If Money is not a driving force for the federation, what would actually work to replace this....
- Thread starter Maccyj571086
- Start date
Since wealth doesn't matter anymore, isn't it all about building your reputation?
It's probably just Earth that's without money and they've figured out a way to run a planet so that people can do what they want and yet still stuff gets done. Maybe they all have to do Federal Service like Starship Troopers but instead of military you have to go be a plumber or builder or something for some amount of time. You get basic needs through your house replicator. Thing is people nowadays will go do stuff for free, like volunteering, so I can imagine that sentiment being possible in some post scarcity economy, especially one where all the old ways got nuked in World War 3. You will still have people that try to manipulate the system for their own benefit but in some imaginary world everything mostly goes right.
Can only hope the world gets there sooner rather than later, we'd all be better off for it. Viva la revolution!
Why giant ones? I'd rather have an unending supply of regular blocks, for the sheer challenge of how to build a real house from them--just like childhood me dreamed of
Yeah one thing 90s trek never managed to explain completely is who cleans everything. I think they sometimes claimed that the Enterprise is "self-cleaning" or something like that, but how that's supposed to work is never explained.
Frankly they should have a bunch of small Star Wars/Wall-E style robots buzzing around doing all the menial tasks (maybe they would have if they weren't on a TV budget)
Though the question is how much plumbing they really need is questionable, it's possible that their showers/bathtubs just replicate water and "recycle" it back into energy at the end. And it's possible that...waste...is similarly recycled into replicator energy.
Considering how much the characters always bitch about how replicated food is, somehow, inferior to home made stuff, I find it possible that replicated clothes and objects might be thought of similarly. Meaning things like hand tailored clothes and furniture survive as luxury articles that you can buy and sell for "credits", The bulk of the population just replicates their clothes and other things for very, very cheap/free and non-replicated clothes are all now hand-tailored by people who just have a passion for fashion (like Garak) and trades and craftsmanship probably have made a huge comeback. There likely aren't any chain stores anymore and no things like children in poorer countries being forced to sow jeans in sweatshops.
In fact an article like a dress made out of non-replicated material might even be a lot more expensive/luxurious than a hand-tailored dress would be today. There's likely not a lot cotton production going on anymore. Wool only from people who just like to keep sheep as pets. Non-replicated silk and leather might be completely unobtainable if you take Riker's words about not "enslaving" animals for their products anymore as gospel (since you need to kill animals to obtain leather and silk)
So a hand-tailored dress made out of non-replicated cotton is probably something mostly "rich" people can afford in the 24th century or something that's saved for special occasions.
So there would still be luxury, possibly even less obtainable than it is today, but there's no longer any poverty.
Last edited:
The rise of automation, especially in conjunction with the development of artificial intelligence means that worldwide societies and economies will undergo immense change in the near future. Near limitless clean energy will only accelerate that - already we may be living in capitalism's final phase. By the time of Trek it'll be in the distant past.
The majority of jobs will be lost to automation and A.I. and corporate profits will initially soar as they continue to produce goods and provide services with fewer and fewer staff costs and overheads.
Eventually, however, without the wages of the decreasing number of workers in circulation, the economy will stall as demand crashes. The historic link between the exchange of effort and skills for goods and services will be broken for good.
Either jobs will have to be shared whilst still attracting a full wage/salary (unlikely to be supported by companies) OR the state will have to pay a universal basic income supported by taxation.
With producers the only source of tax that is needed to fund the populace, people who in turn use it to pay the producers for the goods and services, it doesn't take much examination to realise that they will be effectively giving their product away.
Without a profit motive there will be little incentive to be a private producer. The means of production will lose their attraction and perhaps inevitably pass from entrepreneurs to the state.
I'm sure that the rich and powerful will find ways of maintaining their influence - human nature dictates that, but for the most part it will be to each according to their needs, from each according to their abilities.
People will be provided for and people will contribute as needed.
The majority of jobs will be lost to automation and A.I. and corporate profits will initially soar as they continue to produce goods and provide services with fewer and fewer staff costs and overheads.
Eventually, however, without the wages of the decreasing number of workers in circulation, the economy will stall as demand crashes. The historic link between the exchange of effort and skills for goods and services will be broken for good.
Either jobs will have to be shared whilst still attracting a full wage/salary (unlikely to be supported by companies) OR the state will have to pay a universal basic income supported by taxation.
With producers the only source of tax that is needed to fund the populace, people who in turn use it to pay the producers for the goods and services, it doesn't take much examination to realise that they will be effectively giving their product away.
Without a profit motive there will be little incentive to be a private producer. The means of production will lose their attraction and perhaps inevitably pass from entrepreneurs to the state.
I'm sure that the rich and powerful will find ways of maintaining their influence - human nature dictates that, but for the most part it will be to each according to their needs, from each according to their abilities.
People will be provided for and people will contribute as needed.
And more productive....
we saw on lower decks that self cleaning means the junior crew takes care of it
You don't need replicators to achieve abundance (aka, more than enough for everyone).
We already do that in real life (we have more empty houses than there are homeless people), we produce enough food to feed over 10 billion people annually, and so on... but our management of said resources is ridiculously inefficient (aka, money/capitalism is the problem because it wastes so much and is a barrier to gaining access to what people need - no money, no access to what you need).
So, technology, science and resources aren't the issues... and the same would be applicable to Trek humans.
