprise, I feel sorry for you.

I'm bewildered too. I know these things are subjective and personal, but to me all the CGI in the world doesn't stop the Abramsverse Ent looking deformed and rather ugly next to the original, like a computer savvy 5 yr old attempted to remake it and did well. For a five year old.

The fact that new technology and larger budgets are involved doesn't help the case, it simply makes excuses harder to find.

 

[Kemaiku]

I guess the "beauty" of toys and CGI models isn't as important to some as those who have the time to idolise them.

 

[The Old Mixer]

It's easy to look at the result of decades of development of the same basic concept and see the original that it's all based on as something primitive.

 

[WebLurker]

Allow me to be a bit skeptical. There's no currency yet people still own things, like Sisko's Father's Restaurant or the Picard's family's vineyard. How could that be without a currency of sorts. What if someone decodes that he's entitled to part or that vineyard or to using the kitchen of the restaurant. In a true currencyless economy nobody would own anything, all things would be the property of the collectivity. People would get to use houses and other things they need but never to call them their own. That's where St falls flat on its face.

Unless the exchange works differently so that accounts are tallied without money. (People still seem to need jobs to support themselves, but maybe that doesn't involve the exchange of money?)

 

[Tenacity]

I read that Roddenberry wanted equal numbers of men and women aboard the Enterprise but it wasn't possible at the time, or something.

Roddenberry said if he made the crew 50/50 male and female people would worry that the crew would be screwing all the time .

You're choosing to accept the limits of the era that produced the show over the ethos the show was trying to promote.

The show is what was on display, that future is grand and wonderful in some ways, confusing and behind us in other ways. Truthfully the future is full of warfare, and disasters, there's a absence of gays, there residual sexism, we see open prejudice. There is squabbling for resources and competition for territory.

They never were evolved Humans and they certainly aren't gods, they're just people. They're us living centuries in the future with more technology.

If you're taking it at face value as the real future ...

I'm take it as the fictional future that TPTB have presenting, warts and all.

The future (despite the statements of a few characters) isn't some utopia paradise, the future is the best that generations of people working as hard as they could were able to create.

The Federation isn't "the universe of hats." All Humans aren't going to think the same, or have the same ideals and values. It impossible (imo) that the hundreds of species in the Federation are going to have a single culture, or the same view on what constitutes "progressive."

You are attaching a "ethos" to the show that just isn't there.

Per "Dark Frontier" (VOY), United Earth phased out money sometime in the 22nd century.

But there's no argument that Humans have money in the 23rd century, TOS is full if references.

Possibly for the same reason Majel Barret's Number One character had to be taken out of the series -- because it was the 1960s

Roddenberry removed the character of Number One because his girlfriend was rejected for the role. The NBC executives loved the idea of a woman first officer in the first pilot. Being the 1960's had nothing to do with it.

 

[scotpens]

. . . a monotheistic Federation . . .

The only canon reference to monotheism in Trek TOS is Kirk's line in "Who Mourns for Adonais?": "Mankind has no need for gods. We find the one quite adequate." There's no evidence that he speaks for the entire Federation. "Balance of Terror" and "Bread and Circuses" both contain references to humanity having "many beliefs."

Possibly for the same reason Majel Barret's Number One character had to be taken out of the series -- because it was the 1960s, and people thought the idea of women doing things other than standing around and looking pretty was too "controversial" (probably an oversimplification, but, hey, this was many decades before I was born.)

The notion that a female First Officer was considered "too progressive" or "controversial" was The Gospel According to Roddenberry, and has long since been debunked. What NBC's executives really objected to was the producer casting his girlfriend -- a relatively unknown actress with limited experience -- in what would have been a regular major role in a weekly series.

EDIT: Never mind, Tenacity beat me to it.

 

[The Old Mixer]

Roddenberry said if he made the crew 50/50 male and female people would worry that the crew would be screwing all the time .

Yeah, that would be the first thing on his mind....

 

[nascenticity]

Roddenberry said if he made the crew 50/50 male and female people would worry that the crew would be screwing all the time .

It figures people thought this.

Roddenberry removed the character of Number One because his girlfriend was rejected for the role. The NBC executives loved the idea of a woman first officer in the first pilot. Being the 1960's had nothing to do with it.

The notion that a female First Officer was considered "too progressive" or "controversial" was The Gospel According to Roddenberry, and has long since been debunked. What NBC's executives really objected to was the producer casting his girlfriend -- a relatively unknown actress with limited experience -- in what would have been a regular major role in a weekly series.

Thanks for bringing me up to speed. "She got removed because of misogyny" was the version I heard, but her being under-qualified for the role would make sense and be slightly less depressing.

 

[JonnyQuest037]

"She got removed because of misogyny" was the version I heard, but her being under-qualified for the role would make sense and be slightly less depressing.

For most everyone except Majel Barrett, I'd wager.

 

[Tenacity]

It would have been great if Roddenberry had recast the role of Number One with a actress who would have been more acceptable to the network. Down side is Roddenberry basically combined the roles of Number One and Spock into a single character. With a (new) female first officer, Spock likely would not have been developed to the extent that he was and we would have missed out on what turned into a fantastic character.

 

[nascenticity]

For most everyone except Majel Barrett, I'd wager.

Well she ultimately ended up playing at least two different characters plus the voice of the computer, so presumably she felt better about it after a while.

 

[charliefox]

Well she ultimately ended up playing at least two different characters plus the voice of the computer, so presumably she felt better about it after a while.

The second character I could have done without. Some of the most annoying episodes have her as the center of attention.

 

[nascenticity]

The second character I could have done without. Some of the most annoying episodes have her as the center of attention.

You'll get no argument from me.

 

[charliefox]

You'll get no argument from me.

That's always nice to hear.

 

[Tenacity]

Well she ultimately ended up playing at least two different characters plus the voice of the computer ...

Plus a variety of voices on TAS. I think she did dialog for some of the online games too, as the computer.