Do humans of the 24th Century really work to better themselves?

[JirinPanthosa]

Yes, they work to better themselves. That's the premise of the series.

I'm sure some of them are lazy, but not enough to break the premise. And I'm sure there are a bunch of non-starving artists. But social sanctions are just as big a motivator to contribute than material ones.

There've been a lot of threads lately that are projecting pithy faux-libertarianism onto the series. The premise of the series is that humans work to better themselves. You may not consider that realistic and that's a valid criticism, but humans working to better themselves is something the show makes extremely clear.

 

[Silvercrest]

It could be that Sisko's employees are all people who cook for the joy of it, want to show off their techniques, etc. — but one of the conditions of working there is you have to do other tasks too.

 

[HIjol]

Wow...bandwidth challenges...expensive telecommunications...rush hour...exclusive restaurants...clogged transportation networks...bossy parents...

...sounds like a time and place I know...

 

[borgboy]

It could be that Sisko's employees are all people who cook for the joy of it, want to show off their techniques, etc. — but one of the conditions of working there is you have to do other tasks too.

Any creative job, like cooking, would have people who do it for the love of the work. I can't believe anyone would wait tables for no pay.
I'd think a staff where the chefs took turns waiting tables would make for a really chaotic work environment. You'd have to have a pretty large staff of chefs to rotate them out to get enough wait staff.

 

[T'Girl]

Yes, they work to better themselves. That's the premise of the series

I sorry, but no. Bettering yourself was mention twice briefly in over 700 hours of Star Trek, once in TNG and once in DS9.

It's not the "premise of the series."

 

[Grendelsbayne]

It could be that Sisko's employees are all people who cook for the joy of it, want to show off their techniques, etc. — but one of the conditions of working there is you have to do other tasks too.

Any creative job, like cooking, would have people who do it for the love of the work. I can't believe anyone would wait tables for no pay.
I'd think a staff where the chefs took turns waiting tables would make for a really chaotic work environment. You'd have to have a pretty large staff of chefs to rotate them out to get enough wait staff.

The real question, though, is why can't you believe it? Is it not because you're assuming that waiting tables in Sisko's is the same infamously crappy job as waiting tables today is considered to be? And is there any evidence whatsoever that the waiters at Sisko's are in even remotely the same situation as waiters today? I would say no, it's entirely possible, and if you accept the premise of a no money economy, probably absolutely necessary, that waiting tables in Sisko's is a much nicer job than anything wait staff today are familiar with.

As far as the wannabe chefs - I'd say they probably would not make up the entirety of the wait staff, just part of it. It also would probably be less of a rotation and more of an apprenticeship style relationship in which they have to work their way up to learning the secrets of the kitchen. And, since no one is getting paid, there is actually no reason why there couldn't be a lot of different chefs hoping to learn from Sisko. For all we know, there could be several dozen waiters attached to the restaurant thereby producing a schedule in which most of them only work a few days a week.

 

[Last Redshirt]

The only times I can ever recall them talking about no-money was when they were around people who weren't from their time or weren't from the Federation, so it always came off as this smug 'well look at us' tone that Star Trek had sometimes. It was also really contradictory because I believe there was plenty of times where the Federation/Starfleet officers used money.

Frankly, I think the Federation does indeed have money. How do they trade with foreign nations? Or give them aid? Or pay their officers/enlisted crewmembers? I hardly think everyone in Starfleet is in it to boldly go where none have gone before and all that.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

The only times I can ever recall them talking about no-money was when they were around people who weren't from their time or weren't from the Federation, so it always came off as this smug 'well look at us' tone that Star Trek had sometimes. It was also really contradictory because I believe there was plenty of times where the Federation/Starfleet officers used money.

Frankly, I think the Federation does indeed have money. How do they trade with foreign nations? Or give them aid? Or pay their officers/enlisted crewmembers? I hardly think everyone in Starfleet is in it to boldly go where none have gone before and all that.

Trading is usually referred to in the context of trading technology or goods. Giving aid can be anything from providing replicators or raw materials to providing military assistance or medical aid. And if one accepts them at their word that they don't have money, then obviously they don't pay the officers or crew. Just because you don't believe people would join starfleet unless they got paid doesn't make it so.

