Everyone thinks that they work harder than everyone else does. Just listen to the callers on any typical AM talk radio show.
Uphill. Both ways. In a blinding snowstorm.
Uphill. Both ways. In a blinding snowstorm.
If Money is not a driving force for the federation, what would actually work to replace this....
- Thread starter Maccyj571086
- Start date
Star Trek is still about our humanity.
If you want to attack the writer and not the opinion you can continue over in TNZ
Unacceptable.
Also, the government doing things for people is the entirety of its reason to exist.
The government is us, acting collectively for the common good. And freeing up valuable time to engage in other pursuits.
Eton. Eaton is a place near Norwich.
You are under the (mistaken) impression that if you give people something for nothing they will 'inevitably' go lazy and lounge all day without doing anything.
First off, Humanity needs to re-examine its relationship with 'work', 'being busy', 'contributing to society'... etc.
Second, 'laziness' is just a cop-out that people use all too often and it REEKS of Capitalism.
You cannot assume that the environment humanity created in Trek and that of Capitalism share the same premise or that they equate things in the same manner (which they don't).
For example, I was called 'lazy' many times when I was unemployed... even though I exercised, trained my skills in 3D artwork, learned new things using the Internet (studying peer-review medical research), conversed with others on forums and other boards to exchange ideas... helped other people in fixing their computers (free of charge), did creative writing, etc.
Now, WHY did people call me lazy?
Because from their point of view, none of the things I did that didn't earn me money (or I did to improve myself as I saw it) they perceived as 'contributing to society'.
Why?
Because their entire value system is WARPED by the existing socio-economic system which says you need to make money (often for someone else and at the expense of your own time/input) in order to be 'productive'.
Now, the way I came to understand it is... people get 'lazy' (as society defines it today) BECAUSE of Capitalism (exactly because they are forced to work for a living).
For example, in order to do something in the existing system, it costs MONEY to do so.
No money = no access.
So, people tend to do things that are usually ACCESSIBLE to them in Capitalism... which frequently means spending time on social media (as means of distraction because we created an environment which we HATE living in - hence the distractions), consuming media on Netflix and various similar stuff.
Also, majority of jobs in existence are utterly pointless that have 0 purpose except to push money around for the sake of it, and it also translates to people feeling empty as a result.
They grew up with the notions that THIS is the best they can look forward to... 'that's life'... 'that's reality'... 'deal with it'... and then you have the AUDACITY to claim that people are lazy if you give them free stuff?
Environment shapes behavior.
If you change the environment to be ENGAGING... gives people unrestricted access to what they need and various other things, you would notice that human behavior would also CHANGE.
Just because you have a system of abundance, it doesn't mean people would go lazy... in fact, it would be the opposite.
People would likely travel... with no money to dictate what is accessible to them, and all of their needs met, they don't have to worry (or stress) about surviving... they can focus on different things.
When studies with universal basic income were conducted in Dauphin in the 1970-ies for example it was discovered that people did NOT in fact go lazy just because they got more money.
In fact, the said money alleviated many people's financial issues with basics and since they didn't have to worry about those anymore, they could focus more on providing better attention to their kids, or themselves.
So, no, people wouldn't go lazy... in fact, with basic needs being met and social values changing from 'acquisition of wealth' and 'status' in society to self-improvement/betterment (of not just yourself but everyone else and the environment at large), people's priorities shift.
We see this in real life all the time... so assuming it would be any different for people in the Federation would be faulty (but most of the 'faults' lie with the writers and their incredible LACK of knowledge into how environment shapes human behavior - not to mention their ineptitude when it comes to science and technology and the NEED to dumb things down and NOT make too advanced - sigh).
At any rate, your base premise of assuming laziness would suddenly go rampant just because you provide people with everything they need is faulty.
People in Trek work (don't do 'jobs') on things that matter to them.
Also, why would I want someone else to work 'hard' to avoid 'lazyness' just because I happen to work hard at some things?
Seriously, that's a messed up position.
Its equivalent to 'I suffer, therefore you MUST suffer as well'.
You still want to COMPETE with others and force them to experience the 'hardships' you do?
Come on... and also, the amount of 'hard work' one does in a collaborative society doesn't nearly result in the things you think they do.
You think people would exploit it just because 'that's who they are'... lol... faulty premise.
