History of Star Trek having no "money"

[Tenacity]

Methods of compensation to other species outside of the Federation does not mean they possess any internal financial systems of their own.

Nor does it preclude the existence and use of money inside the Federation, or that the Federation has a economy that includes personal payments for goods and services.

I'll take canon references over whatever all that was though.

Passage from Earth to DS9, for someone who isn't in Starfleet requires payment (Little Green Men).

Actually, TOS came up with ... a smiling Vulcanian

And later a crying Vulcan, racist against Human Vulcans, secretive Vulcans, illegal arms buying Vulcans, other.

warpless Romulans

Scotty said the power was impulse. But was that impulse as opposed to warp drive? Or impulse as opposed to matter/antimatter reactor, or warp core? The BOP's primary weapon definitely could travel at warp.

a sexist Starfleet

Societies change and change again, even in the TNG era most starship captains and starfleet admirals were male.

No, "Spock's Brain." No!

Still considerably better than Masks or Inner Light.

No post-scarcity is not socialism

To be fair "post-scarcity" would not preclude socialism, but it also would not require it.

 

[Kemaiku]

tl:dr

 

[Spot261]

I read it, all 9 lines.

 

[Arpy]

The original Enterprise is one of the most beloved spaceships in history.

You can love things that are outdated.

Of the ones you mention, the issue of Khan and Chekov for instance really isn't an inconsistency. It would only be one if the had been a positive statement prior to TWOK that the two had never met. Simply failing to show such a meeting on the screen does not preclude there having been one.

The only canon statement we have either way comes from TWOK which clearly states they did. Ergo they did. How we interpret that in terms of the timeline is a separate matter. It's very easy to extrapolate that Chekov may have been belowdecks and encountered Khan in an unshown incident. We don't know for sure, we simply know they did in fact meet, we have a canon source that unambiguously states they did with no contradiction anywhere in the franchise.

Likewise the "no warp" inconsistency for Romulans. All we know from BoT is that the particular Romulan ship which crossed the neutral zone did not currently posess a warp drive at the time of being scanned. It does not follow that it was not FTL capable by some other means (or that the term "simple impulse power" may mean something different to "impulse engines") or that the Romulan Empire did not posess warp capability.

In fact we know the BoP was FTL capable, we are presented with it travelling interstellar distances within a matter of days. Equally we know "warp drive" is only one of many means in the trek universe by which FTL travel can be acheived. Therefore we can infer that "simple impulse power" as declared by Scotty in some means allows for FTL.

KIRK: Yes, well gentlemen, the question still remains. Can we engage them with a reasonable possibility of victory?
SCOTT: No question. Their power is simple impulse.
KIRK: Meaning we can outrun them?​

Look at the lines in context with the writing on the show. They're not nitpicking technobabble, or thinking about the physics of sublight. They're setting up the next scene: yes, we can engage them despite their advantageous new cloak and scary torpedo technologies.

You as a fan can make the dialogue work by working to make it work, but what they're presenting to you is not something that works at face value.

Same thing with Khan. They were figuring the fans would just let it go given that in the over a decade since the show was on the air, everyone's associated the screw as a solid unit.

Societies change and change again, even in the TNG era most starship captains and starfleet admirals were male.

So you're arguing that instead of chalking up an old TV show's outdatedness to its being outdated, we should imagine our future going backward and letting outdated concepts once again cause pain and idiocy? During an otherwise progressive and prosperous time. We should create generations of pain and waste, prejudice and misery because that's how in your mind you've made sense of the old TV show?

No.

To be fair "post-scarcity" would not preclude socialism, but it also would not require it.

Quite.

 

[Tenacity]

During an otherwise progressive and prosperous time

Prosperous yes, comfortable and optimistic too. Progressive only depending on how you define the term.

that's how in your mind you've made sense of the old TV show

It's what's on display, on screen, in the scripts, which gender of actor was hired for a given role.

23rd and 24th centuries. A predominance (not exclusive) of males in upper authority positions.

 

[nascenticity]

23rd and 24th centuries. A predominance (not exclusive) of males in upper authority positions.

I read that Roddenberry wanted equal numbers of men and women aboard the Enterprise but it wasn't possible at the time, or something.

 

[Arpy]

Prosperous yes, comfortable and optimistic too. Progressive only depending on how you define the term.It's what's on display, on screen, in the scripts, which gender of actor was hired for a given role.

23rd and 24th centuries. A predominance (not exclusive) of males in upper authority positions.

You're choosing to accept the limits of the era that produced the show over the ethos the show was trying to promote. If you're taking it at face value as the real future, it's a shitty show. For many reasons including and well beyond the sexism.

 

[WebLurker]

You can love things that are outdated.

How's the original Enterprise outdated? Most of the stuff you claimed was was used for the Abramsverse one, too.[/QUOTE]

 

[Lance]

Or, if you like, you could say the full conversion happened between TOS and TNG. We never do learn much about what happens within the Federation, our heroes usually dealing with "foreign policy." Look at the changes to the real world within the last 80 years with the invention of the first computer. If anything you'd think advances happen even faster in the future.

