Federation credits ≠ latinum.
Another take on "there's no money in the 24th century"
- Thread starter hxclespaulplayer
- Start date
Federation credits ≠ latinum.
I don't think that would be the way it works. I think it's more like you have to decide yourself when to convert your credits to latinum and how many.
In other words, I'd say that there is undoubtedly an exchange rate between the two, i.e. there's a going rate for buying latinum with Federation credits, that changes over time and almost certainly isn't the same outside the Federation as it is inside it. And, I'd assume that there are planets (relatively) close to but outside the Federation where there is latinum, but where you can't buy latinum with credits no matter how many credits you have. A Ferengi may prize latinum above credits, but a savvy Ferengi should be able to make latinum by investing in Federation credits at the right time.
The Federation credit sounds like a fiat currency to me. I seriously doubt it is backed by latinum.
Just the opposite, in VOY we heard of the sale of a lamp to Janeway and Tuvok that involved a price for the purchase. The seller was a Vulcan.
If you were talking to a merchant or a banker our system would be different, but maybe not all that strange. They had loans, borrowing, credit, letters of credit, book keeping exchanges, delayed payment plans and escrow accounts.
A lot of people today don't really seem to understand what happens when their credit card gets "swiped."
There probably is an exchange rate.
My statement (as well as this one) is sheer speculation but Federation credits has to be back by something. I don't think the Ferengi would trade with it if it wasn't. If it's based on the credit itself, should the Federation need to add more into circulation, it will diminish the purchasing power of the existing credits. I don't believe the Ferengi would trade goods for something that could diminish over time.
I bet three bars of gold-pressed latinum that this debate won't get anywhere.
Of course they would.
The strategy of buying low and selling high depends upon volatility in value. You can make a big profit selling a certain something, when everybody else thinks it will not have value, but you think it will, you corner the market on it, you were right, everybody else was wrong, and they have to buy it from you. It wouldn't be possible to do that if it were a sure thing that it would only increase in value. How else could you position yourself against everybody else?
That's actually not clear.
Who joins? Is it the planet's government, or is it the planet's population? Obviously the "planet" itself doesn't join.
It very well could have been the native indigenous population of Earth, a substantial portion of the entire Human species, that joined the Federation,
But when a Human leaves Earth and travel to a distant non-Federation planet, aren't they still a part of the Federation? Part of the collective membership?
Of Earth? Yes other species can come and live of Earth, and if they settle on Earth they would become a part of the population, and a part (among other things) of the economic system of this planet.
Now no, they would not be strickly speaking "Humanity," certainly not biologically. However by living here they would be connected to Humanity. I think by the 24th century the bulk of Earth's population would still be Human.
They can live on the planet, but the Humans would only be a citizen of that planet if they formally immigrated. Then being either a dual citizen, or perhaps renouncing their previous citizenship.
For example Amanda (Spock's mother) very likely became a citizen of Vulcan at some point, maybe simply marrying Sarek gave her that citizenship, or she had to go through a immigration process.
Earth's colony planets might also have Earth's economic system. But Humans living elsewhere in the cosmos wouldn't
It might be more accurate to say "the majority of Humanity" has a certain system, and so in everyday colloquial speech Humanity has that system
I see what you're trying to say, but I don't agree.
During TOS we heard credit, not Federation credit, they might be two entirely seperate type of money.
One of the advantages of the Federation might be a interstellar common financial system, but the various members could retain their own internal money in parallel if they choose to.
The DS9 episode The House of Quark does, in one scene Quark has gone over the house's financial records and details what he found, the Klingon economic system seem very much like our modern day one.
Klingon money is call the Darsek.
That's true but credits backed by nothing can only diminish in time and will never build in value. If backed by nothing, as officers exit Starfleet getting their stipend for their posting at a federation outpost on an alien world, the purchasing power would eventually become crap. It's basically Econ 101. When the American dollar was no longer backed by gold, economists urged the reduction of printing more money because of its resulting depreciation. The difference with American currency and Federation credits is America can discontinue/burn money to build its value, but the sheer number of people entering Starfleet quadrant-wide obtaining the backless currency will be detrimental.
Imagine buying a jumbo jet in pesos.
On the other hand, it makes more sense that Starfleet has ships running throughout their section of space obtaining latinum and other rare resources used for currency on alien planets to build their credits so their citizens can freely trade amongst any alien species and they'll know their money is worth something.
Econ 101?!? Somehow, I think that Econ 101 doesn't cover economies anywhere near the size of the Federation!
The American dollar is doing just fine, and there's nothing whatsoever to suggest that fiat currencies in general are in danger of being proven unworkable in our lifetimes or anytime thereafter. Individual fiat currencies may fail, but only because their governments have insurmountable problems.
