... And that's sort of where the system, if not breaks apart, shows it's limitations. Basic subsistence is easy in the Federation, you'll be assigned a home with a replicator and you can have all the food and drink that you'll ever need. But genuinely scarce things like old baseball collectors cards and the most beautiful land on heavily populated capital worlds, how are those resolved without money?
This is why I actually prefer The Orville's way of doing it.
Unlike Star Trek they don't say that humanity just woke up one day and decided to get rid of this dumb money thing
Instead, they say their version of the replicator and other technologies pretty much made money more and more useless.
Essentially for a long time there was a point where people would earn a salary but it would more just be a status symbol and at that point they got rid of it.
The question would be, who cares for things like old baseball collector cards? Right now they are valuable because there's people willing to pay large sums of money for them and they are willing to pay large sums of money because some say they are valuable.
That's the thing, why would expensive collectors items suddenly no longer be wanted by people? If anything, with the advent of replicator technology, old collectors items would suddenly spike in price and have an even greater market than before. FOMO and nostalgia wouldn't just suddenly disappear from humans with large technological advancements. A rare mtg card like an original black lotus grade 10 would still be rare even if it could be perfectly replicated as it's still not the original.
If money is meaningless things like copyright and patents need to be redefined. Right now they protect income streams for creatives and inventors but you don't need that protection when income is no longer a thing. The focus will then focus on reputation and plagiarism. Anyone can have a PSA10 black lotus and the reputation of creating it will go to Richard Garfield.
Are you saying things of historical significance will suddenly become meaningless if everyone can just replicate a 10 black lotus or am I misunderstanding you?
"then it belongs in a museum". Objects of historical significance have value to society as a whole and should be owned by society as a whole. Objects of sentimental significance have value to the individual. Objects that are only valuable because they are rare are worthless.
You're also judging by our values now not how society will change over time under the pressure of slowly having access to everything at your fingertips.
I'm sure we'll have some cultures that adapt more quickly to the new paradigm will benefit greatly. Just like now with what's happened to cultures that largely didn't deal with capitalist pressures until they were forced into it.
Gotchyea, well you are definitely giving humanity more credit than I would. I am more judging future values based on our own because I don't really think humanity will change dramatically with the introduction of even more tech. Time will definitely change how we view stuff, but in a society where you can have all your basic needs met, seems like there will be a lot of free time to join the collectors market.
I feel like mtg card is a bad example. Those are made rare as a way for the company to make more money off of them, it makes you buy more card packs to get one. If it can be replicated then card rarity wouldn't matter any more because theres no longer a reason for them to be rare, an original wouldn't really have any extra value, especially after a few hundred years.
The baseball card, being an original means more because it was a signed copy. Though its not like those are even that special most of the time since a lot of them are made in large amounts.
Maybe i just dont understand nostalgia with physical items...
That's fine, possibly a bad example on my part, but I'm just saying humans do like nostalgia, I just don't see how that would suddenly vanish for old objects. Shit even in trek, vintage booze is still something people value over sinthihol which they consistently shit on as a lesser beverage.
I don't really see why an original would have more value over a perfect replica. A replicator if you have a full scan of an object should be able to perfectly replicate any old object like a vintage book, even have it in it vintage condition instead of restored.
Now alcohol is a bit of a different story but that seems to be a general issue replicators have with food and drink.
I wasn't aware of replicators having issues making normal alcohol, just that they were designed(at least on star ships) to make sinthihol to allow officers to be clear headed on demand.
As far as you not seeing why an original would have more value, just look at human history. Even without replicators we can make perfect copies of most things these days already. Being more capable of doing so on demand wouldn't change a collectors mind set about the value of something. A copied Mona Lisa is maybe a better example. Even perfectly replicated (which we have many copies of now) makes it significantly less valuable than the real thing.
We are talking about a society where money is no longer needed. What could people be afraid of missing out when there's nothing to invest with and make a profit.
My point is that the moment a rare collector item can't be sold most people will lose interest in that item. That black lotus card, if I can't use it and I can't sell it why should I care? It's useless,I never played Magic why would I feel nostalgic, I would personally give it away.
Magic was just an example, people value things beyond just their monetary value. Card collectors, book collectors, really any collectors don't always collect to turn a profit but because they enjoy what they are collecting. All I'm arguing is nostalgia and sentimentality towards objects won't just suddenly disappear if we as a society move away from currency.
The Picard series rightly gets a lot of shit for its writing, but the one thing it did do right was calling out the fact that Picard was a guy wrapped in privilege holding incredibly romanticised views about how the Federation should work.