The money I remember seeing starfleet officers using was 'federation credits' and it was paid out to non-federation merchants. Which to me suggests that Starfleet, having the habit of putting its members in close contact with alien races that do use money, provides officers/crew with the opportunity to interact with those races through a sort of system in which the officers can 'pay' alien merchants with federation credits, and those merchants can cash in their credits for materials or technology or something else the federation can very easily provide. Not as compensation for their work, but more as compensation for their willingness to remove themselves from the cushy planetary environments where they could've gotten anything they wanted without having to work for it.

 

[Robert Comsol]

Star Trek is "only" few hundred years in the future, this no money culture would be easier to understand if Trek took place for example in the year 3000 or something.

I think it essentially boils down to education and the fabric of the culture you grow up with how much money matters or not.

Our culture is still dominated by money and its influence, therefore our understanding or imagination of a culture that could do without money is inevitably to some degree biased and limited.

I took a look at TNG's "Family", but this is the only line I found addressing what could be a conflict:

LOUIS: Never did I know anyone less interested in grapes than you, Jean-Luc.
PICARD: No, not true. I was interested. And I was proud that my family were helping to preserve the traditions. I just didn't feel bound by those traditions.
LOUIS: You always reached for the future and your brother for the past.
PICARD: There should be room for both in this life.

I never had the feeling that Picard's brother was working in the vineyards to earn money, but rather to preserve tradition which then rather constitutes a kind of ritual, IMHO.

Bob

 

[Deckerd]

Yes, they work to better themselves. That's the premise of the series

I sorry, but no. Bettering yourself was mention twice briefly in over 700 hours of Star Trek, once in TNG and once in DS9.

It's not the "premise of the series."

People work to give themselves an occupation. Given the choice, everyone would like to do what they want to do. In real life you end up doing what somebody pays you to do but if the financial constraints are removed then the vast majority of people will not choose to lounge around on a couch all day. Humans live a long time and that time has to be filled.

 

[SPCTRE]

Yes, they work to better themselves. That's the premise of the series

I sorry, but no. Bettering yourself was mention twice briefly in over 700 hours of Star Trek, once in TNG and once in DS9.

It's not the "premise of the series."

People work to give themselves an occupation. Given the choice, everyone would like to do what they want to do. In real life you end up doing what somebody pays you to do but if the financial constraints are removed then the vast majority of people will not choose to lounge around on a couch all day. Humans live a long time and that time has to be filled.

Furthermore, even today most healthy individuals have a measurable need for peer approval and professional recognition. Most people get that from, you know, working.

It stands to reason that this will not have changed fundamentally by the 24th century.

 

[T'Girl]

you're assuming that waiting tables in Sisko's is the same infamously crappy job as waiting tables today is considered to be?

Yes, because the job is waiting tables, busing dishes, cleaning up other people's mess, half eaten food, stuff they dropped on the floor.

The money I remember seeing starfleet officers using was 'federation credits' and it was paid out to non-federation merchants.

That assumng that the barman on space station K-7, a facility run by a Human administrator, was a non-Federation merchant. An assumption I don't accept.

Two Humans conducting business using money.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

you're assuming that waiting tables in Sisko's is the same infamously crappy job as waiting tables today is considered to be?

Yes, because the job is waiting tables, busing dishes, cleaning up other people's mess, half eaten food, stuff they dropped on the floor.

The job could also be described as meeting people, generally providing a nice atmosphere and just carrying dishes back and forth (which is not an absolutely terrible thing in and of itself). Without the need to pay anyone, there could be enough wait staff on hand to ensure that no one has to break their back working at unrealistic speeds and there is no need to compete with each other for tips; the fact that no one is paying means the restaurant has no incentive to make the customer king, meaning anyone who makes a ridiculous mess or is rude to the staff, etc, gets kicked out and banned from coming back.

It's not exactly world changing work, but for a people person with relatively low ambition and a desire to do something useful with their time it could be a perfectly satisfactory occupation, for a few years if not necessarily for your whole life. Even today there are retired people who don't actually need money but still choose to take simple jobs (like delivering mail or helping in a shop) to pass the time. Remove the ridiculous work pressure currently found in waitressing, and there's no reason why waiting tables wouldn't be just such a job.

The money I remember seeing starfleet officers using was 'federation credits' and it was paid out to non-federation merchants.

