And now, for something completely different!

[Cheapjack]

Or: 'It's life jim, but not as we know it!'

'To clarify my idea of a what you would get, in the 24th century, instead of money, you would just get a pass, an account, with clearance to to certain things. At age 18, after being educated, which you would want,you would be called into a meeting, and you would be asked' What are you going to do with your life? What's your plan?' If you said'Well I'm planning to get smashed on synthehol every day', your pass would be restricted, and you would just get enough clearance to do that, until you came up with a plan. you might find it difficult to reproduce, on your clearance,as you would be a bad example. You might decide you want to make chairs, as ex president Carter does. Hand made things would be liked in the 24th Century. There may be some monetary credit on this account, to get you off planet things, but this whole idea of unitary pieces of money that people sweat for and worship to amass, and which everything, even human sex, is measured in units of, would go the way of the chicken and the goat as a means of barter. People would be given clearance based on what they are going to do to contribute to humanity, as Picard has said they live for. That will be the big difference between us and them. We live primarily for our own gain, secondarily for humanity's, though some of us have no concept of that. With them, it's the other way round, cos they KNOW they have the basics, and will always get them, as we don't.

The principle of TNG is that humans have changed. They have evolved, because of technology. They are not the same as the Romans, they not the same as us. They still have the savage within, they could still regress, there is a piece of all of us in them, but they are more refined and more evolved. This is the bedrock of ST and is repeated over and over again in all it 700 episodes. And they don't have capitalism as we know it. Sorry, but they don't. Just because they sometimes use money, doesn't mean they do.They can DEAL with people, like Harry Mudd, that do trade the currency, just as we can still swim, and all of us can do it, but we're not an aquatic species. Those three 20th Century humans in the Neutral Zone accepted it and took the cold bath and came up spluttering and coughing, but they learned to cope in the 24thC.'

....And to add to that, I would say, in order to satisfy some, that the 24thC humans in TNG have VESTIGIAL capitalism. The same way we have canines. The same way, we could,if pushed, eat raw meat. We would be proud, in some part, that we could still eat raw meat, but one part of our mind would be disgusted, I think. We could eat humans,if there was a need, if we we were pushed, but we would be even more disgusted.

24th Century people can deal in money. Kirk, I think in particular, would be very good at it. He would strike a hard deal. Riker would be good, and he would be proud of it, in some part of his mind. But. he would think it a little backward, and could imagine a better way. But they do not have such a system in their ordinary lives, because, in our terms, they're all absolutely loaded anyway. The world is their oyster, in our terms. but it's just a pass, an account, with SOME credit on it, maybe something amazing to us. like a couple of hundred thou.

To think, people, in 20th Century made a living doing what I'm trying to do here! Imagining a strange,new future!

Weird!

 

[Green Shirt]

Weird!

Yes.

 

[Cheapjack]

Star Trek, is, or should I say, was, once, science fiction.

That's what Science fiction is all about and you should read some. They're not going to kick your door in and arrest you for reading SF. Not yet, anyway.

Write your own SF, if you don't agree. One where the Dominion are conquered and the Jem'Hadar all work at the 24thC MCdonalds, hats perched uncomfortably on their bobbly heads, grateful for the opportunity to work for $7 an hour. It's better than ketrosel white, i suppose.

But, i don't think it would be Star Trek.

They have a very high standard of living in ST, even higher than America today, if that's possible and not dangerous talk!

 

[SpyOne]

Cheapjack and I got into an argument in this thread: http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=117776
It was distracting from the on-topic discussion, and he said he'd make a thread for it, and this appears to be that thread (as his first post here consists of part of his last reply to me there.

There were, of course, some bits he omitted here, and some things he said here that he did not say there.

I have siad that capitalism hasn't alway been around, we once bartered and before that, we stole. And up until the 19th Century, Aborigines didn't have it at all, and they are human and intelligent and successful.

And I have asked if the fact that they use it now doesn't indicate that they thought it was an improvement.
I will point out again that the fact that capitalism, in some recognizable form, has been around for millennia was only brought up to rebut your suggestion that it was a recent phenomenon, at best a few centuries old.

At least you are now saying that you will get the basics in TNG world, and that will be a lot more than you get now, which stands to reason, as their standard of living will be much higher, as it will be, if things keep going the way they are, 400 years down the line.

This does not indicate a rate of change, and it is wrong for you to suggest that it does. I believe that not only would you be unable to find any post in any thread where I said, or even implied, that the Federation does not provide all basic needs to its citizens, but you won't find anyone at all espousing that view in the thread this discussion came from.

And the Romans has slavery, which is something even they felt guilty about and something Quark said was wrong and unferengi like.

