The Federation not having any money
- Thread starter The Overlord
- Start date
Rubbish... they eliminated money 200 years before the invention of replicators.
Canonical evidence clearly states this.
The reason they eliminated money so early on successfully and created abundance in materials was because they heavily use recycling technology.
Humanity today (in the real world) would be able to do the same if they initiated recycling on a global scale and used mountains of trash all over the world to create new things and keep recycling used ones when it's time.
We have the ability to break things down into base elements using recycling... we did since it was invented... then we can reconstitute these elements into something new.
The predominant reason it's not done is 'money'... and why would it be in people's best interest to create abundance in materials in the first place?
It's much more profitable to hold the reigns on the market and charge obscene amounts of money simply because it's 'rare'.
The world even without implementing recycling tech on a global scale can provide majority of the world with what it needs.
Recycling would make this far better though... but we live in a system that doesn't do what's best for humanity.
Material abundance (along with other things) was/is well within OUR reach since decades ago, let alone the Trek humans who probably refined the process to such a degree where it's numerous times more efficient by Archer's era, let alone Kirk's.
Star Trek made it clear that energy is in abundance, and by the 24th century generated by extremely powerful matter/antimatter reactors that have been refined for effectively 200 years (ever since they were first used on star-ships) which probably perfected efficiency to levels that WE can only dream about or not even imagine in the first place.
Plus, the Federation was shown to be able to use other energy sources... such as solar power.
They aren't limited to just 1 source of energy. They can probably get it in numerous forms using methods well beyond what we currently employ (that doesn't mean WE can't use different energy sources - of course we can).
Besides, it's not so inconceivable as you may think.
What the Federation is doing with replicators is on a much smaller scale of what occurs in the universe via process of nucleosynthesis in stars.
They observe stellar phenomena ALL the time for humanity's sake... it's only evident they can replicate these things on their scale with enough time and effort.
Last edited:
Still...you can't eliminate money and economic system. What...does everybody just work for free? All the labors and all the people who run things need to be paid. what's the point of hard work if you can't reap the rewards. I always thought hard work pays off but in ST it doesn't... IF it's not worth the emotional and physical stress...no intelligent and resourceful people would stick around or will be even willing to work. I wouldn't if my wife is giving hard time about money and being gone all the time and the kids screaming and running around the house. That's why you need money as a mean for motivation. Look at the area in our society that are underfunded...it's devoid of intelligent people. Social workers in this country suck as a result. They end up hurting children instead of saving them a lot of the time.
ST makes it look easy... That we can just get rid of our economic system. Just like the abundance of energy idea thing. [chuckle]
Last edited:
I remember coming across a study that shows that money is not a motivator, and in fact is a demotivator, unless the task to be performed for the money is a very linear, assembly-line type task.
I can envision a Star Trek-like future, in which there is still trade - for instance dilithium crystals, latinum bars, etc. But where the local Earth economy has done away with poverty, and the people work at whatever interests them, because that is where true motivation lies - working for common goods and the betterment of oneself.
Examples seem to bear this out. Did young men join the service after pearl harbor for money? Or after 9/11? We could say it was purely for revenge, but that only burns so long. They did it to make a safer world. Teachers, nurses, police officers - not known to be in it for the money. And even the better athletes and performers are only good if they forget what they're making. The minute they focus on their income, their career goes to shit.
I can envision a Star Trek-like future, in which there is still trade - for instance dilithium crystals, latinum bars, etc. But where the local Earth economy has done away with poverty, and the people work at whatever interests them, because that is where true motivation lies - working for common goods and the betterment of oneself.
Examples seem to bear this out. Did young men join the service after pearl harbor for money? Or after 9/11? We could say it was purely for revenge, but that only burns so long. They did it to make a safer world. Teachers, nurses, police officers - not known to be in it for the money. And even the better athletes and performers are only good if they forget what they're making. The minute they focus on their income, their career goes to shit.
But therein lies the problem really. We can't all be athletes, or performers, or artists. We can't all do jobs we love, or we'd all be doing it.
someone (i.e. most of us) still need to do the jobs noone enjoys otherwise society will go to shit.
and to get people to do that, they need to be paid.
someone (i.e. most of us) still need to do the jobs noone enjoys otherwise society will go to shit.
and to get people to do that, they need to be paid.
Yes, you can.
Yes.
Why?
A sense of contribution. Same reason people donate to charity or volunteer today.
Your wife wouldn't give you a hard time about money if there ISN'T ANY. And kids have been running around the house for millions of years, that's not going to stop. "Money", meanwhile, is a comparatively new-ish concept.
Problems that only exist because of money in the first place. With no money, the programs will no longer be "underfunded", and social workers won't suck any more. People who WANT to be social workers (and there are lots of them) but don't do it because the money sucks would suddenly be free to do what they love.