You are projecting EXISTING ways of thinking and doing things onto a system that's basically a polar opposite... and you're bringing the faulty notion of 'human nature' (which doesn't even exist) into the discussion trying to justify your point of view.
The whole point of the 'no money' economy is to allow humans so they find things they want to dedicate themselves to.
Oh and, any given field will not have a select small minority of people working in that field 24/7 without breaks.
A collaborative environment/system which exposes everyone to relevant general education (basic methods of science to understand how the natural world works), critical thinking and problem solving would generate humans that are genuinely willing to contribute.
So, lets say your field is engineering... you think you'd be the only one to do that in a town filled with millions?
Of course not.
The majority of the work would be done by automation... people would only do a minor portion of the work, and other engineers would be invited to help out.
Now you're asking 'why would they?'
Oh I don't know... maybe because the very things that ensure their own (and other people) well-being and quality of life and protection of the environment DEPENDS on it?
So what if you're asked to donate 1 hour of your time per week every once in a while to do something you know you can do?
I'd certainly, do it... and so would many others.
People would step up to do what's necessary.
Also, people in Trek don't lounge about the Holodeck all day - even if they are given the chance.
Why?
Oh I don't know... perhaps because they created an environment/system which doesn't require of them to ESCAPE it frequently (like Capitalism does) .
They usually find satisfaction in their every-day lives... they understand they can EXPERIENCE life and that it offers more than enough to keep you interested.
Sure, they also spend time in the holodeck for some fantasy... so what?
Its a different society.
People today write books based on fantasy... in Trek, they write holonovels instead.
And also, you cannot take one faulty case such as Barclay who developed holo-addiction and say it would happen to EVERYONE.
Faulty premise.
Barclay had socialization issues and he used the holodeck as a way to DEAL with those.
Also, Starfleet crews resort to holodecks for entertainment because they are onboard a starship... and even if they do what they love all day long, sometimes, they need a break to relax.
A starship is not a planet, so having a holodeck there is handy way to help the crew in different ways.
On a planet though, I'm pretty sure that people engage in different activities freely (because they are ACCESSIBLE to them) and are 'productive' in different ways.
The concept of 'productivity' is probably largely abandoned in the Federation because its yet another method of social stratification (aka 'humiliation').
A 'vestige' of how people used to behave (aka, today).
I'm game if he wants to, I'll gladly take it over to TNZ.
The government should have a VERY finite level of doing things and STRICTLY defined levels of interference into societies daily life. Beyond that, the rest should be left to it's citizenry, the government should stay out and not interfere with it's citizenry if possible.
The Government shouldn't do everything for people. What next, do you expect the government to come in and raise your children for you? Wipe your bottom for you when you use the restroom?
How involved should the government be in your daily life IYO?
Dude, I know when I'm being lazy and I can be very lazy. Has nothing to do with capitalism and everything to do with my own personal attitude.
Maybe its different for others.
Last edited:
Yes I want the government to raise my kids and wipe my ass...
We’ve had our exchange, which really doesn’t belong here. By all means take it up in Miscellaneous or TNZ.
Moving on.
I've literally seen it first hand. If people are completely satisfied and need nothing else, they won't contribute to society and will stay a mooch. There are ALOT of people like that.
I agree, just our methods of re-examining it is different.
Nothing wrong with Capitalism, but you're a Democratic Socialist, so I don't expect you to see things the same way as me.
You can't assume that it doesn't have similar premises as well. The show was created by many capitalists.
All nice to do things for yourself or friend, on your personal "Free Time". Not contributing to the whole of society.
Bingo, you sacrifice your time/input to contribute to the greater whole of society, in the end you get some benefits in goods & services as well, you pay for those goods & services using currency. You get free choice as to which goods & services you want. A very democratic notion.
You want to contribute to the whole of society & get something out of it, not just sit there and take from it and give nothing in return.
Everything consumes some form of resource.
Cars/Shuttles/Vehicles/Star Ships costs some form of resource to Manufacture & Operate (Fuel/Electricity).
All the development that goes into Cars/Shuttles/Vehicles/Star Ships costs man hours to Develop, Test, Integrate.
From gathering the base raw materials, the energy to manufacture & assemble, the man hours to integrate the various systems on board the StarShip, to test & validate all the systems, to train StarFleet Officers to use said systems. To then crew said StarShips and fill them with resources to go out and explore strange new worlds.
All that takes ALOT of resources. Federation Credit is just a medium to exchange for Goods/Services/Materials to get to that point.