The Romans used to say about slavery, "A free man is free to starve." The Romans had laws that required slaves to be fed, and other basic provisions made for them, which was more than they offered free men in their society.
Yes, humanity has been improving steadily for millennia. We are much kinder to those unable to care for themselves than we were. That point is not in contention, nor is the idea that this will continue into the future.
What is in contention is whether the system presented in TNG-era Star Trek is recognizably capitalist. You appear to be arguing that capitalism must logically be absent since it is (in your contention) thoroughly evil. This would require some proof of that point beyond your statements that it caused global warming and makes kittens cry.

... but this whole idea of unitary pieces of money that people sweat for and worship to amass, and which everything, even human sex, is measured in units of, ...

And again you make statements that nobody else made and pretend they did so you can argue against them.
I never said money would be worshiped. I never said that people would seek to amass it. And I never said anything at all about it relating to sex. I simply said that money exists, and that on-screen evidence shows it is used for transactions internal to the Federation. A Starfleet Officer acquiring a local object on a Federation member world described the transaction as "purchase", for example.
And doing so casually, with no evidence of the disgust you seem to think they would feel.

 

[Cheapjack]

Cheapjack and I got into an argument in this thread: http://www.trekbbs.com/showthread.php?t=117776
It was distracting from the on-topic discussion, and he said he'd make a thread for it, and this appears to be that thread (as his first post here consists of part of his last reply to me there.

There were, of course, some bits he omitted here, and some things he said here that he did not say there.

I have siad that capitalism hasn't alway been around, we once bartered and before that, we stole. And up until the 19th Century, Aborigines didn't have it at all, and they are human and intelligent and successful.

And I have asked if the fact that they use it now doesn't indicate that they thought it was an improvement.
I will point out again that the fact that capitalism, in some recognizable form, has been around for millennia was only brought up to rebut your suggestion that it was a recent phenomenon, at best a few centuries old.

At least you are now saying that you will get the basics in TNG world, and that will be a lot more than you get now, which stands to reason, as their standard of living will be much higher, as it will be, if things keep going the way they are, 400 years down the line.

This does not indicate a rate of change, and it is wrong for you to suggest that it does. I believe that not only would you be unable to find any post in any thread where I said, or even implied, that the Federation does not provide all basic needs to its citizens, but you won't find anyone at all espousing that view in the thread this discussion came from.

And the Romans has slavery, which is something even they felt guilty about and something Quark said was wrong and unferengi like.

The Romans used to say about slavery, "A free man is free to starve." The Romans had laws that required slaves to be fed, and other basic provisions made for them, which was more than they offered free men in their society.
Yes, humanity has been improving steadily for millennia. We are much kinder to those unable to care for themselves than we were. That point is not in contention, nor is the idea that this will continue into the future.
What is in contention is whether the system presented in TNG-era Star Trek is recognizably capitalist. You appear to be arguing that capitalism must logically be absent since it is (in your contention) thoroughly evil. This would require some proof of that point beyond your statements that it caused global warming and makes kittens cry.

... but this whole idea of unitary pieces of money that people sweat for and worship to amass, and which everything, even human sex, is measured in units of, ...

And again you make statements that nobody else made and pretend they did so you can argue against them.
I never said money would be worshiped. I never said that people would seek to amass it. And I never said anything at all about it relating to sex. I simply said that money exists, and that on-screen evidence shows it is used for transactions internal to the Federation. A Starfleet Officer acquiring a local object on a Federation member world described the transaction as "purchase", for example.
And doing so casually, with no evidence of the disgust you seem to think they would feel.

Spyone:

And I Never said that capitalism is evil. It's just a step.It's necessary, at the moment. But there is a better step beyond it. Gene Roddenberry got it, I got it. Read the Caves of Steel by Asimov. They have passes for everything in that. No money.They have a class structure too.

Spyone, the Romans only fed their slaves, cos they had to, in order to get work from them. If they didn't, they would die. They effectively charged them for it, and made them pay with more labour.

As I said, they have vestigial capitalism in TNG, as I interpet it. They have credit,money,spondulicks,wonga,dosh, on their personal account, to get some things and to deal with people who trade that way. But their system is based on what you have to contribute, as they are, what we could call now, a leisure class, and, though you never said it, that's not evil. They work, but on their own projects. They may find that working in the fields, growing stuff, being semi-self supporting, keeping the old ways alive, improves their mindset, and they would be free to do that,They are hypereducated,hyperresponsible, but they have to go to the toilet, as we do. But, we're not there yet. I admit, without want, there may be no desire to get anything and you may turn into a vegetable. But I've never heard of any millionaire in our time turning into a vegetable. You get used to it and you DO things. And, I think they would be frowned on a lot and have their clearance restricted if they couldn't think of anything and they would have career advisors, as we have now.

Spyone, this isn't an argument that you can win. there is no argument. STTNG has stated that they don't have money as we know it and they don't have capitalism as we know it, as the Ferengi have, and they look down on them. It has been stated. They exist to contribute to humanity.they don't live for the aquisition of things,power etc, as the world is already their oyster, in our terms. It has been stated. And it isn't just Picard's personal view, it is GR's. He said it to the writers, he said it in interviews. I'm just trying to expand on it.