To a 17th century person, the 21st century makes it look easy. They have instant e-mail, where we had to wait six months to get a letter across the American Colonies! People never left their home cities because it took too long to travel, those 21st century folk can hop on some sort of mythical flying machine and be there and back in a weekend! Shoot, in the 21st century they have this thing called WEEKENDS! We work 7 days a week, 365 days a year with no vacation! And in the winter, its freezing cold! They have heaters in the future! And its dark after 5pm, they have lights!
Your arguments are silly. Its 300 years in the future, think outside the box.
That is the party line, after all. I don't really buy it anymore. The lower level necessity for money prevents people from following their passions.
And in my observation, to be a star athlete, or performer, takes an enormous amount of work that the vast majority who say they want to do those things clearly have no passion for. They want the attention, or lifestyle, or whatever.
Then you have a large segment who simply enjoy creating art or music on a smaller scale, and do not aspire to take it much further. Their passions lie elsewhere.
What I am suggesting is that, if everyone finds, and follows, their true passions (and/or branches thereof), that the species has already created just the right number of artists, architects, nurses, police, etc.
As for the shit jobs, it often takes a lot of shoveling to find one's direction in life. But when you're working towards your own goal, there is love of labor. Following one's bliss doesn't mean the end of all drudgery. And, people are highly motivated towards labor jobs when it is in a community setting, rescue / disaster relief, etc, again showing the counter-intuitive motivational factor of money.
Well, I guess that's why they pay people with special skills more in the service to attract talented people.
Of course...according to you that's false. Hmmm...
You don't think working with other people and having problems at home don't give you emotional stress. Psss. For example, I'm not going to run around watching kids with problems and chasing down the parents and try to find out who did what on a meager salary. It's not worth the heartache for me watching people die.
People work because they think hard work pays off in the end...you know...reap the rewards.
Last edited:
You're still missing the point, dude.
Right now: You work long, hard, arduous hours at your job to earn money to provide for your family. You come home and your wife bitches at you for being gone all day and that there isn't enough money to give your family the life they want.
Future: You work a job you love, that may be difficult but its something you enjoy. Your wife, meanwhile, doesn't have to bitch about money BECAUSE SHE DOESN'T NEED ANY to provide for your family and give them the life they want. Shoot, if you need to take a day off your job to spend with your family, YOU CAN.
The level of automation in the future (that we've seen on trek, at least) is such that menial jobs start to go away. I see this at my company already; in the past 5 years, we've increased our level of automation such that we are producing more widgets today than we were 5 years ago, using half the number of people. We haven't fired anyone, but attrition is bringing down our headcount as people retire to spend time with their families.
In the future, EVERYONE won't need to work. And certainly not 40 hour work weeks. Unless you want to.
Depending on your career field, young people first entering the armed services can receive up to $40,000 as a enlistment bonus. Senior NCO's can in some cases receive a $90,000 bonus to re-enlist.
Tom Paris said "When the New World Economy took shape in the late 22nd century, and money went the way of the dinosaur." Problem with that is, Tom Paris also said "Faster than light, no left or right." Indicating that Paris's statements are foolish.
Another problem with Paris's dinosaur anecdote is that money clearly exist after the late 22nd century, the mid 23rd century is full of references. Perhaps Paris meant that "currency went the way of the dinosaur." Which make more sense taking into account Nog's dialog that Humans ("your species") decided to abandon currency-based economics. Currency is banknotes and coins.
The United States is the number seven recycling country in the world, not too bad. The U.S. electronics recycling industry alone employs 30,000 workers and this year will pull in estimated revenues of over five billion dollar, that expect to rise to over fourteen billion by the year 2014. Americans are the largest consumers of electronics in the world, and recycle 26 percent of all our electronics.
That's right Deks, if you want there to be lots of recycling, figure out a way to make money at it.
It's "made clear" that M/AM reactors are aboard ships. Energy abundance off of the ships is not "made clear." An assumption?
Then why don't we currently see large numbers of people volunteering to be social workers? As you yourself have noted people today do volunteer their time.
So that they'll keep doing it after it ceases to be "fun."
And what happen when the society changes? You're describing a voluntary labor force, fine. But societies do change over time, from the beginning of TNG to the end of VOY it only about sixteen years, that's a pretty small slice of history. . What happen Tighr when the next inevitable change arrives? Or are you going to stipulate that the Earth's population is going to remain socially stagnate for thousands of years?
Then how will people afford to purchase, maintain and run their replicators? Or for that matter keep the lights on?
-------------------------------
Roberto Orci (one of the screenwriters of Star Trek Eleven), while in a Q&A with fans, Orci stated that, "there's money, or some kind of credit system in this universe." Not canon no, but another piece in the pro-money case. Maybe we'll see a example of Federation credits in Star Trek Twelve?
http://trekmovie.com/2009/05/22/orci-and-kurtzman-reveal-star-trek-details-in-trekmovie-fan-qa/
Last edited:
Similar threads