Social Media is just a another product, you volunteer your own time and give away information to power them. You CHOOSE whether or not to use it.
Netflix is a service where you get access to it's entire library for a fixed fee per month. You CHOOSE whether or not it's worth using it.
To you, many jobs might seem pointless, to others, it's a critical part to make the bigger whole of the business work efficiently. Every person has only a finite amount of time & bandwidth to do tasks, after that is used up, you'll get worst quality work out of said human. So there really isn't much point in extracting more work out of said people beyond a certain point.
The people feel empty because they choose a job they don't like and stick with it for whatever reasons. They don't save & scrimp until they can go partake in a job that they enjoy working in.
People can work to gather enough resources to do what they want, then go engage in whatever job they find engaging. That's how it works today. It shouldn't really be that different in the future.
Just look at Japan's NEET/Hikikomori culture, it's a growing problem where people are TOO comfortable and aren't contributing to society. Just sitting back and enjoying things.
That just sounds like you want more people to mooch off of society with nothing in return. Those same people can do work, contribute to the greater whole of society. Be reimbursed with Federation Credits, then go on vacation some other day.
A very limited study, and one that didn't contribute nearly enough to the greater whole of society.
You can improve yourself on your Personal Free Time outside of work. What you do on your free time is up to you. If you want to go help your local community, so be it.
The more things change, the more things stay the same. It just might take different shapes & forms.
We'll have to agree to disagree.
Yup, people will easily get to work in "Jobs" that they like doing work that interests them because the costs of everything is incredibly cheap and manufacturing is easy. I'm not asking you to do back breaking pointless labor like digging ditches with a shovel. I'm asking you to participate in work using modern technology to make things easier, and you still complain.
I want our entire society / team to work hard. If I see you slack off, I'll see more and more people want to slack off. Then we'll all slack off together and nothing gets done.
No, it's a logical position.
It's called TEAM WORK. Collective Work to benefit our Society / Team / Unit / Organization / etc.
I want them to contribute to society in a meaningful way doing a job they find engaging. It doesn't have to be the same thing as me, but it has to be useful work that contributes to the greater whole.
It literally depends on each specific task and how it fits to the greater big picture.
Trust me, "Human Nature" exists all right. We aren't that different from our ancestors. We might have more collective knowledge and some genetic enhancements, but we're not as different as you would like to believe.
And of course there is the "Federation Credit" which has been referenced several times in ST. So it's not that there is "No Money", it's that money and the accumulation of "Wealth" isn't the goal of people. There are ALOT of regulations and safety checks to prevent the SnowBall effects of the bad part of capitalism and to regulate everything properly.
That's why we have the Federation Collective / Society, so that we can rotate people in and out. Not burn people out.
Yes, a common basic education system to get everybody onto the same basic minimum fundamentals of information, knowledge, aptitude, problem solving and critical thinking skills makes for a well rounded person to contribute USEFUL WORK to the greater whole of society.
That's no different from what we have right now with many machines doing what used to be "Back Breaking" manual labor. We just have formal systems in place to get things done a certain way, up to a specified quality and quantity with many requirements.
And we can have people who find that type of job engaging participate in it. There are plenty of jobs out there. Environmental Protection is one of them. Same with ensuring a certain Quality of Life minimum standard is being met.
<sarcasm>Wow, you're so generous at 1 hour of your time per week, imagine how far society can get if every human only contributed 1 hour per week.</sarcasm>
Given what I've seen of society now, plenty of people won't step up if they can avoid it and have other people do the work for them.
You gather 10,000 people to help on a voluntary project, I bet you that ≤ a dozen will help out for free.
Without incentive / rewards, people won't do anything if they can have somebody else do it.
I see that all the time, everywhere.
You obviously must know only hard working upstanding people in society. Never the worse of society.
Capitalism has NOTHING to do with it, people just like "Having Fun". That's part of "Human Nature" which you deny.
Most people find every-day lives to be boring, monotonous, mundane, and un-eventful.
Yes, people like entertainment. It's a base need for many folks, regardless of Species, Gender, Sexual Preference, any other factors, etc.
And he got past that issue thanks to Deanna Troi and her counseling.
Yes, everybody needs to take a break and relax, even in my vision for the future, there will be PLENTY of time to relax.
Yes, it's a awesome tool to experience a virtually limitless amount of scenarios, experiences, sites, locations, etc.
