Tell me you're not building a house right now without telling me you're building a house right now.
What is other transportation like in the 24th Century?
- Thread starter Gingerbread Demon
- Start date
I hadn't experience such delays personally (then again I don't live in the USA so that could also play a part).
That of course doesn't mean they don't exist, but for what we're talking about (housing the homeless) and refurbishing most of the pre-existing buildings, we're not discussing about installing potentially customized bath tubs that can take up extra time and materials to get done. Standard tubs which are made in large quantities would more likely be used.
However, the units in question which would house the homeless would likely be better off with simple showers... bathtubs can be a hazzard in my experience, so I'm personally more accustomed to showers. We had a bathtub in our family home and we ended up having it removed. Even for the elderly, it becomes a problem of getting into the tub, not to mention its slippery (and bath mats are just junk for the most part that stop working after a short while).
Speaking of which, if your parents experienced a problem with a bathtub, have they considered just having (or stopping at) a shower or a wet room instead?
Is there a fundamental need for a bathtub?
Yes, there is.
As it is a guest space. And it isn't a custom tub. Standard tub, surround, and installing drywall.
And it's not just materials but availability of workers too, which is the other side of the delay. They do not have anyone willing to come work in any reasonable time.
Not saying it's not doable but the general cavalier attitude of "Well, just get it done" is one I find highly laughable in the face of the past several delays I and others in the area I live have experienced in the past several years. Never mind the costs and where the money comes from to fund such projects and having stake holders weigh in on the use of such facilities.
It isn't simple, at all. At least not in my experience, both personally and professionally.
Yeah, we could call them Sanctuary Districts
You know very well I wasn't proposing anything of the kind.
Short of eliminating Capitalism and initiating a transition into Resource Based Economy (which won't happen overnight), don't you think giving people homes and potential UBI to have them actively participate in society is better than having to hide from what we call 'law' and being subjected to poverty and misery at all times?
But hey, if you have a better idea, I'm all ears.
Unfortunately, I see that being how it ends up.
I know you didn't, and I should have used a smiley, but I couldn't resist the comparison.
Good Luck with that, there's plenty of people, business, countries, organizations who wouldn't want to see that transition.
We are ironic about Sanctuary Districts but they don't differ much from the all-too-prevalent problem of dumping "problem" families in specific social housing areas with the unvoiced aim of "not spoiling other areas".
There were, some years ago, proposals in the UK for housing severely problematic families in the same street. It would have been compulsory and the stated aim was to provide intensive help. There was an outcry and nothing came of it. Had the proposals gone ahead, the "intensive help" would have (most probably) ended up in the same fashion as so-called "community care" - underfunded from the start and practically non-existent within a few years.
There were, some years ago, proposals in the UK for housing severely problematic families in the same street. It would have been compulsory and the stated aim was to provide intensive help. There was an outcry and nothing came of it. Had the proposals gone ahead, the "intensive help" would have (most probably) ended up in the same fashion as so-called "community care" - underfunded from the start and practically non-existent within a few years.
Perhaps, but its very possible the upcoming global economic collapse which was slated to occur by 2030 (by an updated MIT study) will force even those people to let go (because there will be nothing to left to hold on to).
I remember that residential tower building in London burning and the whole stink because of the cladding being installed on the building just to make it look 'decent' for the richer people who 'had to' look at it (but nothing was done to make the cladding fire proof, or to better improve the building itself to prevent problems of that and other kind.
Honestly, the 'rich' need a hard cold dose of reality and not complain about sharing the area with the 'commoners' (in reality, such distinctions are utter rubbish, and society is worse off for allowing social stratification to occur in the first place).
The UK has a nasty habit of allowing stuff like this in the first place. Take one small look at the PM's fighting on national TV and behaving like children (basically showcasing a classic case of 'circus') the public still allows these people to represent and lead them.
We know what happens, this isn't an experiment that needs to be run.
You either know someone in a position of power, maybe give them some "favors" or you never get to go.
Not a shock we see a bunch of officers going whenever they choose.
The federation's "self betterment" means you have to get in a position of power to truly enjoy federation life. Better yourself and you'll have access to all of the things people use to buy.
At no point in trek are we shown a world where everyone gets equal access to society.
People want scarcity, they are interested in things that are scare, there's no such thing as a truly post scarcity society.
Best you could hope for is a society where food/shelter/clothing are not scare things, and we we're too far off from that.
