I thought Raffi's point was that Picard had something to fall back on where as she didn't really have any goal or accomplishment like maintaining the vineyard. She dedicated herself to the conspiracy theories and it turned out badly. Didn't think it was about money
Spoilers Everyday life on earth
- Thread starter robau
- Start date
I'll take that.
Yeah, Raffi's (comparative) squalor was more a product of her emotional and mental poverty (not taking up a hobby for herself and family/friends) rather than financial and material poverty (when she just sulks in a simple housing unit).
^ Or she lost the career she spent the majority of her adult life training for and gaining experience in. Plus the fact that she was basically "fired" from Starfleet and any reputation she built up was gone, this would make it difficult to find employment in the civilian sector.
She's a druggie who lives in shack.
She's a druggie who lives in shack.
There are people nowadays that can taste the difference between different types and vintages of wine. I'm sure that real wine vs. synthetic wine is similar to that. Yes, a lot of people probably wouldn't care that much, but there are bound to be some who do.
All that we have to go on with regards to wealth is what Gene has stated in the past. He didn’t give a very good guidebook to go on. There is mentions of federation credits going back to the original series. In TNG first season they state they will pay for items “have it charged to doctor crusher”. TNG was his creation and almost immediately there is talk of charges to accounts. His guideline was that accumulation of wealth is not a priority in the 24th century. His guidelines wouldn’t appear out of place today.
True, one problem is the backstory to human economics is very weak. We never really saw how transactions work with humans, instead we got vague statements and affirmations like 'there is no need or want' or accumulating wealth is no longer a driving force for people.
So as soon fans can come up with some type of explanation for what's going on, they got hit with a bold statement--humans don't use money anymore. There is no money in the 24th century.
That's why everyone argues about why people would work in Picard's vineyards for nothing, or if Sisko's father was charging anything for the food in his restaurant.
The world building as far human life on earth is really vague and weak. before all they really showed was just happy looking smiling people in the background in futuristic clothing. They never showed specifics.
Picard is actually showing people living in 24th century trailers, a human pilot for hire that says he's expensive, etc. I wonder if the show is going to ret-con the money thing.
I don't think they need to retcon anything. I think they are showing the finer details of how the world works, and how people chose to participate in this new world. Not everyone is going to participate the same way, be happy with were they are at, etc.
Certainly we have a person join Starfleet in order to get more prestigious jobs. Who is to say that resentment he felt for being on Voyager wouldn't be echoed by those who end up leaving Starfleet.
Certainly we have a person join Starfleet in order to get more prestigious jobs. Who is to say that resentment he felt for being on Voyager wouldn't be echoed by those who end up leaving Starfleet.
The whole "no money" thing has always been a bit of a fallacy. Federation credits in Trouble with Tribbles, Scotty buying a boat in Star Trek 6, Doctor Crusher charging a bolt of cloth to her account in Encounter at Farpoint, the human Vash being all about profit, Federation personnel frequenting Quark's bar, Sisko charging Quark for repairs to the cargo bay after a scheme went awry. Some form of currency must be involved in these transactions.
I believe that if you live on Earth or any of the more advanced core Federation worlds, that all your basic needs such as food, water, shelter, medical care, etc; are all provided by replicator and are free to the general populace. However, if you want to buy a boat or a bolt of cloth, drinks at K7 or Quark's, or go on that dream vacation to Risa, then you will need it to have accumulated some form of currency, identified in Tribbles as Federation credits.
I believe that if you live on Earth or any of the more advanced core Federation worlds, that all your basic needs such as food, water, shelter, medical care, etc; are all provided by replicator and are free to the general populace. However, if you want to buy a boat or a bolt of cloth, drinks at K7 or Quark's, or go on that dream vacation to Risa, then you will need it to have accumulated some form of currency, identified in Tribbles as Federation credits.
I can't really recall Tribbles now, but were they explicitly charging for the drinks on K7 or did we just see Cyrano Jones peddling his tribbles for money? I don't think either a yes or a no would change much about my perception of Federation economy, it seems like they mostly use money for buying things that could be classified as luxury or exotic, as well as for business dealings on the frontier and with foreign citizens, or for services off the books to avoid official scrutiny (like Picard hiring Rios or McCoy trying to hire that alien guy from TSFS).
I don't recall if charging for drinks was mentioned, but Cyrano and the barkeep were haggling over the price of the tribbles.
No, there's also evidence of the existence of wealth and money through dialog.
In part yes, but others also had input too. It was never solely Roddenberry's creation. Gerrold and Fontana (among others) created much of the intellectual structure of TNG.
Except when they do.
Except when there is.
Capitalism 101.