 

[DevilEyes]

Or: 'It's life jim, but not as we know it!'

'To clarify my idea of a what you would get, in the 24th century, instead of money, you would just get a pass, an account, with clearance to to certain things. At age 18, after being educated, which you would want,you would be called into a meeting, and you would be asked' What are you going to do with your life? What's your plan?' If you said'Well I'm planning to get smashed on synthehol every day', your pass would be restricted, and you would just get enough clearance to do that, until you came up with a plan. you might find it difficult to reproduce, on your clearance,as you would be a bad example.

So what if you don't do what you originally promised to do? Who can guarantee that you will keep the promise, instead of going to get smashed on synthehol every day (to use your colorful example)? Your idea reminds me of those US customs forms that ask people if they are terrorists or spies - as if anyone is going to admit it if they are.

So I presume, you'd have to go on appearing in front of the commission and proving yourself all your life? In order to make this to work, is the state going to be checking on people to see if they're fulfilling their Plan?

In other words, it would be a totalitarian society, in which the state tries to control every aspect of people's lives, where people have to look for permits for pretty much almost anything, and in which the state (or rather - people who have been appointed to commissions, therefor being given a lot of power) categorizes the citizens as "worthy" or "unworthy" to be allowed to do various things...

.... according to you, it even decides who should reproduce? That comes really close to compulsory sterilization, only through indirect methods.

You might decide you want to make chairs, as ex president Carter does. Hand made things would be liked in the 24th Century. There may be some monetary credit on this account, to get you off planet things, but this whole idea of unitary pieces of money that people sweat for and worship to amass, and which everything, even human sex, is measured in units of, would go the way of the chicken and the goat as a means of barter.

Why would the existence of money imply that people worship it, try to amass it, or that sex should be measured in units of money?

Is everything in extremes for you? I suppose this is supposed to be your judgment on capitalism, but 1) it is a warped, exaggerated caricature of capitalism, and 2) why do you assume that money = capitalism? Money is a means to facilitate trade, it existed in feudalism and it exists in socialism as well.

To think, people, in 20th Century made a living doing what I'm trying to do here! Imagining a strange,new future!

Weird!

The word I would use is "creepy".

Your Federation seems less free than Romulus or Cardassian Union. I think I'd try to emigrate as soon as possible from that totalitarian society.

 

[Cheapjack]

Or: 'It's life jim, but not as we know it!'

'To clarify my idea of a what you would get, in the 24th century, instead of money, you would just get a pass, an account, with clearance to to certain things. At age 18, after being educated, which you would want,you would be called into a meeting, and you would be asked' What are you going to do with your life? What's your plan?' If you said'Well I'm planning to get smashed on synthehol every day', your pass would be restricted, and you would just get enough clearance to do that, until you came up with a plan. you might find it difficult to reproduce, on your clearance,as you would be a bad example.

So what if you don't do what you originally promised to do? Who can guarantee that you will keep the promise, instead of going to get smashed on synthehol every day (to use your colorful example)? I presume, you'd have to go on appearing in front of the commission and proving that you've done

In other words, it would be a totalitarian society, in which the state tries to control every aspect of people's lives, where people have to look for permits for pretty much almost anything, and in which the state (or rather - people who have been appointed to commissions, therefor being given a lot of power) categorizes the citizens as "worthy" or "unworthy" to be allowed to do various things...

.... according to you, it even decides who should reproduce? That comes really close to compulsory sterilization, only through indirect methods.

You might decide you want to make chairs, as ex president Carter does. Hand made things would be liked in the 24th Century. There may be some monetary credit on this account, to get you off planet things, but this whole idea of unitary pieces of money that people sweat for and worship to amass, and which everything, even human sex, is measured in units of, would go the way of the chicken and the goat as a means of barter.

Why would the existence of money imply that people worship it, try to amass it, or that sex should be measured in units of money?

Is everything in extremes for you? I suppose this is supposed to be your judgment on capitalism, but 1) it is a warped, exaggerated caricature of capitalism, and 2) why do you assume that money = capitalism? Money is a means to facilitate trade, it existed in feudalism and it exists in socialism as well.

To think, people, in 20th Century made a living doing what I'm trying to do here! Imagining a strange,new future!

Weird!

The word I would use is "creepy".

Your Federation seems less free than Romulus or Cardassian Union. I think I'd try to emigrate as soon as possible from that totalitarian society.

And you see anything less than free market uber capitalism and extremes of wealth and poverty as totalitarian. Free does not mean free for the strong to oppress the weak. Government exists to stop this. Government exists to give everyone the same chance and this would be realised beyond your wildest dreams, in my ST world.You seem to think free means the freedom to die of a horrible disease, chin held up.

