Discussion in 'General Trek Discussion' started by JoeZhang, Jan 7, 2013.
So an MD who treats you for free is what?
More than likely a pervert who has stolen a white coat.
Trek goes back and forth on this issue. When it's being real, there is no money and the nasty jobs are automated. ...When was the last time you went down to the local river for your water or lit candles for light at night? Or dug a ditch for an outhouse or killed a cow to for meat? Something very basic that's been so for millennia can change. When it want to make something "relatable" to viewers who find the future too foreign, it sticks a guy with a phase-vacuum in the background. What? They don't have Roombas in the 23rd century?
Doctors get paid, Jarrod.
If I could own a restaurant where I chose the decor and put my own spin on the food and could build a community, sure, I could make a go of that.
Ahh, so every time someone used the word "money," they actually meant "currency."
In The Voyage Home, after Kirk saw a woman buy a newspaper with coins, he said; "They're still using currency. We've got to find some." Coins being a form of currency.
And later in the restaurant (where food and drink is sold), Kirk heard Gillian say; "Don't' tell me they don't use currency in the twenty-third century. To which Kirk responded; "Well, they don't." Kirk could have had lots of money sitting in his 23rd century account, but he wasn't carrying any currency (physical money), and he obviously could not access his account from the 20th century.
In Unification (Part 2), the scene in the piano bar. When Amarie said; "So why don't you drop a few coins in the jar ..." Riker then responded with; "I don't carry currency." Coins again are a form of currency.
In Dark Frontier, when Tom Paris says; "When the New World Economy took shape in the late 22nd century and currency went the way of the dinosaur ..." This make more sense than Paris using "money" in his statement, because we know that money existed in the following century.
So, money as electronic data transfer, yes.
Money in some form in Beverly's account, yes.
Money as currency, not always.
But apparently Beverly Crusher did.
Here's a free restaurant:
"In Barcelona the Ritz was used by the CNT and the UGT as 'Gastronomic Unit Number One' - a public canteen for all those in need...Everyone who went was supposed to have a pass from his local committee, but the guards 'refused to be bureaucratic.' Not only did few people attempt to eat twice but according to Langdon-Davies, little of the Ritz cutlery disappeared. The anarchists ascribed this to the fact that it now belonged neither to a private concern, nor to the state, the people did not steal from themselves. The basic principle was that the community should take on all responsibility for welfare. To leave it to the state was to give authoritarianism a human face." The Spanish Civil War by A. Beevor.
Re: menial or unpleasant jobs:
"Certain jobs are regarded as so distasteful, that they are filled by a permanent rotation system in which almost everyone serves his turn; the most notable instance is work in the kitchen and dining room, such as cooking, dishwashing, and serving...the only exemptions from this rotation are the ill, the aged, and teachers. An inconvenient job such as that of a night watchman is also filled by rotation system, the period of service being two weeks." Kibbutz: Venture in Utopia by Melford Spiro.
Wow, T'Girl...use the same examples to make the same argument for money as have been used thousands of times on these boards since they aired. And I'll do the same with the ones against? Or the very ones you used? Yeah, that's how I'll spend the next five minutes.
The waiters in 10 forward got to see the GD galaxy and had access to the best holodecks Starfleet could offer.
Even in the Utopia, you have to start somewhere on your journey to fulfillment.
Most of the time they do, but that's not the reason why they are considered Doctors.
Do you really define profession by the amount of money they make?
^ A profession that isn't paid is, by definition, not a profession - it's a hobby.
Maybe pop culture doesn't exist then.
Though it depends how one defines it. If it's media-driven attitudes and memes, then the media in 24th century Earth or the Federation in general may be very different from today.
Also, as the Federation is a multi-species union, not all cultures may even have media (at least as we know it or would recognise it).
Most likely things are automated, so there are no crappy jobs left.
Federation economics make no sense, but then who knows, maybe some whizzkid in that time invented an entirely new paradigm of economics. lol..
Are you saying that doctors fit into the moneyless economy fine but restauranteurs don't?
Doctors need to get paid to pay off school debts that got them their training, pay for supplies of the craft, pay for malpractice insurance, etc. a doctor who doesn't get paid is not a doctor very long. Doctors who work pro bono still make money from somewhere else in our economy.
Good point. It would be a mistake to assume that "the Federation" is one big, monolithic culture. Heck, even Vulcan and Earth have very different cultures and values.
Chances are, there are worlds, even within the Federation, that have their own versions of celebrities and pop culture, and others that don't. Ditto for their economic systems, politics, religions, values, etc.
And, of course, once you get out into the Final Frontier, beyond the boundaries of the Federation, anything goes. You could have entire planets driven by money or celebrity or the worship of ancient Sandra Dee movies . . .
Please, let there be a Marx Brothers Planet...
You mean the historical documents
With technology like that, social media must be out of control in Trek's time...imagine what an interstellar version of Facebook or Twitter would be like.
That's what Spock's always checking out in his scanner...
^ "Captain. Ambassador Kardashian has posted to her Spacebook wall. Recommend we go to Warp 5 immediately."
Pop culture (or mass communication) today is economically and politically driven. That was true in ancient times, with theocratic and monarchial control over mass communication and ceremony, that is so in today's corporate-state society. The system only promotes itself through its communicative means. In Roddenberry's future those factors are not supposed to exists anylonger, so pop culture/consumer society (at least as we know it) shouldn't exist either. I think Roddenberry was envisioning a more creative rather than consumerist society based on mutual support and equality rather than competition.
"A culture now wholly commodity was bound to become the star commodity of the society of the spectacle. Clark Kerr, an ideologue at the cutting edge of this trend, reckons that the whole complex system of production, distribution and consumption of knowledge is already equivalent to 29 percent of the annual gross national product of the United States, and he predicts that in the second half of this century culture will become the driving force of the American economy, so assuming the role of the automobile industry in the first half, or that of the railroads in the late 19th century." -- Debord.
Looking around the country and the world it is the economies dominant face.
Separate names with a comma.