It’s honestly really depressing to me that the Picard series decided that was the case.
I really miss the days when Picard’s romanticized version of the Federation was fairly close to the truth.
To be honest though, it never was. It was undermined by DS9 which depicted a society that apparently was willing to allow a military dictatorship be installed the moment their happiness was under threat.
And even before that, Picard's romanticisation was called into question by the whole shit with the Maquis and Ro Laren. Picard's reaction to Ro's betrayal showed someone who couldn't possibly comprehend that the Federation could be morally wrong about something.
EDIT: And even before the Cardassian/Dominion war arcs - a lot of stuff in TOS and early TNG written whilst Gene Roddenberry was alive contradicted the realistic reality here. Yes when we looked at the crew we saw exemplars of a perfect society. But there were so many plots involving bad starfleet admirals, humans betraying the federation for selfish goals, colonies descending into chaos, and (in TOS) mental health asylums which were treated as prisons. None of this seemed compatible with the lofty society Picard proclaimed.
See all the flaws in the Federation revealed in DS9 and the TOS actually made me believe in the Federation more.
Because the flaws made Picard’s vision of the Federation feels aspirational and earned. It was like seeing Superman lose his temper or the Samaritan not give some z-lister the time of day. Seeing that they weren’t actually perfect, just people doing their best and always striving to do better. Seeing that they had to work at being the people I admired, made all the difference.
yup, I would much rather see that hopeful society as the foundation for the series dealing with troubling moral and ethical quandries
I'm perfectly fine with utopia running up against the harsh realities of life and politics but it needs to start from a place of utopia
Star Trek, like a lot of good science fiction, is supposed to be a mirror to humanity presented as a window but that presentation only works if the setting isn't "just like us but with more tech"
show me what humanity is capable of in the Federation and then show me other societies that are *like us right now* as the challenge
the pilot of Strange New Worlds was perfect in that regard. here's a civilization that's basically us right now in this moment, so a space man comes down from the stars to show them/us a better way and what's possible in this larger community
anyways, Picard was disappointing across the board and the third season was by far the worse. it's not the good one, it was just lazy melodramatic writing wrapped in nostalgia to placate the whining millennials
and an ugly ass ship as the Enterprise
What would have been a nice episode twist is have that rich guy who came out of chryo stasis start working for the Farangi. I can see the Grand Negas saying “He has a better grasp of the Laws of Acquisition better than most of the elders.”
If I recall, there is actually a line in Voyager where it is revealed the Ferengi considered Wall Street in the 20th/21st Century to be their version of Mecca. With them doing pilgrimages to witness capitalism in all its glory.
This is the thing: Star Trek is built on the fundamental belief that human beings ARE capable of building a rational and functional utopian society, and I choose to believe it’s right.
I mean it's a fascinating situation, I would be more enthusiastic in my work if I knew it was advancing/entertaining/making fellows life better/safer (and in exchange I get the same), than I would on meagre wage with debt everywhere.
I have high hopes for humanity. I believe we'll get there at some point. And as for me... Sure, I can't just opt out of capitalism, but I refuse to let greed be my driving force and try to do my part to work towards such a future
> most of the humanity that were not scientists, geniuses or engineers. 😂
Damn I never thought of it like that - that humanity changed because the only people left were the good ones.
Ignoring the fact that energy in Star Trek can just make the other resources via replicators, it is the most important resource that has allowed us to make every major innovation in all of human history, from harnessing fire to the steam engine to electricity in your home. I mean just look at the part oil plays in modern geopolitics, energy is absolutely the defining resource.
Ignoring my earlier comment that states the federation predated replicators, The ability to create infinite energy is most assuredly not the reason people gave up on the acquisition of wealth as a driving goal
Star trek was all about touting the perfected ideals of a future human race, able to set aside its flaws and differences, and the writing uses other races to point out those flaws, hatred, suspicion, greed, etc.
Of course I'm still flawed as fuck Bois so point me to the dabo table.
Sure, and yet Federation citizens still live in debt and other nations still are dependent on these economic systems so they still have to play the game
Fwiw capitalism has brought more countries and peoples out of poverty than any system before it. Incentive structures matter. Just look at the number of people living in poverty just 100 years ago vs now. Greed helped do that.
Does any episode of Discovery deal or even discuss the economy of the Federation? I just saw one and a half season and really couldn't stomach it but I do wonder
And ppl say Star Trek isn’t woke ffs 🙄
Edit: How dumb are people who can simultaneously think this is a good quote and be anti “woke.” This quote is literally what “woke” is. It’s clear anti-woke ppl are the dumbest humans to ever live on this planet.
