How does the Federation pay for things?
Easy: flowers, chocolates, and promises it doesn't intend to keep.
Easy: flowers, chocolates, and promises it doesn't intend to keep.
How Dose Starfleet Pay For Stuff?
- Thread starter elax92
- Start date
All of relatively equal worth...
Of course! It's the future, baby - and its awesome.
I'm sure you meant, "at the very heart of the matter!"
I actually disagree with the assertion that it is human nature to hoard resources. I think this is actually tied in more with post-agricultural society and consumerism than human nature.
If we look at hunter gatherer societies we often find a more egalitarian resource sharing society. This seems to indicate that while needing resources for survival, human nature is to work together in tribal families to acquire and share resources. I think the reason why things like "human nature" are so hard to peg down is because culture plays such a huge part in who we are.
Therefore, while I do see the possibility of a money-less society as possible; it would require vast cultural changes across the planet. As I asserted in a prior comment I believe such change would require require abandoning urbanism and in many ways returning to a pre-agricultural society.
As far as Star Trek is concerned I think WWIII would provide a good reset button that could allow these ideas to take hold and human culture to begin to change away from consumerism and big government.
I had actually considered using that line, yes, but thought better of it.Pre-agrarian societies themselves are largely money-free, yes, and rely more on the bartering "equal exchange" system to acquire resources. It was a more "open" way of doing things, to be sure. A simple solution that was totally appropriate for its time.
And I totally agree that we would need to, as you say, "abandon urbanism and return to a pre-agr. society" in order to get back to that way of doing things. But to many that is the way backward, not forward. Self-sustaining communes try things like that all the time. Some succeed but never make headlines, others not so much and descend into cult-like Jonestown situations and possess a stigma in the modern era. Either they're quaint little hippie enclaves who are trying to live in a bygone delusion, or they're socio-political fanatics who need to be investigated and given the ol' Waco Texas barbeque treatment. There doesn't seem to be a happy medium. Again, I think, due to the limitations of human nature.
My point is that it's going to take a lot more than a nifty theory to unravel almost 2 centuries of industrial advancement and fiduciary entanglement of society without some people not wanting to voluntarily or forcibly give up what they feel is their due, hard-earned or otherwise. Such things oftentimes lead to revolution. I remember a wonderful quote from "West Wing" (one of my favorite political shows of all time) by Will Bailey:
I really miss that show...
When you convert matter into energy and back again, you're going to lose something. You can't recycle waste and raw material with 100% efficiency, and at some point the energy demands of industrial-sized replication would make standard methods of fabrication more optimal.
Calm down. All opinions on this thread are merely conjecture. I was offering mine as one possible explanation to the disparities that exist between Roddenberry's vision and the writers' struggle to realize that vision with dialog.
It's very possible that Kirk & Picard's statements about not using money was their way of expressing that the "economics of the future are very different," that the definition of Federation Credits does not qualify as money as understood by 20th century standards.
My comments referred to the Federation economy only. I said nothing about other governments, including the Ferengi.
Fantasy (def.) - the faculty or activity of imagining things, especially things that are impossible or improbable. Just because something doesn't currently exist doesn't make it fantasy, sir. The "human nature" you are referring to only applies to modern-day western capitalist society. This is a very narrow definition if human nature. A basic anthropological study makes clear that basic human nature does not extend much beyond the need to secure food, water, shelter, and ANY kind of social structure. The society envisioned by Roddenberry is not impossible, or improbable, and therefore it is not fantasy.
To clarify, I meant that the Federation looks like what the EU became. Case in point: Federation members, like EU members, have ambassadors. The EU has a Commission, the UFP has a council. However, the U.S. has a strong central government and States do not use ambassadors to conduct diplomacy with other States or other countries.
This I agree with completely. And I think that in Star Trek the WWIII-Warpdrive-Vulcanian combo is the perfect storm for bringing about this sort of change.
Of course the issue of the ruling elite would still have to be dealt with. But I imagine there would be some interesting stories that could be told about that.
Comparing the federation to the European Union. I would hope that with the Vulcanians on board it would turn out a bit more logical than this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O37yJBFRrfg
This is a video explaining the structure of the European Union.
Oh, yes. 
The prequel we probably should have gotten.
The prequel we probably should have gotten.
Correct .
So the moneyless utopia is really just a replicator economy. Dirt can magically become things, but wealth can not be amassed.
Oh, ok.
-
The replicator economy is troubling.
1) The replicator is just a MacGuffin for Picard getting futuristic insta-tea. We might as well be talking about how the transporter is actually an immortality device.
2) Many things can't be replicated: latinum, land, etc. The replicator alone cannot be the one-stop answer re the Federation economy.
3) It's not much of a utopia if it's founded on the ease of acquiring material possessions. The idea that "it's easy being a saint in Paradise" sells out what it is to be a saint. Mother Teresa didn't spend all her time in Donald Trump's apartment.