I prefer people to be "Productive" in ways that contribute to the whole of society. Doing jobs that help out and fill out needs of people.
People from the future aren't going to be that different from people of today IMO.
You've seen a small % of people doing something in a culture/environment that prompted them to think in a specific way.
What do you expect?
Actually, I'm not a democratic socialist (and you thinking I am one doesn't make it so).
I don't conform to political notions as defined by other people.
Doesn't have the same premise because we've seen it explained several times in TNG, DS9 and VOY the premise is NOT the same.
But yes, I do agree with you the show was written by many Capitalists... who then proceeded to inject various stupidities into it.
In your opinion.
I've done more contribution to society like that than I ever have working 40+ hours a week for someone else and earning money for them just for the sake of moving it around.
Again, you confuse having a 'job' with contributing to society... faulty premise.
I am FORCED to donate my time in things I don't want to do for the sake of acquiring useless bits of paper which have been agreed upon (long before I was born) by MORONS that its a good way to access goods and services (and in the far past it was, but since society generates abundance, such notions are utterly moronic and counterproductive).
Realistically, most peoples access to goods and services is restricted by the very thing you applaud (money).
If they don't have enough of it... they don't get access.
Correction, my employer reaped most of the benefits... and I didn't get much in return..
I got useless bits of paper which personally mean nothing to me and the only reason I use them is to gain access to basic necessities of life (which I know society already produces in massive abundance and wastes to an incredible degree).
Yes, but the way we go about usage of resources in Capitalism is utterly idiotic and incredibly wasteful.
Pointless to use 'federation credits' to gain access to goods/services/materials because the society in question also produces abundance in every are like real life humans do... only Trek humans realized they don't need to be bogged down by using primitive currency and methods of 'exchange'... or 'barter' or 'trade' to get what they require.
Most (if not all) of the goods and services they have are produced by advanced automation technology (just like it is for us).
They have people in administrative (monitoring) positions mostly to ensure the technology is doing what needs to be done.
To imply one has a choice is funny... because the 'choices' which capitalism presents are just a variation on the same theme... and people also get 'choice fatigue' because of the overwhelming amount of garbage capitalism throws at them.
A non monetary system wouldn't actually have a lack of options, it would specifically cater to individual customization (which is excessively expensive in Capitalism and unaccessible for most).
People mostly use them because they are affordable means of getting ENTERTAINMENT.
If money wasn't a barrier in gaining access, there is a very high probability A LOT of people would go out and do a lot of different things.
My point was to illustrate that majority of the time people GRAVITATE towards social media and Netflix because they have no other alternatives that are within their own purchasing power.
Also, social media are used extensively for communication by people in everyday life and what keeps them engaged with it so much is the rotten socio-economic system we created.
Don't turn this on me, because this isn't just my 'opinion'.
There have been numerous publications about 'bull*hit jobs' over the past decade alone that touch upon the very same subject.
First off: Most people cannot do the things they 'love' because they weren't born in a system which try to discover what their strengths are and nurtures that to full realization from a young age.
People are FORCED to find jobs just so they can survive - which are frequently low wage/mininum jobs which don't pay enough to allow people to save money in the first place.
Oh and its not easy to just 'quit your job and find what you love'... because the existing socio-economic system frequently won't allow you to do that without putting your livelihood in jeopardy... aka, no job = no money = no access to food, water, shelter, etc. (which prohibits access to anything else).
Then you need to factor in the premise that most people aren't ENCOURAGED to save money to move onto better things... because, oh yeah... they live in a system that constantly BOMBARDS them with ads which PUSH them to buy stuff they don't need (for the sake of 'growing the economy' - or more to the point, to make someone else rich).
Even people who find jobs that approach the notion of what they 'love' end up getting utterly SICK of it because of the excessive rules/regulations (not to mention hierarchy and bureaucracy) bogs them down.
It limits them to no end for starters, and the money frequently becomes an obstruction to creativity.
In fact, multiple studies confirmed that money is not a good incentive for creativity... its good for monotonous/repetitive tasks (all of which, along with highly specialized ones can easily be automated today).
No it doesn't work like that.
First you need to be lucky enough to be born into an environment that ensures you have relatively well off parents (who are also emotionally stable enough) to raise you and provide you with relative access to what you need to propel you further.
However, you still need money to acquire resources in question (because EVERYTHING humans do is subject to being paid).