Last edited:
And this where the problem starts. Some characters refer to Fed credits, others to charging things to their accounts, and of selling and buying things. So it looks like people are using some type of money.
Then you see the replicators and Picard saying there is no need or want, or the desire to accumulate wealth or more things. And then you think it's a no money, post scarcity society or something.
So just when you finally try to come up with a reasonable explanation for this type of economy, you get hit with the straight, "there is no money in the 24th century." 'I'm a human, I don't have any money' and so on. And all this was said late in the TNG era, in First contact.
So that's it. Canon wise they wiped the possibility of money use among humans.
If it was shown that in order to use the replicator, you had to pay in credits, that would explain a LOT of things about how human economy works. But so far the only thing they've shown is people going up to a replicator, ordering whatever they want and walking away.
The way it is, the debate is still at a standoff. It's pretty messed up.
What direction it's going to take depends on what they show in Picard next.
She got the place from Det. Jack Colt. If you use light colors it looks much bigger on the inside. (honestly when i saw her home I immediately thought of this scene for some reason)
Yes - money in Star Trek, sadly, has never really made any coherent sense. It's why we, as fans, have had to ... piece it all together as best we can.
I always assumed that Earth itself has no currency or need for it in the way we need in the 21st century. However, the UFP does have currency for exchanges between members. So on Earth - you have your most basic needs met. But some things can't be given away for free. Rare objects are given some type of value.
Maybe it's also like the Star Trek: Starfleet Command games where you build up "prestige" and can buy things with that? :P
Not to mention the one thing Earth can't "replicate" with ease - space (not outer space but land). AKA real estate. It's why everyone doesn't live in a fancy chateau. You probably either buy those or you earn it (or it is passed down from earlier generations).
I figure Federation credits are simply something you use off-world. Same with Latinum.
It doesn't help that Earth and the Federation and Starfleet are used so interchangeably in dialogue. Which only further adds to the confusion on some parts of Trek referencing money and other parts implying it is a thing of the past.
The thing that always baffled me is - why are some worlds in such squalor? Can't the Federation offer these destitute worlds food replicators? Are they scared those worlds will re-engineer their replicators and build photon torpedoes?
Why would anyone become a prostitute for an Orion Syndicate member when they could find their way off world and just live on Earth? Even if one argues that finding passage to Earth is difficult under those conditions - I just find it odd why anyone would opt to live out in the wild "frontier" when they could live in peace on Earth. Is Earth that boring in the 24th century? It made sense that people braved the "frontier" in human history because they saw opportunities and chance for riches via gold rushes, etc. But what excuse is there to live in some distant colony surrounded by hostile Cardassians?
Is Earth's immigration policy so strict that it is hard to get a spot on Earth?
I'm more confused on that than I am how money works on Earth.
I always assumed that Earth itself has no currency or need for it in the way we need in the 21st century. However, the UFP does have currency for exchanges between members. So on Earth - you have your most basic needs met. But some things can't be given away for free. Rare objects are given some type of value.
Maybe it's also like the Star Trek: Starfleet Command games where you build up "prestige" and can buy things with that? :P
Not to mention the one thing Earth can't "replicate" with ease - space (not outer space but land). AKA real estate. It's why everyone doesn't live in a fancy chateau. You probably either buy those or you earn it (or it is passed down from earlier generations).
I figure Federation credits are simply something you use off-world. Same with Latinum.
It doesn't help that Earth and the Federation and Starfleet are used so interchangeably in dialogue. Which only further adds to the confusion on some parts of Trek referencing money and other parts implying it is a thing of the past.
The thing that always baffled me is - why are some worlds in such squalor? Can't the Federation offer these destitute worlds food replicators? Are they scared those worlds will re-engineer their replicators and build photon torpedoes?
Why would anyone become a prostitute for an Orion Syndicate member when they could find their way off world and just live on Earth? Even if one argues that finding passage to Earth is difficult under those conditions - I just find it odd why anyone would opt to live out in the wild "frontier" when they could live in peace on Earth. Is Earth that boring in the 24th century? It made sense that people braved the "frontier" in human history because they saw opportunities and chance for riches via gold rushes, etc. But what excuse is there to live in some distant colony surrounded by hostile Cardassians?
Is Earth's immigration policy so strict that it is hard to get a spot on Earth?
I'm more confused on that than I am how money works on Earth.
Or good tasting food.
Good point. I think in DS9 Jake Sisko mentions some type of pudding on DS9 that he loves doesn't taste the same on Earth. So it does seem like there are ... differences in that. Even in Picard - the Martian miners were complaining about the food too from what I recall.
And then he sold them to Federation officers. What did they buy them with?
Similar threads