Yes, the goverment would decide a lot, but it would be reasonable, reasoned out, thought over, agonised over,debated, like the constitution was and with a ton of common sense and representing an average agreed by all. And they wouldn't have death panels, or sterilise people. Surely that's better than having a fight over it and letting the strongest win? Is that free? Not if you don't win and are just the average joe.There would be a little SCIENCE to it, too,based on what we've learned about humans and humans living in groups and people in the 24th Century would know a hell of a lot more about it than we doMost people would be responsible to others, even from an early age and that's not totalitarian indoctrination, it's right. It happens now, to a limited extent, by the STATE.People would be free to contribute to the gene pool, they would find it a little more difficult if they did nothing. and as I've said there would be a bit of everyone in the people of the 28th Century. people only have 16 kids, cos they feel threatened and cos they feel that there should be more of their type in the world. You wouldn't need this in the 24thC as people wouldn't feel threatened, they would know they are secure,as they don't now. And they ALL would know they are valuable. And, they would all get a hell of a lot out of life, for free, anyway. And they wold be more free than even people are today, free to travel the world, but they would have to contribute.Some people may not even decide to have any kids at all, because they would feel that other people's have more in common with them, that they were human.

Devil, the state decides now, that you are unpopular, if you decide just to get smashed every day and not contribute. You are not popular, you have a limited circle of friends, you don't have much cash. You are FREE to do that, of course. The state doesn't exactly come out and say you can't breed, absolutely,but it makes it more difficult for you. And, the state and the government are voted in by a majority of people, so really it's the majority of people decide. and THAT is freedom.

As happens today, you would have rights and responsibilitys, to use a 21stC term. Your rights would be incredible. Your responsibliies would be minimal, just DO soemthing useful thats all. But you wouldn't have a right to kill one hundred people every day, as that's a bit unsociable, if you can stomach that term and don't think it's 'totalitarian'. Well, you could, you could go to Cardassia, or the Klingon world and become a soldier or a member of their secret service. You'd be free to do that.

You may decide to go to Cardassia, but I bet you'd come back fairly quickly. You can't do whatever the hell you want even on Cardassia or Romulus. and you might find that some are a hell of a lot more ruthless and stronger than you and you are going to get wiped out in a day and you may want a nasty creepy nanny state to look after you.Or you may find out that you are the best of them, in which case we back on Earth would be proud of you.You may decide that your own planet would be the best thing, or your own island, and that would be easier in the St world.

The most important thing is that humans survive, they can reproduce, they are not persecuted or enslaved and they contrubute to the rest of humans, if they choose to live with a big heap of them.And you would be able to do this fifty times more than you can today, in the ST world that I see.All this talk of freedom is a 20thC non seqiutor

 

[DevilEyes]

And you see anything less than free market uber capitalism and extremes of wealth and poverty as totalitarian.

O rly? How did you draw that conclusion?

This proves that you're incapable of thinking in anything but extremes, or understanding anyone else's position without turning it into a caricature. Anyone who disagrees with your ideal of total state control over the life of the individual is an evil greedy capitalist who loves inequality and oppression.

I find this really ironic. FYI I am a social democrat, so you better find someone else to be your Evil Capitalist straw man.

Guess what: it's possible to be against oppression and extremes of wealth and poverty while NOT being in favor of totalitarianism. And your idea of Federation is that of a totalitarian society, there is no two ways about it.

Free does not mean free for the strong to oppress the weak. Government exists to stop this. Government exists to give everyone the same chance and this would be realised beyond your wildest dreams, in my ST world.

Actually, in your ST world, government (i.e. the people in the government) would be too strong and would oppress the weak, i.e. the majority of the population.

You seem to think free means the freedom to die of a horrible disease, chin held up.

Don't be ridiculous. For all your talk of "evolved" humanity, you don't seem to have a high opinions of humans, if you believe that anyone whose life is not completely controlled by the state is going to die of a terrible disease.

 

[Cheapjack]

And you see anything less than free market uber capitalism and extremes of wealth and poverty as totalitarian. Free does not mean free for the strong to oppress the weak.

O rly? How did you draw that conclusion?

This proves that you're incapable of thinking in anything but extremes, or understanding anyone else's position without turning it into a caricature. Anyone who disagrees with your ideal of total state control over the life of the individual is an evil greedy capitalist who loves inequality and oppression.

I find this really ironic. FYI I am a social democrat, so you better find someone else to be your Evil Capitalist straw man.

Government exists to stop this. Government exists to give everyone the same chance and this would be realised beyond your wildest dreams, in my ST world.

Actually, in your ST world, government would be too strong and would oppress the weak.

You seem to think free means the freedom to die of a horrible disease, chin held up.

Don't be ridiculous. For all your talk of "evolved" humanity, you don't seem to have a high opinions of humans, if you believe that anyone whose life is not completely controlled by the state is going to die of a terrible disease.

