Scotty ~ Pay for the week???

To be sure, the verified use of money in a transaction is a one-off instance in TOS. Sort of.

That is, there are two movie instances as well. Scotty in ST6 says he bought a boat. Kirk in ST:GEN sold his cabin. Supposedly buying and selling involves money, although it could also involve barter or a futuristic system of compensation. But the point is that all the other TOS references save one can be interpreted as figurative or in jest.

When he does that, Spock rattles off a number but never reaches the end, and thus never adds "...and three point two two credits" or "...and five point nine three futurobucks". For all we know, he is speaking of hours.

"You've earned your pay", "I'd give real money" and so forth can easily be argued to equate "By Jove!" (no, the speaker doesn't worship Roman deities for real) or "We'll clean their chronometers" (no, the good Colonel is not in charge of the Timepiece Maintenance Department, and there need not even exist any chronometers in need of cleaning as of 2291). And apart from those, there is basically only one instance where our heroes attempt a conventional trade transaction in the 23rd century Federation environment: "Trouble with Tribbles".

Cyrano Jones and the bartender obviously believe in money, in setting a price, and in demanding payment, but funnily enough, no Starfleet officer ends up paying anything in the scene - neither for the tribble nor any drinks. It seems drinks are free elsewhere in TOS, too. Or then the invisible credit system just works very smoothly.

As for Kirk saying "we don't have" money in ST4, that could mean

1) money doesn't exist in his native time and place
2) he didn't get any of his money with him, at least not in any useful form
3) he's broke, as Starfleet froze his accounts
4) he's lying

Timo Saloniemi

 

I don'y really know but i guess that Plum was right. They probably keep credits as a form of measuring the fair, even dispersal of resources such as replicator rations or transporter usage or even in voyager= Holodeck time. there would be no poverty becouse the only way you would have less than someone else was if you had used more of you credit that they had and that would be your own doing. and i quess that by working ( such as on a starship ) you would
be considered a contributing member of civilisation and would be amply rewarded. So actually i guess it really isn't THAT different from money today.

 

Timo: The bartender wanted to charge Uhura for the tribble Cyrano Jones "gifts" her with. Consider how smart and intuitive Trek's computers are, I'd hazard that the exchange of credits is invisible and tacit but real nonetheless.

 

And I'm all for accepting an automated credit system for the TOS era, with essentially capitalist logic behind the system (but with several futuristic twists to it).

What I'm far less certain of is whether Starfleet personnel get paid for their work. A citizenship salary and/or an expenses account would cater for this Starfleet/civilian monetary interaction just fine, here and in the TNG/DS9 timeframe.

And even if Starfleet personnel do get paid, it is doubtful that the pay would be directly tied to rank. Otherwise I would think there would be more incentive for the low-ranking personnel to move up, and correspondingly more of a system to keep these upstarts at bay. In TOS, rank procession is still within reasonable bounds, but the 24th century evidence speaks against a rank/payscale connection.

What any of this says about the Federation economy at large is subject to one major caveat: we are watching Starfleet, and usually Starfleet only. The "navy beans" economy today is not particularly representative of the civilian economies that are the more relevant ones (they pay for the military, after all). It probably shouldn't be representative in the future, either.

Timo Saloniemi

 

Kirk says this often, but mostly to his weekly female Yeoman....

 

Each rank or postion must get some type of "pay", enhanced "rank has it privilages." A First Officer must get paid better a chief enginner or helsman, etc.

 

Hey, thanks for doing the actual math. So, I wasn't that far off!


A billion here, two billion there . . . pretty soon, you're talking about real money!

(Paraphrase of Senator Everett M. Dirksen, 20th century statesman)

 

But that would imply that Starfleet officers have an incentive to get themselves promoted. From the looks of it, in the 24th century at least, they don't. Different people get promoted at wildly differing rates, without much regard to their actual skill level increase or the like. Nobody complains or even comments on how some get stuck at Ensign for a decade while others get two promotions a year.

24th century Starfleet seems to dish out promotions the same way today's militaries offer commendations - they are a reward mechanism for specific heroics or a means of benevolent favoritism, rather than a reward mechanism for years in service or experience accumulated. This would work well if the collar pins weren't worth more than the plastic they are made of, either in monetary terms or as indicators of position or experience level. An Ensign can head a department just as well as a Lieutenant Commander - the latter simply has been better at brown-nosing or heroics.

The payscale may not be completely flat for citizens of the 24th century UFP or the personnel of the 24th century Starfleet. But there's little to nothing to indicate that it weren't.

Timo Saloniemi

 

Maybe he's just cheap...