People often also live in regions where they cannot acquire resources just by going out into the world and acquire them... because, they don't know where to look for (education they got never prepared them for that),... which usually means they need to FIND JOBS (any kind really) as a means of supporting themselves... and for the grand majority, that means they are forced to work on jobs they don't want to for pittance, just because they are forced to 'work for a living'.
Let me put that into context for you:
"A form of severe social withdrawal, called hikikomori, has been frequently described in Japan and is characterized by adolescents and young adults who become recluses in their parents' homes, unable to work or go to school for months or years."
Interesting... now, typically, you call them 'moochers' (which is also incredibly shortsighted of you)... but you never ask WHY they become recluses in their parents home, unable to work, or go to school for months or years.
Well, there's this thing called 'environment shapes behavior' (I suggest you study it... and while you're at it ... you should look into 'epigenetics' and 'neuroscience' too to gain better appreciation for it) which most likely impacted these kids in a capacity that made them reclusive.
You also don't understand what their lives are like (no, you really don't... because you don't LIVE their lives and you are NOT in the same environment).
You are projecting and extrapolating their actions (and you paint them in a VERY biased capacity due to the culture you live in).
Says you... and again it seems you missed the point.
You never asked the question as to WHY these people became recluses... no, you just 'concluded' that they are a bunch of 'moochers' because their parents are (apparently) well enough.
I'm sorry, but from where I'm sitting, you don't have the whole picture.
How interesting... and while accurate, there is this one little (actually a gigantic) problem with that:
Most people who finish working are TIRED out and stressed out from spending one third of their day (that is if you're lucky enough to be working only 8 hrs a day... most people don't because they need to work 2 jobs or more just to provide for themselves) working for someone else in a job they likely hate (where they are low paid), so they come home and need to do even more stuff such as: cooking, cleaning, etc.- you know, all of that takes time and effort.
And most people just don't have the STRENGTH to do all of that (let alone improving themselves outside of work) because they are EXHAUSTED.
Then there's also the 'snag' of most people not being exposed to relevant general education (basic methods of science of how the natural world works), critical thinking or problem solving to begin even QUESTIONING their existing lives that might even PROMPT them to change something.
Most people RESIGN themselves to the reality of living their lives as they are because they don't know any better... and also, even many who ARE lack the time and money, not to mention resources to DO something about it.
A common crutch invented by clueless people to make themselves 'feel' better and don't have the first idea of what real change means.
Majority of 'changes' you speak of are superficial at best... namely, people may change positions and move on, but the underlying socio-economic system is the same, which ultimately results in different people occupying previously same positions and just resulting in things staying mostly the same... with only superficial changes occurring.
People have been utterly petrified by the notion of actual change, so they invent little things and call this a 'big change' when in fact its nothing more than a token that results in minor revisions which don't have big enough impact to be classified as proper change.
You want to change something big?
Start by re-examining the core perceptions you were brought up with... the 'pillars' that make up the baseline upon which your thought process forms.
Once you've done that and you've actually studied multiple relevant disciplines (to provide you with a broader context), only then you might actually start changing big things about yourself.
But to reiterate my point, most people don't have the exposure, the means, the time or patience to DO any of those things because the system they live in frequently doesn't allow it (if it did, the system as we know it likely wouldn't exist by this point).
In the real world, most people NEVER get to find out what it is they love because they never discovered it due to the existing system we live in. No, they end up doing back-breaking work for most of their lives and end up always living in poverty just because they never found themselves under circumstances which afforded them connections with other people who could make that possible for them.
Unless you change the socio-economic system, participating in work using modern technology won't change ANYTHING for grand majority of people, because you're still asking people to submit to labor and work for you (and someone else) to acquire bits and pieces of paper just so they wouldn't starve or go homeless.
Don't you get it yet?
The existing system THREATENS people to submit to labor just so they can survive or otherwise be faced with deprivation/poverty, no food, no water, no shelter... all of which eventually leads to death (which is... unless you've been paying attention, rampant in today's world... with 9 million people dying annually due to starvation despite the fact of the world producing more than enough, 1.5 million dying due to preventable diseases, and at least 500 000 dying due to homelessness.
You're asking people to PARTICIPATE in the very system that's creating deplorable conditions, effectively repeating the same mistakes over and over again that got us into this mess to begin with, all the while expecting a different result.