And you are getting lost for an answer as you are saying I can't debate. You were the one who said my world was creepy. you mentioned the highly emotive word totalitarian.

And my world wouldn't oppress the weak. Even the weak can start up a community group, or sweep up. And they would have a lot in this world.

 

[DevilEyes]

And you are getting lost for an answer as you are saying I can't debate. You were the one who said my world was creepy. you mentioned the highly emotive word totalitarian.

And my world wouldn't oppress the weak. Even the weak can start up a community group, or sweep up. And they would have a lot in this world.

An answer to what? I already said all I had to, and you didn't provide any counterarguments to speak of. "Totalitarian" is simply the word that accurately describes your vision of what the Federation should/would be like. Totalitarianism = system in which the state tries to control every aspect of people's private and public lives. How is the system you have described not totalitarian?

 

[Cheapjack]

And you are getting lost for an answer as you are saying I can't debate. You were the one who said my world was creepy. you mentioned the highly emotive word totalitarian.

And my world wouldn't oppress the weak. Even the weak can start up a community group, or sweep up. And they would have a lot in this world.

An answer to what? I already said all I had to, and you didn't provide any counterarguments to speak of. "Totalitarian" is simply the word that accurately describes your vision of what the Federation should/would be like. Totalitarianism = system in which the state tries to control every aspect of people's private and public lives. How is the system you have described not totalitarian?

Because not every aspect is not controlled, that's why. You are given a pass that is a gold card, by our standards. You wouldn't just get to meet William Shatner at a ST convention, in this world, you could visit him at his local watering hole, if he wanted to see you! This pass is does have some limits on it, but they are incredible, by our standards. Yes, it's limited, but as I have said there is a limit to how rich you can be, even in the 21stC. There are somethings you can't do in America, today, no matter how rich you are. You can't have slaves, or set up your own goverment or overthrow the present one.There are a million and one things you can do with this card, but a million things you can't have, as Kirk told Charlie X. Some people in Africa today can't even do two things a day today. It stands to reason that you can't do anything you want to all the time, it's the first thing I was taught in A Level politics and the Government,as the heaviest fist and the one representing the people most of all, tells you that.

The State doesn't tell you that you have to go to Hawai, or Canada, you decide. As to the having kids bit, you could have them, but their cards wouldn't be restricted, as the poor of today's kids chances are. The government would only be alerted if you started putting in requests for weapons grade plutonium, as it would get a bit nervous.Most of the time, it wouldn't even bother you. Maybe even, you wouldn't have to be seen to be doing something, maybe we can nix that idea, but the American government now and the UK one, insists that you are 'doing something' to look for work, or you get nothing, and that's not totalitarain. But it has been proven that doing something is good for you and maybe people wuold be worried if you turned into a vegetable. Maybe you would just be asked at 18, and then left alone for the rest of your life. But the education system would turn out some real competent people. Maybe you wouldn't get your card restricted unless you murdered someone. Having a sense of social responsibilty is good, and I don't agree with the equation that complete popluation social responsibility = Totalitarionism, which is not what you are saying, but could be implied. Social responsibilty can be inculled in everyone, even criminals tell their children not to rely on others too much, even when they need other people around to steal off. And in this world you wouldn't rely on others to get your daily bread. Some people don't believe in it, I admit, even those that live in a heap of people. They think they're in it all alone, even when they need people to commit crime on.They think they're living an a field of sheep or cows, and they're the wolf.That's their right. They may be right, of course. But they become very persuasive, when they need a doctor or a fire engine.They suddenly become very social animals. Some don't. My Grandad refused to take his heart pills, he said he had to cure himself and he died as a result.Leave them alone, but be a bit worried if they start to build a bomb.

I'm trying to use every bit of persuasiveness here. But I don't want this thread to get shut down, as that would be a bit totalitarian.

Surely, it's a more attractive idea, my pass, than just the basic llving stipend, that Penta suggested? It's not much more than you get now and a higher standard of living 400 years down the line means you might get a bit more. You might not be able to get into the after show oscars parties, unless you're Harry Mudd,but you might clearance to get to visit San Francisico, to do some research for your book,if you saved up a bit!? you might even be able to request a transfer to University of California, if you really tried, which someone in England now has little hope of!?

 

[SpyOne]

At least you are now saying that you will get the basics in TNG world, and that will be a lot more than you get now, which stands to reason, as their standard of living will be much higher, as it will be, if things keep going the way they are, 400 years down the line.

This does not indicate a rate of change, and it is wrong for you to suggest that it does. I believe that not only would you be unable to find any post in any thread where I said, or even implied, that the Federation does not provide all basic needs to its citizens, but you won't find anyone at all espousing that view in the thread this discussion came from.

I had hoped you would get the hint here, but it appears I have to make it more blatant: an adult would apologize for what you did there, or would justify his actions by proving me wrong.

