I wish we lived in a post-scarcity Star Trek world where there’s no money except there is but not in the Federation except when it IS in the Federation and no one has any needs except when they do.

https://lemmy.world/post/18818521

I wish we lived in a post-scarcity Star Trek world where there’s no money except there is but not in the Federation except when it IS in the Federation and no one has any needs except when they do. - Lemmy.World

I’m glad there is no money in the Federation. Unless you count credits. Which are not money. Unless you use thousands of them to pay the Barzans. Or give them to Starfleet officers to buy things like tribbles and drinks at Quark’s.

While Federation Credits are money, I was under the impression they were only really used when you want to buy stuff outside of the Federation from sellers who don’t share the same socialist society that the Federation has. On a Federation world I believe they wouldn’t have much value.

DS9 was not a Federation station, and the Bajorans were clearly ok with a capitalist presence. Giving Starfleet personnel a stipend seems pretty unavoidable if they want their officers to be able to partake in practically anything on DS9.

But that gives them inherent value and would end up being traded internally. And then people would buy up stuff from outside the Federation and charge people in the Federation for those things in credits so that those people don’t have to travel off-planet to get those desirable things.

And as I said, they gave thousands of credits to the Barzans, so credits are obviously worth something when exchanged back to the Federation too.

On top of that, in TOS, there is a scene where someone wagers with credits (conceptually, but it basically sounded like a thing). To add to that, credits were being used on Space Station K-7, a Federation space station, or Uhura would not have been able to purchase a Tribble and Cyrano Jones wouldn’t have been there selling them.

I’m afraid we will have to accept that Federation economics makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

I think it’s more of a universal basic income sort of deal. Every federation citizen has all their needs met without being required to work. But that doesn’t mean there isn’t an economy or there’s no money.

But then we have this problem dialogue from First Contact:

Captain Jean-Luc Picard: The economics of the future are somewhat different. You see, money doesn’t exist in the 24th century.
Lily Sloane: No money? You mean you don’t get paid?
Captain Jean-Luc Picard: The acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force in our lives. We work to better ourselves and the rest of humanity. Actually, we’re rather like yourself and Dr. Cochrane.

You could argue that he was simplifying things, but I think Picard would have understood that Lily was smart enough to not make that necessary. He could have just as easily said just said the “economics of the future are somewhat different” part without the money part and the whole section of dialogue would have made much more sense. Saying that money doesn’t exist is pretty much just a lie.

So I still maintain that none of it makes sense because it’s all contradictory.

I’ve always been interested by his family winery and the family who’ve worked for his family for generations. Like who owns the land? What do the workers get for working? If real organic wine is a premium product that can’t be adequately replicated does that hint at a two-tier market?

I’m wondering why anyone would be a waiter in Sisko’s father’s restaurant in New Orleans.

“This is the Federation, son! It’s a cashless society! There’s a vast galaxy out there! You can be whatever you want to be when you grow up!”
“I wanna be a waiter at a New Orleans creole food restaurant.”
“…”
“And work for a big old jerk!”
“Okay, we’re going to get you DNA tested because I’m thinking I’m not your real father.”

In a civilisation that can beam food to your table a waiter is a performer, not service staff. And I do believe there are some entertainer who would find satisfaction in putting on a performance for an audience of two, whose attention is going to be somewhere else most of the time.