1) Agreed
2) Agreed
3) Kinda lost me with the Teresa/Trump thing, but... eh, what the hell: Agreed.
I'm saying that you can't buy kindness. Saints (or in Teresa's case, sainthood candidates) didn't become so because they lived luxurious lives that also afforded them some kind of moral wealth. "They were so rich that they became saints!" ...See Trump or Caligula. Federation citizens are nice because of internal, not material, wealth.
Picard said they're "no longer obsessed with the accumulation of things." What is a replicator but a thing-maker?
Picard said they're "no longer obsessed with the accumulation of things." What is a replicator but a thing-maker?
I loved my Thing-Maker®, but the naughty boys in the Naughty Family in our old neighborhood stole it from my basement.
Not to be a Donny Downer, but maybe we all should agree that those references to no money and pursuit of things and such, were lines written that seemed like good ideas at the time, but, in retrospect, were not such good ideas.
Rather, think of life in the Federation/on Earth as a SuperSocialist Ideal Economy in the areas of Health, Education, Welfare, Safety, Transportation, and the like.
"Credits", however, still exists for "wages" so that citizens have expendable "income" for clothes and personal products and other "want" items. Snazzy houses like Robert's French Wine Country Crib exist because it has been in his family for years, as has the land for the vineyard/wrasslin' arena for him and Jean-Luc. Others have similar situations, or other desired housing commensurate with Urban or rural lifestyle choices. Asking for gluttonous largess, 37 Bedroom Replicas of Versailles, for example gets one a quick trip to the Agonizer, so that shit is nipped in the bud. not really (maybe) but the collective consciousness of the society is such that all keep things within reason. (Ok, a little leap here)
Benign Central Government keeps track of Earth/The Federation's "Wealth" in selling technological/mineral/aquatic/what have you rights garnered from other planets, and a fair, non-"Avatar"-like cooperative exists, of a kind, to fuel the whole Shillelagh.
They get theirs, we get ours and everybody gets a fair deal.
There are rules, of course, for Earth Citizenship, and fair trade for tourists to come and/or people needed or wanting to work on the Mother Planet. All is worked out reasonably and equitably. It all works so well, because the profit motive has been removed, and, while nothing is ever on sale (out-of-date Fashions and other "consumer" goods simply recycled, same with star ships and Commodores) nothing is ever valued at more than it should be.
Not to be a Donny Downer, but maybe we all should agree that those references to no money and pursuit of things and such, were lines written that seemed like good ideas at the time, but, in retrospect, were not such good ideas.
Rather, think of life in the Federation/on Earth as a SuperSocialist Ideal Economy in the areas of Health, Education, Welfare, Safety, Transportation, and the like.
"Credits", however, still exists for "wages" so that citizens have expendable "income" for clothes and personal products and other "want" items. Snazzy houses like Robert's French Wine Country Crib exist because it has been in his family for years, as has the land for the vineyard/wrasslin' arena for him and Jean-Luc. Others have similar situations, or other desired housing commensurate with Urban or rural lifestyle choices. Asking for gluttonous largess, 37 Bedroom Replicas of Versailles, for example gets one a quick trip to the Agonizer, so that shit is nipped in the bud. not really (maybe) but the collective consciousness of the society is such that all keep things within reason. (Ok, a little leap here)
Benign Central Government keeps track of Earth/The Federation's "Wealth" in selling technological/mineral/aquatic/what have you rights garnered from other planets, and a fair, non-"Avatar"-like cooperative exists, of a kind, to fuel the whole Shillelagh.
They get theirs, we get ours and everybody gets a fair deal.
There are rules, of course, for Earth Citizenship, and fair trade for tourists to come and/or people needed or wanting to work on the Mother Planet. All is worked out reasonably and equitably. It all works so well, because the profit motive has been removed, and, while nothing is ever on sale (out-of-date Fashions and other "consumer" goods simply recycled, same with star ships and Commodores) nothing is ever valued at more than it should be.
Indeed. The wisdom of Quark applies precisely here:
Truer words were never spoken...
I also like his bit about root beer as a metaphor for the Federation - sweet and bubbly.
This I agree with. But then again, its pretty much true that all species would start to get nasty if their basic needs aren't met (sleep, food, water, shelter). For instance, imagine not feeding your bestest friend cute puppy dog for a week. Then imagine how friendly she'll be.
NOTE: I said, "imagine." I'm not in any way suggesting that anyone should abuse their pet in any way.
^^^ Well of course.