 

[Cheapjack]

At least you are now saying that you will get the basics in TNG world, and that will be a lot more than you get now, which stands to reason, as their standard of living will be much higher, as it will be, if things keep going the way they are, 400 years down the line.

This does not indicate a rate of change, and it is wrong for you to suggest that it does. I believe that not only would you be unable to find any post in any thread where I said, or even implied, that the Federation does not provide all basic needs to its citizens, but you won't find anyone at all espousing that view in the thread this discussion came from.

I had hoped you would get the hint here, but it appears I have to make it more blatant: an adult would apologize for what you did there, or would justify his actions by proving me wrong.

And you are starting to be insulting and to try to turn this thread into a flame war and get it shut down as the whole idea balks you, by implying that I am a child.

OK, I'll apologise.

It is likely, but not certain, that the standard of living will increase down the years, even if fusion is not invented. The standard of living has increased since the stone age as we keep inventing things that make life easier and those inventions are shared out, to some degree, to all people.
We KNOW that there are still things left to invent and it is a probability, as we are working on it now, that fusion will get invented and maybe even replicators, though so far we have only succeeded in beaming photons. We are a confident species and we are proud of our accomplishments in our control of the world and the things we can do to control it, manipulate it feed ourselfs and do things. We're not sure that we will be able to invent more, but we are pretty certain, given our past history and the fact that we are 1% down the way of inventing some things now. As JFK said, 'New metal alloys, some of which have not yet been invented' will construct the moon shot.

Star Trek, in my perspective, has a lot to do with this. It was fuelled by this. We don't know, but we are working on things now and it is only a lack of technology that is stopping us it is a project 1% under way and it is very likely that it will succeed, as hard work and brainpower are all we need to get it.

My interpretation is that the TNG universe has fusion and replicators and these make the TNG humans so more pwerful than us. Other people have said this in other threads.

My assumption, given past human history, is that this invention will eventually be given to all, as we now sell Africans clockwork radios and water pumps and we are even more generous to those in our own country. The reason we do this is because we are generous we empathise with other Homo Sapiens because they are intelligent and like us and because we have the forsight to realise that it will eventually benefit us all, as it frees up people to invent even better things and gets more human brains online.

We are also more compassionate than our ancestors. We can't prove that we will be more compassionate, but there are those thinkers amongst us who can imagine better ways, and in the past, those ideas have been taken on board.

These two things happen in ST, in my view.

Now, it has been clearly stated in TNG that humans in that time are not as aquisitive,greedy,materialistic. They don't always use money.Stock market portfoliios from the 20th Century have not survived and their economy is different. They live to increase the store of knowledge for the common good. GR said so, and he was the executive producer. It said so in the Neutral Zone. It said so in First Contact. The Ferengi are seen as a lesser race because they live like us now. Ira Steven Behr said that they were 20thC capitalists, they were US.

I have tried to flesh out how this works. I have thought of a system involving passes, and little or no money as we know it, and this was mooted by Asimov in the 50's, some time ago, and a system based on social contribution, and system without WANT,as GR said.

It has also been said that humans live to contribute. I have tried to imagine how this would happen.

As I have said, there is good evidence that humans will continue to improve their standard of living and, drawing from that, that the minumim standard of living will be higher 400 years down the line, given both human nature and effort and the quantum leap invention of fusion and replicators.

I have tried to show how this will change economics, as it has been shown it has in TNG, as it has been said that the system has changed, and the Ferengi are seen as regressive and different.

The point where I and Spy and Devil Eyes and penta differ, as I see it, and you may say you never said that, of course, is on the minimum standard of living this invention offers. You all say that it will be much the same as today, Spy has said that it is because there is no evidence that the standard of living overall will increase. Even if there isn't, and I have tried to show that it can be expected to, it definitely has in ST as they have said so, dozens of times. We also differ in that I think it human nature and history shows that its benefits will eventually be handed out to all. You all disagree, on that. You say some humans will withhold its benefits from others. I concede that they may initially do so, but history shows, I think, that eventually ALL its benefits and they are considerable, will be passed out to all, not just enough to cover basic needs and I have tried to imagine a system, a very basic,one that will do this.

 

[Nardpuncher]

The first post in this thread was horrific.
It sounded like an even more screwy version of John Rawl's A Theory of Justice

 

[Cheapjack]

The first post in this thread was horrific.
It sounded like an even more screwy version of John Rawl's A Theory of Justice

I can't see what's horrific about having a system of contribution. As I said, there's a very similar system in Caves of Steel, by Asimov. You need permission to have kids there, i think. Obama said that people shouldn't have kids they cant afford to look after.You need to prove your worth, though there is a class system.They don't have money, just passes. You may be a bit more reassured by the fact I have hinted the benefits would initially be witheld from some. Maybe, in a fusion world, everyone would be able to be their own Genghis Khan and spawn a 100000 descendants. But what would be the need, if humans can be secure, forever? Maybe TNG world can support 100 billion people. They were all very squashed in in Asimovs book.