Also, WWIII did some damage to the planet, but not enough to eliminate means of production.
600 million people died in WWIII according to canonical data with most governments and militaries wiped out.
Humans had molecular fabricators in the mid 22nd century (by the time NX-01 launched).... albeit, we (in real life) developed molecular manufacturing in 2015, and AI controlled atomic scale manufacturing since 2018.
Still, even if Trek humans didn't have molecular manufacturing until early/mid 22nd century, they'd still have advanced methods of production with additive manufacturing (3d printing), hydroponics, airponics, etc... and geothermal for baseload (and probably fusion by the time Cochrane made FC with Vulcans).
As for what was in effect during the 22nd century... according to Archer (when he conversed with the Ferengi), he mentioned that humanity abandoned capitalist practices a while ago.
I would say that in the next 50 years that followed since First Contact movie events (as councilor Troi mentioned), Earth eliminated poverty, wars and disease.
So, yes, I'd say that Humanity instigated a universal basic income or something (or universal basic services - or both) during that time of recovery (during which environmental damage was also repaired - albeit, it would take us 10 years to repair that damage in real life... as would Trek humans - but for the sake of the story, let's go with the premise it took them 50 odd years do that).
We also know that 'money went the way of the dinosaur' in the second half of 22nd century according to Tom Paris.
So, that means that Humanity may have abandoned money just about the time NX-01 launched... or it abandoned it entirely just as the United Federation of Planets was founded in 2161.
Actually, Riker did mention that the Enterprise-D cleans itself.
And we saw on Discovery they have anti-grav drones which cleaned up the mess-hall too.
It makes sense to use automation for this stuff and it would have been doable since even today because self-repair and self-cleaning aren't exactly new concept from a technological point of view.
Lower decks shouldn't be bothered with those tasks unless automation is damaged to the point where it cannot do that (which again makes sense).
You'd give lower decks other more meaningful tasks.
About money.
In many cases there are prices mentioned or what some individual would want in exange for something in Trek.
This is a place for headcanon, right?
Perhaps Starfleet officers do get paid in one way or the other. For example captain gets better "money" than his 1st officer. That's why people want to get promoted. Fresh out of the academy ensign doesn't get the same benefits as an admiral so that ensign wants to climb up the ladder for a better paycheck. Headcanon is cool.
In many cases there are prices mentioned or what some individual would want in exange for something in Trek.
This is a place for headcanon, right?
Perhaps Starfleet officers do get paid in one way or the other. For example captain gets better "money" than his 1st officer. That's why people want to get promoted. Fresh out of the academy ensign doesn't get the same benefits as an admiral so that ensign wants to climb up the ladder for a better paycheck. Headcanon is cool.
Money is far too useful an invention to ever abolish, it would be like abolishing the wheel. Even in a post-scarcity economy you'd still need money to facilitate certain types of transactions.
What they should have done is simply explain that somehow, magically, humans do no longer see the acquisition of money (and the power that can come with it) as a goal in itself, but only as an instrument to facilitate equitable exchanges. That wouldn't have been any less realistic, but at least it would have been less silly.
What they should have done is simply explain that somehow, magically, humans do no longer see the acquisition of money (and the power that can come with it) as a goal in itself, but only as an instrument to facilitate equitable exchanges. That wouldn't have been any less realistic, but at least it would have been less silly.
I knew that you, of all people, would appreciate the choice I made.
Yes but Lower Decks is a comedy show written with a different mindset than TNG/90s Trek.
(And no I'm not saying "iT iSnT sTaR tReKs!!!", Lower Decks is my favourite entry into the franchise.
we also know that money use by humans was alive and well in the mid and late 23rd century.
Except when it wasn't.
Tell that to all the bounty hunters in "The Escape Artist" (set nearly a hundred years later) who were chasing after the bounty on Harry Mudd - a bounty payable in Federation credits.
Or, a century AFTER THAT, the Barzan government soliciting bids on their wormhole (TNG's "The Price") - again, in Federation credits.
So much for the way of the dinosaur, eh?
Bounty hunters aren't part of the Federation.
Neither were the Barzan.
Also, it was fairly well established that the Federation usually engages in trade (aka, resources) with non-aligned species... I also don't recall Federation credits being mentioned in negotiations with the Barzan (whatsoever) - the transcript doesn't mention this either.
Oh and, when TOS came out, Roddenberry didn't fully flesh out a no-money idea.
Also, tell that to Kirk who told in ST:IV that they don't use money (set a bit later than 'The Escape Artist' but still same era).
Last edited:
Incorrect.
Money was useful during actual scarcity in specific areas which required management of some kind to ration the said resources, but that stopped being the case when we developed technology to mass produce abundance.
The notion of 'trade' and 'transactions' is useless in a technologically advanced society like ours that is already generating abundance... and an obstruction which leads to ridiculous mis-management of Earth's resources, excessive waste, climate change, and millions of deaths that occur every year ( about 9 million die due to hunger every year, even though we produce enough to feed over 10 billion... 1.5 million die due to preventable diseases, and at least 500 000 die annually due to homelessness, despite there being more homes than homeless people).
Money WAS a useful invention, but it outgrew its usefulness along with politicians since the first great depression hit in the 1930-ies.
True, but they were still paid IN FEDERATION CREDITS. And yes, those WERE mentioned in the episode.
An Okudagram which appears onscreen in the episode, does mention credits.
Similar threads