Please elaborate.
Well just what they said, the show never comes right out and says everyone "everyone gets equal access to society." Of course they never state the opposite. So we don't know what they have.
They also never claim that the Star Trek universe is a post scarcity society, that's a creation of some fans.
We see a constant contrast between highers up in starfleet and those lower down.
Top officers get bigger quarters etc.
Than we see picard being offered a major job in the episode "family" that implies it'd be very hard for a non officer to get it.
We see captains having power over star ships, and we see the Maquis being turned into literal villains for wanting to do their own things.
Starships are quite obviously scare otherwise people wouldn't be so focused on hijacking them.
There's scarcity of ships and you need to be at the top of the pyramid to get a piece of it.
We also know raw intelligence is a big factor in getting into the academy etc.
In all those pages, I've yet to read anyone suggest the idea that somewhere, someone on Earth at that time has a 1969 Pontiac GTO Judge with glasspacks sitting in their garage that they've lovingly recreated with parts from a replicator bank that they drive up and down the block at night just to piss off the Starfleet cadets who have school in the morning.
Seriously, where is the Edgar Friendly character in all of Star Trek? lmao Where is the guy who refuses to tow the line in the Federation because he wants to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder, "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of BBQ ribs with the side order of grease fries?" The guy who wants high cholesterol and bacon and butter and buckets of cheese and to smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinatti in the non-smoking section?
With replicator technology, it's a sure bet someone has done just this, if for no other reason than because they could. "I can replicate a Holly four-barrel carburetor? What about an Eddelbrock supercharger?"
Computer: "That's correct. I can make both. Shall I make them for you now?"
That is why I find it hard to believe that all forms of transportation from the 21st century just went the way of the Dodo. Somewhere in Starfleet, there's a muscle-car fan (Tom Paris, maybe?). If it can be made on the holodeck, it can be made with a replicator.
Seriously, where is the Edgar Friendly character in all of Star Trek? lmao Where is the guy who refuses to tow the line in the Federation because he wants to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder, "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of BBQ ribs with the side order of grease fries?" The guy who wants high cholesterol and bacon and butter and buckets of cheese and to smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinatti in the non-smoking section?
With replicator technology, it's a sure bet someone has done just this, if for no other reason than because they could. "I can replicate a Holly four-barrel carburetor? What about an Eddelbrock supercharger?"
Computer: "That's correct. I can make both. Shall I make them for you now?"
That is why I find it hard to believe that all forms of transportation from the 21st century just went the way of the Dodo. Somewhere in Starfleet, there's a muscle-car fan (Tom Paris, maybe?). If it can be made on the holodeck, it can be made with a replicator.
They probably started their own colony with blackjack and hookers.Seriously, where is the Edgar Friendly character in all of Star Trek? lmao Where is the guy who refuses to tow the line in the Federation because he wants to sit in a greasy spoon and wonder, "Gee, should I have the T-bone steak or the jumbo rack of BBQ ribs with the side order of grease fries?" The guy who wants high cholesterol and bacon and butter and buckets of cheese and to smoke a Cuban cigar the size of Cincinatti in the non-smoking section?
I mean, probably, but again the attitude that is presented is that people work for the betterment of themselves and humanity and that even if people do those things society will think less of them for it.
Or, maybe that's what the holodeck is for
Reminds me of a line from Heinlein's "Tunnel in the Sky." "Just like wine, women and whiskey there was nothing in close enough that was just as good." I'm sure some people will have those interests, but the limits and social pressures would move them other directions.
They probably started their own colony with blackjack and hookers.
I mean, probably, but again the attitude that is presented is that people work for the betterment of themselves and humanity and that even if people do those things society will think less of them for it.
Or, maybe that's what the holodeck is for
Reminds me of a line from Heinlein's "Tunnel in the Sky." "Just like wine, women and whiskey there was nothing in close enough that was just as good." I'm sure some people will have those interests, but the limits and social pressures would move them other directions.
So...a dilithium reactor-powered GTO...?
Okay, maybe not a GTO, but still. We should have a show dedicated to gear heads. Call it Star Trek: Monster Hangar. "Today, on the show, we're gonna be ripping apart this old shuttlecraft from twenty two eighty! Wow! And we're gonna put these Holly dilithium superchargers in, courtesy of our friends over at Shuttle Zone Parts to see if we can get it up to Warp four!"
Similar threads