The Federation would have many things much more valuable to offer than stockpiles of precious metals. In canon, the Federation has defended its space against all invaders, which has often also benefited surrounding powers. Stockpiles of precious metals cannot do that. The Federation economy works to solve problems in the galaxy. That ability is among the most valuable things there are. Based on its track record in solving problems of galactic import, which indicates its future prospects, it would be completely rational to invest in the Federation with the expectation of benefiting financially.
Not at all. They provide a "sheer number" of people among which the geniuses needed to serve in Starfleet, innovate, and run the Federation in all capacities will naturally be born on the extreme end of the bell curve.
This is a complete and utter non sequitur.
That's a very simplistic plan that would lead to the collapse of the Federation, if it were the only means of increasing Federation credit.
here's my thoughts from a previous thread
In the case of Sisko's restaurant, Picard's wine, etc. it's probably a combination of giving it away out of a love of doing it plus trading those things for other non-replicated items and/or labor
In the case of Sisko's restaurant, Picard's wine, etc. it's probably a combination of giving it away out of a love of doing it plus trading those things for other non-replicated items and/or labor
It's the single government that runs the planet. Which could encompass any number of actual races.
But governments are just administrative and management organizations, and they come and go through the years. While the governing body might make the decision to join (although hopefully it would be a public referendum), what was actually joining the Federation would be the planet's population.
The vast majority of people on Earth would be Humans. The same probably goes for Earth colonies too.
The vast majority of people on Earth would be Humans. The same probably goes for Earth colonies too.
It still sounds like it's back to the bartering system again. It's one thing to trade wine for a special fabric.
So if a person works as a waiter, he or she may get a certain amount of seed for their garden or farm?
So if a person works as a waiter, he or she may get a certain amount of seed for their garden or farm?
Which, as I've tried to explain, can encompass hundreds of races. And legally speaking, it is the planetary government which is a member. The people are citizens, but the planet itself is the member.
Okay, we need to be clear here about our vocabulary. Time for Political Science 101:
A state (not in the U.S. sense of the term, but in the context of a sovereign state) is the legal unity of the people who have sovereignty over a given territory.
A government is the system which rules the state.
A nation is a collection of people sharing a common culture and perceived heritage, possessing for themselves political sovereignty by which they create the state and the government to run the state. For the purposes of this discussion, we can equate a nation with a species, since in general the species that join the Federation are politically unified (and since they literally share a common ancestry).
A country is the territory to which a nation is native, or over which a state has jurisdiction. For the purposes of discussing Federation politics, we can equate a country with a planet or planets over which an interstellar state has jurisdiction.
To make an analogy: The state is a car; the government is the engine; the nation is the driver; the country is the chassis.
When a planet joins a Federation, we are speaking informally, much as it is informal when once says a country has, say, joined the United Kingdom. Obviously, the country of England did not join the United Kingdom, because the country itself is just ground. Rather, the Kingdom of England, a sovereign state, agreed to dissolve itself in conjunction with the Kingdom of Scotland, and to jointly establish the Kingdom of Great Britain, with England and Wales as an administrative subdivision of the Kingdom of Great Britain.
The formal way to speak of it would be to say that the sovereign state has chosen to join the Federation and therefore yield its independence in favor of becoming a co-sovereign constituent polity of the Federation, in much the same way that, say, the Republic of Texas chose to do when it joined the United States of America. Obviously, "Texas" did not join the United States -- the ground is just the ground, no matter who claims it. But the sovereign state joined the United States (and in doing so yielded its independence and became co-sovereign with the U.S. under a federal system).
Just as obviously, Texans did not join the United States per se. Rather, citizens of the Republic of Texas became citizens of the United States of America and of the State of Texas. Texans became both Texan and American.
Let's talk about a hypothetical polity seeking to join the Federation. We'll call it the Commonwealth of Zog. The Commonwealth of Zog is the sovereign state. Its species is known as the Zog Monsters. Its territory consists of the Planet Zog, Zog's moons Zig and Zag, three smaller planets in the Zog star system (Zeg, Zug, and Zyg), and the rest of the space and astronomical bodies inside of the Zog system's Oort cloud.
But! The Zog Monsters are not all citizens of the Commonwealth of Zog. Some of them emmigrated many years ago to the planet Zorg in the Zorg system, where they joined with the native Zorg Monsters to become citizens of the Republic of Zorg. Zog Monsters who are Zorgian citizens comprise 37% of all Zog Monsters in the universe; the rest are citizens of the Commonwealth of Zog.