That assumng that the barman on space station K-7, a facility run by a Human administrator, was a non-Federation merchant. An assumption I don't accept.

Two Humans conducting business using money.

I actually am willing to make certain allowances for ToS, which was shown to be considerably less utopian all around. My own personal interpretation of the 24th cen. is that there are probably small barter economies throughout the federation (where people trade things like Picard vintage wine or antique glasses) and that some places may ease that sort of thing with a sort of unnofficial currency (like a LETS system), and that there are probably still plenty of corners of the Federation, especially around the borders, where people do still use money on a regular basis (certainly a merchant could not obtain anything from outside the Federation without using it) but that money is probably not 'Federation money', but rather the same kinds of money being used by other races around the Federation (ie, gold pressed latinum or some other common currency).

I would say that in the TOS era which is still having considerably more difficulty keeping its colonies safe and prosperous and well supplied, that money would reach much farther into the Federation, but would still be relatively unheard of on the highly developed homeworlds (Earth, Vulcan, etc.) because their needs are already very well met.

 

[Push The Button]

Maybe the waitstaff are androids. Or holograms.

 

[TheGoodNews]

In the 24th Century Earth; hunger, disease, and famine are things of the past. Also there is no money in the 24 Century. A line spoken by Picard, Jake Sisko and Tom Paris.

And from what I understand it was supposedly a stipulation by Roddenberry himself. Also Kirk said there wasn't any money in Star Trek IV.

Gillian: "Don't tell me, they don't use money in the 23rd century?"

Kirk: "Well, we don't."

So what does everyone who is not a member of Starfleet do to pass the time? With their being no money or drive to possess material goods; the rat race for limited resources we (humans of today) experience IRL is over.

They pursue their passions. Forever free from alienated wage labor and meaningless consumption.

"New Babylon is inhabited by homo ludens, who liberated from labor, has no need for art because he can be creative in his daily life."

However, what is the inverse of that? With their being no inclination to work and provide food and shelter for oneself. What's to stop a portion of Earth's citizens from lounging in their house, stuffing replicated cheetos in their mouth and playing whatever future version of Call of Duty in a holosuite or some other form of entertainment?

Wait until the zero marginal cost society and collaborative commons, which are the subject of Jeremy Rifkin's new book, kick into full swing.

 

[TheGoodNews]

It could be that Sisko's employees are all people who cook for the joy of it, want to show off their techniques, etc. — but one of the conditions of working there is you have to do other tasks too.

Or they're like interns who consider it a privilege to work for and learn directly from a culinary master. They're free to pursue their passion. But Sisko only has room for a select few.

 

[F. King Daniel]

If early TNG is the humanity they're working towards, they're doing it wrong.

 

[Nightdiamond]

We have to bring a bit of psychology into this too. People usually do things or perform a task if it brings back some type benefit.

Would people really work as a waiters and janitors for nothing, especially considering how stressful/annoying those jobs can be?

And this is assuming that waiting tables can be just as annoying and stressful in the 24th century as it is now.

It's a paradox...people can't sit around doing nothing all day except stuff themselves, but in a no money society, there is no motivation to do things like wait tables, clean floors etc.

 

[Grendelsbayne]

We have to bring a bit of psychology into this too. People usually do things or perform a task if it brings back some type benefit.

Would people really work as a waiters and janitors for nothing, especially considering how stressful/annoying those jobs can be?

And this is assuming that waiting tables can be just as annoying and stressful in the 24th century as it is now.

It's a paradox...people can't sit around doing nothing all day except stuff themselves, but in a no money society, there is no motivation to do things like wait tables, clean floors etc.

You're ignoring the fact that having something to do with your time that lets you feel useful *is* a benefit, and there is no reason to assume that these jobs are as stressful in the 14th century as they are now. Certainly, the fact that people don't *need* to work to survive would force employers to keep the work reasonably pleasant, because otherwise people would just quit and find a more pleasant job.

 

[Mr. Laser Beam]

If early TNG is the humanity they're working towards, they're doing it wrong.

Ain't that the truth.

I do like what the novelverse has done with Ralph Offenhouse, though. He's now the Federation Secretary of Commerce! See, Picard, Ralph's knowledge of money sure came in handy!