But then, as I said, there are actually several references to the crew using money in TNG's first season. The first concrete example of the TNG crew being 'moneyless' was "The Neutral Zone" where it was a plot point. So where do we draw the line? When does the moneyless society begin? As few as only three episodes before, Picard was talking about buyingdrinks at an alien cafe on an upcoming planetary visit.

I still think the most equitable answer is that Earth is moneyless, maybe the Federation as a whole, but that some kind of currency system still exists for the crew to buy/trade with 'less enlightened' races. Whoever that might be. I still think if any kind of galactic market exists, then even if Earth and other member states don't use money within themselves they still need skin in the game for when they deal with races that still do.

 

[WebLurker]

But then, as I said, there are actually several references to the crew using money in TNG's first season. The first concrete example of the TNG crew being 'moneyless' was "The Neutral Zone" where it was a plot point. So where do we draw the line? When does the moneyless society begin? As few as only three episodes before, Picard was talking about buyingdrinks at an alien cafe on an upcoming planetary visit.

I still think the most equitable answer is that Earth is moneyless, maybe the Federation as a whole, but that some kind of currency system still exists for the crew to buy/trade with 'less enlightened' races. Whoever that might be. I still think if any kind of galactic market exists, then even if Earth and other member states don't use money within themselves they still need skin in the game for when they deal with races that still do.

Per "Dark Frontier" (VOY), United Earth phased out money sometime in the 22nd century. There is good evidence that they do have ways of conducting monetary transactions when needed, although its unclear if only United Earth doesn't use money or if the Federation is the same way (although First Contact seems to imply that the Federation as a whole doesn't use any form of currency.)

We do know that money exists outside of the Federation, given the Ferengi's interstellar business dealings with lots of other races.

Finally, a lot of the references to human/Starfleet characters using money or being paid can be chalked up to figures of speech (like how in a DS9 show, Jake Sisko says he "sold" a story, even though there no monetary transaction as part of the publishing deal), expressions that outlasted their origin (anything involving off-hand comments about earning ones pay), or stuff like that.

P.S.: This fansite article has some interesting discussion on the topic. This other fansite also discussed the idea. (Note: I'm not saying I agree or disagree with either article partially or in full. Just adding more ideas and discussion points.)

 

[Tenacity]

The first concrete example of the TNG crew being 'moneyless' was "The Neutral Zone" where it was a plot point.

Even there the absence of money wasn't directly mentioned.

 

[Guy Gardener]

I think that episode would have ended better if Max left to join the Romulans, not because he's evil, just because he really doesn't want to live in a world (the Federation) where he's functionally a zoo exhibit.

Offenhouse "So I figured out your deal is that you're all pinko commie liberals?"

Picard "That's a very superficial explanation of - "

Offenhouse "So what's their deal?"

Picard "That's a very complex f - "

Offenhouse "Brass tacks, are they "evil" and would I be safe if I wanted to check out what the Romulans have to offer a man with vision?"

Picard "Weeeell... "

 

[charliefox]

I read that Roddenberry wanted equal numbers of men and women aboard the Enterprise but it wasn't possible at the time, or something.

I can't imagine why this would be impossible. Actresses cost less than actors so it would have been cheaper for him to hire more women.

 

[nascenticity]

I can't imagine why this would be impossible. Actresses cost less than actors so it would have been cheaper for him to hire more women.

Possibly for the same reason Majel Barret's Number One character had to be taken out of the series -- because it was the 1960s, and people thought the idea of women doing things other than standing around and looking pretty was too "controversial" (probably an oversimplification, but, hey, this was many decades before I was born.)

 

[nascenticity]

Money doesn't always talk louder than people's preconceived ideas about how the world should work.

 

[charliefox]

Money doesn't always talk louder than people's preconceived ideas about how the world should work.

Money doesn't talk loud, it whispers.

 

[nascenticity]

Money doesn't talk loud, it whispers.

Precisely the point.

 

[Spot261]

Look at the lines in context with the writing on the show. They're not nitpicking technobabble, or thinking about the physics of sublight. They're setting up the next scene: yes, we can engage them despite their advantageous new cloak and scary torpedo technologies.

You as a fan can make the dialogue work by working to make it work, but what they're presenting to you is not something that works at face value.

Well, true, but the fact remains that there is no inconsistency, especially when we consider that the difference between various drives would not be nit picking to a starfleet engineer.

That the line has a dramatic purpose within the plot is irrelevent, every line has some purpose as delivered, that in no way alters the fact that the inconsistency is based on unfounded assumptions and faulty logic. That is not working to do anything, I have no desire to protect the show's integrity, its an objective assessment of the evidence as shown.

As I said, ST is chock full of inconsistencies, but this isn't one of them.

Same thing with Khan. They were figuring the fans would just let it go given that in the over a decade since the show was on the air, everyone's associated the screw as a solid unit.

I have no way of knowing what was in the heads of the script writers, nor do you, but again irrelevent. The same observation could be made of any two disparate on screen events to fudge the matter. The fact is there is often quoted to be an inconsistency in universe where in fact there is not.

 

[Guy Gardener]

Remember that episode of BSG TOS where all the Boys got the space-flu, so all the girls had to learn how to be Viper pilots in less than a day before the next Cylon attack?

 

[Spot261]

Clearly feasible, your point?