Obviously, if the Commonwealth of Zog applies for Federation Membership and is accepted, then that does not mean the entire Zog Monster species has joined the Federation. Even if it means a majority of Zog Monsters are now Federation citizens, not all Zog Monsters are -- 37% of them are still citizens of the Republic of Zorg, which is still a foreign state to the Federation.
That question is a non-sequitur, because you're confusing technical political language with symbolic emotional language. They are still Federation citizens, yes. They are "part" of the Federation insofar as, as citizens, they have the same rights to hold office, to vote, to participate in public debates, to petition, to speak freely, to serve on a jury, to contribute to Federation public life, etc., that any other Federate has.
They are not "part" of the Federation in the sense that they are not, as individuals, a constituent polity of the Federation.
To make a comparison:
I am originally from the State of Ohio, and am currently a citizen of the State of Maryland while also being a United States citizen. If I were to travel to Canada and settle as a permanent alien in the Province of Ontario, I would remain a United States citizen. However, I am not the State of Maryland. Thus, I am a "part" of the United States insofar as, I have the same rights as any other United States citizen, and I can still contribute to American life. But I am not a "part" of the United States in the sense that I am not an administrative division or polity--I am not the United States Department of the Interior, I am not the United States Marshall Service, and I am not the State of Maryland.
Probably. But if, say, a huge population of Tellarites settles on Earth, and comprises, say, 12% of Earth's sentient population, they're still not Human.
Rather, they are citizens of United Earth and citizens of the Federation. I think you should not conflate "Humanity" with "United Earth citizen." Especially since there seem to be worlds out there that Humans settled but which seem to have declared independence from the Federation, or which were settled before the UFP was founded and lost contact with Earth. So "Humanity" encompasses more than just Federation citizens. Not all Humans are Federates.
Personally I think the credits (the way I understand them i.e. as a currency used with non Federation members) entitle the person/organization/government they were given to in exchange for goods/services to order a certain amount of goods/services from the Federation.
For exaple, in "Encounter at Farpoint" the crew of the Enterprise already at Farpoint were given a certain amount of credits (tied to their rank/position) to acquire goods/services/lodging at Farpoint Station while they waited for the ship to arrive. Once the Enterprise arrived the Bandi would have been able to exchange those Credits for things replicated or carried by the Enterprise.
Though I really don't understand why, for instance Dr. Crusher in the pilot of TNG would buy fabric when she can replicate all the fabric she wants, in all colours and patterns she can think of, on the Enterprise...
It's also interesting that in "The Naked Now" Tasha proclaims she's off to find a dress in the "ship's stores" (I also saw the German version once where they translate this as "cute boutiques!") did they mean to imply that the Enterprise had a mall? Again this makes no sense as we see later that they can just replicate clothes (and aren't the uniforms recycled into energy and replicated again rather than washed?)
For exaple, in "Encounter at Farpoint" the crew of the Enterprise already at Farpoint were given a certain amount of credits (tied to their rank/position) to acquire goods/services/lodging at Farpoint Station while they waited for the ship to arrive. Once the Enterprise arrived the Bandi would have been able to exchange those Credits for things replicated or carried by the Enterprise.
Though I really don't understand why, for instance Dr. Crusher in the pilot of TNG would buy fabric when she can replicate all the fabric she wants, in all colours and patterns she can think of, on the Enterprise...
It's also interesting that in "The Naked Now" Tasha proclaims she's off to find a dress in the "ship's stores" (I also saw the German version once where they translate this as "cute boutiques!") did they mean to imply that the Enterprise had a mall? Again this makes no sense as we see later that they can just replicate clothes (and aren't the uniforms recycled into energy and replicated again rather than washed?)
In that episode, when Crusher said, 'charge it to my account' that would have explained it, that humans use some type of futuristic currency.
But then later, they go and say there isn't any money in human society.
Basically erasing the notion that humans use currency.
So now it's back to square one, except they never explained or showed how it works.
They actually showed a more explicit example of humans (Jake Sisko In the Cards) not having money to use, than they've done showing how humans trade or purchase things in the 24th century.
Erasing? Not necessarily. Why would you accept the latter episode but not the former? What makes one more authoritative than the other? Airdate? That seems rather flimsy.
The offending scene in "In the Cards" is just a conversation between Jake and Nog. Something tells me that the situation must be a bit more complicated than those two would be able to describe. Me, I'd be more likely to accept the situation as we see it in "Farpoint," where we actually SEE the Federation economy in action, in a way.
But Farpoint Station wasn't part of the Federation. That's what I meant the Enterpise granted Dr. Crusher a certain amount of credits to exchange for goods with the Bandi.