What are your reactions to my thoughts on those who live in society, but believe they are completely independent, until the fire alarm goes off? Or, is that as distasteful a concept as eating raw meat?

We have a system now, on Earth, where it is implicit that you have to be able to contribute in order for it to be easy to reproduce, but perhaps saying it out loud is a bit distasteful. Perhaps it shouldn't be law, only in extreme circumstances, when you're all squashed in.

Picard has said they live to contribute to humanity. I just tried to imagine how this would work. Perhaps they aren't forced to, perhaps they do it all willingly.It maybe just polite behaviour, like not defecating in public or wearing clothes or not eating off other peoples plates or picking your nose. How about that? I have said that human nature will be changed by some small increment by this. How about that way? You do become a bit more refined, when you have a bit more in the world. And if you were living with people who were all loaded and secure, by our terms, maybe you would like to talk about your hobbies and projects and maybe brag a little and want to outdo people? Maybe that will be the class system of the 24thC?

I'm not loaded, but I want to contribute, and nobody forced me, and I wouldn't have kids I couldn't look after,but there again, from what I read here, I'm a bit of an anomaly!

Though, I stand by my assertion that human beings do eventually give their toys to others, when they have finished playing with them. I think this will happen with fusion,and replicators if they works the way it's supposed to in TNG. This may have a positive effect on people and make them a bit more refined and erudite and maybe some of them would take up a hobby, other than golf!

Given human nature, all you would need is one very famous person to do it, and there would be a rush to do it, especially if they were good looking!!

 

[SpyOne]

A proper apology should include a statement of what you did that was wrong, and why it was wrong to do it. That provides some assurance that you can be successful in attempts to not do it again.
Be explicit: what do you apologize for?

Edit: it seems you may have obtusely misunderstood my complaint, so I'll be more explicit: you have not just implied but essentially stated that I have said things that I have not. Things that no one said. Point out where I said them, or apologize properly for your statement.
You need only look to the passage I quoted above to find an example. Others can be found within your "apology".

 

[Nardpuncher]

The first post in this thread was horrific.
It sounded like an even more screwy version of John Rawl's A Theory of Justice

Given human nature, all you would need is one very famous person to do it, and there would be a rush to do it, especially if they were good looking!!

You seem to have a very pessimistic view of people as demonstrated by this last part I quoted.
This kind of attitude is the one that leads to many people think that others need to controlled and told what's truly good for them.

 

[Cheapjack]

A proper apology should include a statement of what you did that was wrong, and why it was wrong to do it. That provides some assurance that you can be successful in attempts to not do it again.
Be explicit: what do you apologize for?

Edit: it seems you may have obtusely misunderstood my complaint, so I'll be more explicit: you have not just implied but essentially stated that I have said things that I have not. Things that no one said. Point out where I said them, or apologize properly for your statement.
You need only look to the passage I quoted above to find an example. Others can be found within your "apology".

Spy:

I think you're trying to get this thread closed off, cos you disagree with it with it's whole premise and tone.From what I can work out, and its sometimes difficult to work out what you are saying, you said that there is no evidence that the standard of living will increase, and I thought said you didn't say that. You also said that the Federation will look after peoples basic needs, which you seem to think, I think you didn't say. For that, I apologise. Happy? Where we differ, I think,is in the definition of basic, which I think will be a hell of a lot more in 400 years time, as basic 400-600 years ago didn't include education and the ability to change your class and even have some leisure time, and now it does and I think the ability to change your status and even enjoy yourself a bit,in the 24thC will be even more open, to everyone, given all the things people can do then.

I've learnt some valuable life lessons from this thread. Some people, even Star Trek fans, i get the impression, have a large selfish component and don't like being told what to do. I thought all Trekkies were mini JFK clones, all using every 'degree of mind and body that they possess', to improve the human condition. Maybe they are a lot like JFK, they just don't think the government should tell them to be like that. Maybe TNG humans will be like that too, because they have a lot more, because they are educated a lot more and for selfish reasons, as I have tried to show, as it will be something they can brag about at the latest cocktail party. Nard, I don't think this makes me pessimistic, just optimistic with bit of realism. You are more likely to dip into your pocket and donate, if there is a crowd around you, than if you are on your own, though people do help people at the wayside when noone is there and that is good.

It is a better system, (though at times we have had to force people, by some small amount),if you do things like that, of your own free will and are not forced to, by law. It's exhilarating and exciting and reassuring that TNG people will be like that, if they are. I would truly like to meet them!

Also, I think I have sussed out that people don't like the state restricting breeding, as having kids is a big thing - it's creating another intelligence, something our best minds cannot do artificially and can't even to totally in TNG universe. It's the closest thing to altruism some people will ever do and the biggest experiment, construction project that they will ever complete and its also one of our most primal, selfish instincts. People realise that intelligence is a good thing, though I don't really think a lot of them really know why, I think there's only a few of us, today. They just see that it gets you more spondulicks.