I'm just saying that it's very easy for technologically advanced societies to brag about "evolved sensibilities" and crow about no longer needing the barbaric concept of money, when all their needs are provided for by said technology. Arpy said it best with the "it's easy being a saint in Paradise" comment - and the Quark statement ties in with that - very true. The whole assumption of a moneyless utopia only works if a classless and extremely stable society's existence is assumed and that everyone buys into it. That is a big assumption, and that is where my assertion of the "fantasy" aspect comes in. When push comes to shove, and if the technology on which they so heavily rely breaks down for any reason, and the mass-shock of regressing from that elevated state sets in, society breaks down and lawlessness ensues. The strong will prey on the weak; a lot of people will needlessly die and many more critically injured. A lack of a barter system and/or currency are, in reality, going to be the least of anyone's problems. Said downfall would likely come from those who, despite all best intentions, perceive that those "in charge" of the utopia don't have their people's best interests at heart. History is replete with such downfalls. The "dear leaders", of course, must have fancier cars and nicer clothes than everyone else because they work so hard at maintaining society. The class system that they worked so hard to destroy would re-emerge silently and those in charge would probably never see it coming. It's happened in every major civilization in history in varying forms. Again, despite the noblest of intentions. It's the "Man Who Would Be King" syndrome.
Well of course.I'm just saying that it's very easy for technologically advanced societies to brag about "evolved sensibilities" and crow about no longer needing the barbaric concept of money, when all their needs are provided for by said technology. Arpy said it best with the "it's easy being a saint in Paradise" comment - and the Quark statement ties in with that - very true. The whole assumption of a moneyless utopia only works if a classless and extremely stable society's existence is assumed and that everyone buys into it. That is a big assumption, and that is where my assertion of the "fantasy" aspect comes in. When push comes to shove, and if the technology on which they so heavily rely breaks down for any reason, and the mass-shock of regressing from that elevated state sets in, society breaks down and lawlessness ensues. The strong will prey on the weak; a lot of people will needlessly die and many more critically injured. A lack of a barter system and/or currency are, in reality, going to be the least of anyone's problems. Said downfall would likely come from those who, despite all best intentions, perceive that those "in charge" of the utopia don't have their people's best interests at heart. History is replete with such downfalls. The "dear leaders", of course, must have fancier cars and nicer clothes than everyone else because they work so hard at maintaining society. The class system that they worked so hard to destroy would re-emerge silently and those in charge would probably never see it coming. It's happened in every major civilization in history in varying forms. Again, despite the noblest of intentions. It's the "Man Who Would Be King" syndrome.
^^^
I'm just saying that it's very easy for technologically advanced societies to brag about "evolved sensibilities" and crow about no longer needing the barbaric concept of money, when all their needs are provided for by said technology. Arpy said it best with the "it's easy being a saint in Paradise" comment - and the Quark statement ties in with that - very true. The whole assumption of a moneyless utopia only works if a classless and extremely stable society's existence is assumed and that everyone buys into it. That is a big assumption, and that is where my assertion of the "fantasy" aspect comes in. When push comes to shove, and if the technology on which they so heavily rely breaks down for any reason, and the mass-shock of regressing from that elevated state sets in, society breaks down and lawlessness ensues. The strong will prey on the weak; a lot of people will needlessly die and many more critically injured. A lack of a barter system and/or currency are, in reality, going to be the least of anyone's problems. Said downfall would likely come from those who, despite all best intentions, perceive that those "in charge" of the utopia don't have their people's best interests at heart. History is replete with such downfalls.
That was kind of the takeaway point I got out of some of Deep Space Nine. It seemed like First Contact dealt with the issue too with Picard wanting revenge.
^^^ OH yes. Lilly quite effectively shoved Picard's "evolved sensibilities" squarely up his ass. LOVED that scene with the "little ships" - one of the best in Trek history, IMO. No matter how technologically advanced we become, our evolution advances at glacial speeds by comparison, if it's even moving at all. Roddenberry, while being a self-proclaimed "humanist", seemed to miss what some of the more visceral nature of what being a human is all about. 300 years is not enough to make any kind of real fundamental change in our collective psyches like that, outside the creature-comforts our tech artificially provides for us.
The ancient questions remain:
- Can our collective conscience and ethical nature as a species ever catch up with our tech level?
- When do we know we have gone too far for our own good?
- Can we put on the brakes before we drive off an unforeseen yet inevitable cliff?
- Can we transcend the crutch of artificial technology to allow ourselves to be truly enlightened beings?
Watching any news channel at any given time in the past several decades, I'm not so sure.
The ancient questions remain:
- Can our collective conscience and ethical nature as a species ever catch up with our tech level?
- When do we know we have gone too far for our own good?
- Can we put on the brakes before we drive off an unforeseen yet inevitable cliff?
- Can we transcend the crutch of artificial technology to allow ourselves to be truly enlightened beings?
Watching any news channel at any given time in the past several decades, I'm not so sure.
Whatever currency is most exchanged in the Galaxy, the Federation likely uses, holds or has credit for. I would imagine, for a Federation citizen, it is simply a matter of swiping a card of some kind. Whatever any Federation citizen needs or wants it is provided.
That's just my interpretation.
That's just my interpretation.
Similar threads