Albert Einstein said a very similar thing... repeating the same thing over and over again while expecting a different result.
No, you are PROJECTING your own biased notion of how the world should be.
And for the record, many people in Africa (such as women) work incredibly hard (harder than most people in the west or more developed countries) and are still living and die (horribly) in poverty.
Your concept of 'hard work' being some kind of 'salvation' is utter nonsense... as is your perception that people will slack off if they don't work hard.
Its preposterous, illogical and not grounded in actual science.
Only the problem is that most teams in the current system are assembled to benefit a single company/organisation/individual... not society at large.
For example: majority of charities being given huge lumps of money don't even end up shuffling that money towards the goals they advocate.
Most of it ends up in the hands of organizers (the people who founded the organization), and goes to pay for fancy parties and events that are used to acquire the said money from donators (who then go on to brag about 'I gave money to charity, look at me, I am so moral and superior to you' - which is quite disgusting when you think about it because it means they missed the point entirely and are just injecting 'competitive' notions).
You can do that without money.
Forgive me but I won't 'trust' you because science actually has evidence and checked theories from peer-review which completely reject the notion of 'human nature'.
To that effect, I tend to use viable scientific data as guidelines... not people's personal opinions.
Or its just that your interpretation is invalid due to lack of context and information we were given in how Federation credits are used.
Don't presume its something the entire UFP uses because on more than one occasion, its been said 'we don't use money' ... or 'currency' for that matter (but we know they barter and trade with other species).
So you need to try and wrap your head around that to take in the possibility that what we were told about 'Federation Credits' (or more to the point, their USAGE) is not at all something that's used by Federation citizens... but quite possibly non-aligned (but peaceful) cultures who rely on trade/barter and insist on some kind of currency (like the Ferengi).
And these kinds of transactions would occur inside Federation space but mainly with species that still rely on a monetary based economy.
We have industrialized education which isn't designed to find out how each and every person learns and then adapts the study curriculum to that person... nor is education targeted to find out what each person's strengths are and build on those.
More to the point, people aren't exposed to 'relevant general education (basic methods of science), critical thinking or problem solving'.
Schools don't encourage people who question the curriculum and the majority of the global population in the real world has 0 understanding of basic scientific principles.
Education in the real world is structured in a monetarily affordable capacity and revolves around creating SPECIALISTS (people who are only educated in 1 subject, whose perceptions are too often limited to see a bigger picture and are clever enough to run the machines but stupid enough to not question the system they're in).
Sure, but the ability to GET that job is virtually non-existent or highly remote
First off, you need to have a ton of qualifications (which most people cannot afford to get due to life circumstances which you seem to ignore constantly and I mentioned above), and also it doesn't help the fact that literally THOUSANDS of people (if not more) are applying for that 1 job.
The system we have is completely inadequate... and that's something that seems to evade you entirely.
Pretty far actually considering there are about 7.8 BILLION people in the world and majority of studies have found that humans are only productive for 2 hours per day... oh and did I forget to mention we have advanced automation capabilities?
And there's the fact Buckminster Fuller said in 1974 we could lower the working week back then to 15 hours... today we can drop that figure to a much lower number still thanks to automation.
With due respect, you're only 1 person and you've seen a bare fraction of people.... you don't speak for all 7.8 billion people and your understanding of human behavior is... inadequate.
You're making an assumption based on your limited perception.
You completely ignore the conditions people work in (the environment), what's the structure like and whether people discover what they're doing is something they can invest time into in the first place.
Not everyone in the existing system have the time to volunteer.... especially if they are (for example) unemployed and require a paid job which would allow them to pay their bills and rent (so they don't become homeless), or that they can just eat and afford heating in cold weather.
You cannot just 'gather' 10 000 random people at the drop of a hat without understanding their circumstances and expect them to work in a monetary based system (which requires of people to have money to survive) for nothing just because you expect them to.
The hundreds of millions of volunteers around the globe would seem to disagree with you.
Highly unlikely... what you see is a very small % of people living in the same system/environment which droned into their skulls (since they were born) that without 'incentive', people won't do anything.
And while money IS an incentive, my point is that we have countless examples of real life incentives that have NOTHING to do with money, barter or trade.
Actually, throughout your reply I noticed you frequently demonstrated inability to see the worst of society... and 'hard working' only in regards to how your own culture defines it (which is pretty limited to be honest).