Star Trek succeeds, i think, because it appeals to both the right and left wing in us, both the carnivore and the herbivore. Both will be here 400 years down the line.We have canines, we eat meat, but we have also been preyed on at times, and we protect each other and look after each others kids and groom each other, we are sociable. But we are a hairless ape, we are a BIT more than that, we have large brains and can change our world. and we will be a little bit more so in the 24thC but we will not be egg-headed puny intellectuals, we will be recognisably human. There will be a bit of all of us in them.

The bits I think I have seen less of, is the grooming bit, the sociable bit, in some ideas about the 24thC century, on this forum and it has depressed me. We will have better ways of grooming each other in the 24thC, I think. We will make sure that we are nearly flea-less, I think! There will be some who we will all jump up and down on, whoop over, deprive of things, but they will be relativeley flealess, compared to 20thC humans, and we will do it because we are proud of our troop - look at us, we're nearly flealess! We will brag about it!

 

[ProtoAvatar]

Cheapjack
You argue that humans are too stupid to do what's best for them and, therefore, need to be controlled (by other 'stupid' humans - not much logic consistency in your argument, Cheapjack).

I find your assesment of humans ridiculous - likely derived from watching too many B movies. And, of course, I strongly disagree with your totaliarian/submissive tendencies.

 

[Cheapjack]

Cheapjack
You argue that humans are too stupid to do what's best for them and, therefore, need to be controlled (by other 'stupid' humans - not much logic consistency in your argument, Cheapjack).

I find your assesment of humans ridiculous - likely derived from watching too many B movies. And, of course, I strongly disagree with your totaliarian/submissive tendencies.

Proto; read my posts. I haven't said that at all, I've said that its better that people do things altruistically of their own free will. And I haven't said that humans that 'control' humans, as you put it, as if telling people they can't go around murdering people is 'control', are stupid, they're some of the few that really get it and understand people, but there is a better system. The better system is that they are responsible and magnanimous and do it freely and I hope they will be like that in 400 years time. Read my posts. I've evolved to your point of view, if that's what it is. It's better that people do good and help others of their own free will than being forced too, though the inferior system we have now has to force people a little bit. And you have to stop people doing some extreme bad, surely, just out of common sense? Maybe I want to force people a little bit too much, the best way is self initiated. Thats not totalitarian, getting this thread closed down is. Or ignoring it. or mis representing it.

It's just amazing to me how right wing some trek fans are. I thought they were all honorary members of the Kennedy clan! What they see in it, gets me, though I have tried to see that it is because their genes will still be here in 400 years time, phasereing a klingon.

I mean, you could have a law that says that everyone has to be 'nice', has to to one good turn every day, has to smile at least twenty times a day. I'm starting to see that some people think this is wrong. Some people want to do one bad thing every day, to be nasty. And, before you say that who says what is nice and what is nasty, everyone who has been to infant school knows that, what is required behaviour. I suppose that you would say that it is nannying to continue that interference to adulthood, but if you do the job properly, you won't have to. They will know they are doing wrong, as adults, they will just have a right to and there be will not be this attitude that is around, today, that there is no such thing as right or wrong and it all depends.

What I am saying is that some people don't get altruism, until the fire alarm rings,and I hope more will by the 24thC. I've also said that humans DO share things, when the novelty is over and they are quite pragmatic and cheap fusion and replicators are something that is really good, that benefits all. And they might not have greenbucks or even Americanexpress in the 24th C, maybe just a pass. This is the exciting new peice of fruit, or should I say, new tool, new rock, that everyone shares in the 24thC? I am also trying to say that people may be a lot more charitable in the 24thC America and the world, than they are in 21stC America today. That episode Past Tense from DS9 was a bit of a shocker and though some have said you will get a bit more than that, and it will be changed, in the 24thC, their future's are a bit depressing, to me anyway.

I think the reality about the minimum you will get, in the 24thC, will be somewhere between my gold pass and Penta's Basic Living Stipend. An average of the two. Not enough to indulge to excess, to stagnate,but more than enough to change your status and even pursue human happiness, which is part of some constitution, I can't remember which

Also, the Q has compared humans to apes, at times, in TNG, which is not a B movie. I have tried to absorb what GR was getting at in this respect.So has Desmond Morris, who wrote 'The Naked ape'. I think we are a bit more than that, as I have tried to show, well I think we are both, we have some ape motivating what we do, and some 'higher' bigbrained homo sap, but we are not talosians, we are not all brain, and I think ST is about that.

I've spent a long time on these boards. I'm going to go and weep into my beer. Please don't let me come back and see the world totalitarian. Do gooder, maybe, Student of GR, yes please, mini-Q, I'd love that!