You keep repeating the same outdated trope of 'human nature' that doesn't exist in science (and just because most people repeat something, it doesn't mean its accurate... whole cultures and societies have behaved in a completely stupid manner simply because they didn't know any better - and that's a problem of lack of exposure to relevant general education, critical thinking and problem solving).
Most people find every-day lives to be boring, monotonous, mundane and uneventful because we CREATED a system (environment) that its boring, monotonous, mundane and uneventful - this little fact seems to be escaping you (or you are just unwilling to acknowledge it).
And like in most of your replies you don't understand WHY this is so.
People created entertainment primarily as means of escaping a dreadful reality which they created (a method of distraction)... but later on it also became as part of creative outlet.
Yes, but my point was that he was dealing with his social issues in the only way he knew how (because he didn't know any better)... so I don't understand how the writers managed to concoct the notion he was a holo-addict... that's just lazy writing.
Also, the idea that no one would have helped Barclay before he got to Enterprise-D seems like yet another laziness on writers behalf.
What seems to escape you is that you cannot do that through an existing system that's based on 'infinite growth', 'cyclical consumption', 'cost efficiency' and 'profits'.
Also, with due respect, your future seems just as oppressive like this one... because in the end you would still force people to submit to work to earn money to survive... and, you cannot guarantee there would be enough 'jobs' for everyone... because even in the existing system there simply aren't enough jobs for everyone... and the fact our existing socio-economic system keeps creating new bull*hit jobs just to keep the money flowing is utterly IDIOTIC (even though science and technology are producing massive abundance and can do so with MINIMAL input from Humans at a FRACTION of the footprint we presently use).
Until you get rid of the oppressive and fear factors (change the actual system to something completely different/better), you will end up with the same problems like before.
I can see your option working as a transitional period into say a non-monetary system... but not the be all ends all method of solving the problems we have (because, you demonstrated that anything short of your idea of 'productivity' encourages 'moochers'... and by that extension, you would likely implement draconian measures (based on threats probably) to get people to fall back in line (which sounds suspiciously like dictatorship - which arose because of Capitalism and its way of doing things).
Really now?
Because, I distinctly remember from reading history books that people of the past behaved in very different way..
They had different customs... heck even the language they used was very different because the environment they lived in was different.
Also, the whole base premise of Trek was that Roddenberry said Humanity overcame its infantile stage (that majority of humanity lives in right now).
That seems like a massive change to me... and it was illustrated somewhat on Trek in both TOS and TNG... but it was also limited because of other writers who didn't share those notions and because the show was written to appeal to the general public of the times the TV show was produc
I'm having to squint real hard to see anything related to Star Trek anymore.
As both @Nyotarules and I have said, capitalism and its attendant evils/benefits are a great topic for Miscellaneous or TNZ.
If this thread can't be brought back to the fictional universe of Star Trek, we'll close it.
Like we've had to close this same thread a thousand times before...
As both @Nyotarules and I have said, capitalism and its attendant evils/benefits are a great topic for Miscellaneous or TNZ.
If this thread can't be brought back to the fictional universe of Star Trek, we'll close it.
Like we've had to close this same thread a thousand times before...
Well, I'd say that pretty much ends any discussion about Trek.
After all, people in the future being different ('better' )from present day humanity is pretty much the core assumption underlying Trek - at least all trek till Enterprise (even though I'll agree DS9 introduced some caveats). You'd have to explain why people like Kirk and Picard were lying about that.
For what it's worth, in the 'real world' I don't see humanity becoming fundamentally 'better' either, but that wouldn't be relevant in this discussion.
Last edited:
Not sure how Kirk figures. He describes humans as killers but they have choice.
But, I still find relatable human traits, both good and bad. Especially in TOS.
Then move this thread to Misc/TNZ forums so we can continue it. I'll wait until that happens so I can continue my debate with Deks.
Last edited:
I'd rather continue debating Deks here on the existing thread, we're not done debating.
I think the Grand Nagus summed up my views on capitalism quite well: "Workers of the World, unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains."
...I didn't say which Grand Nagus!
Anyway, Trek is ever evolving and thousands of people have contributed to it. Canon - including what role money does or doesn't play - will always be somewhat contradictory and unclear.
...I didn't say which Grand Nagus!
Anyway, Trek is ever evolving and thousands of people have contributed to it. Canon - including what role money does or doesn't play - will always be somewhat contradictory and unclear.
Similar threads