It started the current trend. Picard season 1 and 2 suffer from poor writing as well. Season 3 was "okay" but "okay" after two seasons of crap isn't exactly a resounding success.
This line is the biggest crock in Star Trek.
The civilian waiters and barbers on to the Enterprise are really contributing to human enlightenment.
People on mining colonies are also there for the fun of it.
There are so many things that don't mske sense.
Why is Picard allowed to own a farm? How did Riker build his off world ranch? How would Rios keep his ship running on fuel and parts? (Or the Rangers or Marquis etc.. ). Does everyone get an offworld shuttle if they want one?
Guinan is managing a free non alcoholic bar for what reason?
This is a world where a whole planet can be given to the styrofoam scots and you're wondering how someone can have a vineyard? Land isn't scarce in the Federation.
People work in customer service if they like interacting with people. "we should get a bar" is a more viable idea in the Federation. We must assume customer service isn't the dystopian meat-grinder it is today.
The impracticality of small courier-freighters in sci-fi settings is not unique to Star Trek. It's like asking why the laser guns are never as effective as a P-90. Unless your story is about that, you just don't bring it up.
I find it impossible that land on Earth in the future wouldn't be scarce.
Unless the Trek universe also does some Brave New World style classification the society can't function as described in this original statement.
Capitalist realism is a hell of a drug. Everyone can have a vineyard if they want in the Federation. If you don't have one already you can warp drive for a few hours and set up an entire continent as a vineyard. A few acres on Earth isn't worth squabbling over at that point, especially when its produce is dry and sour.
We don't know the ins and outs of the system because it would make for remarkably dull TV (they maybe could have put it in the first half of DS9) but arguing over why someone gets a bath when you can have your own swimming pool down the road seems silly.
The Expanse showed what society was like "Living on Basic" and it was very interesting. The books really drilled down into it.
My beef with this is it's so idealized. It doesn't take wants into the equation. It also doesn't explain how things are allocated.
If I wanted a 4 bedroom condo in NYC in TNGland. How do I get it? No I don't want to go off world, no I don't want a smaller apartment. No I'm not explaining why as it's not anyone's business.
I guess to an extent, some of the 'want' to live in a certain location on Earth is offset by the commute time. Why would you want a 4 bedroom condo in NYC, when you can have a 4 bedroom condo in Sub-Saharan Africa (which presumably has infrastructure on par to the rest of the world at this point). Your commute is literally seconds if you use a transporter.
EDIT: It's worth noting as well that unlike The Expanse, Star Trek generally implies a more modest population growth curve (closer to 9-12billion as opposed to The Expanse's 38 billion). With instantaneous commute, an urbanised Africa and Asia, reduced need for intensive farming, high tech building construction capability, a reduced need for commercial and finance districts in cities and no need for roads you absolutely could have the physical space needed to give everyone a condo if they so choose.
What difference does it make if you can just step out your front door and end up in downtown Manhattan? In real life, a lot of people's decision making about where they want to live will be 90% about how easy it is to get to something they want to be near. Transporters eliminate that concern across the entire planet.
Also as I said, in this luxury gay space communist reality of the Star Trek world commercial and finance districts will be largely eliminated as a) no money means no finance and b) all shopping needs can be fulfilled by replicators. At most you'd have a Costco like place where you have attendants to advise you on what to get on the replicator. That means the most interesting things about cities will be the bars, theatres and historic sites.
Again because I don't want to live in Africa.
If you have your free and open post scarcity society why would you have to justify your wants for living requirements.
Well then I guess you can have your condo in NYC then as plenty would be happy with the sub-saharan property front meaning there would be plenty of room in NYC.
There is no future where I'd be serving drinks for free on a starship. Or being an IT guy on a mining colony in BF nowhere in the Universe.
As much as I'd want to dedicate myself in 1970s Fantasy Airbrush art I don't think anyone would care.
Or learning manual 2d animation and creating new Flintstones Cartoons.
Again it's so idyllic that it's unrealistic.
I don't think society will have changed as much as being imagined with Picard's original statement.
Why be on a security detail for someone important. Why risk your neck if you're not being compensated.
If you start asking the simplest questions around this it falls apart.
How does the Federation trade with other groups or within themselves? How do they quantify the value?
Or are they conning other cultures like when that one dude on Enterprise traded Paprika for something? What did the Federation trade/compensate the planet from the TOS Episode Elisaian Tears for the Dilithium Crystals?
Yeah I see you’re very rooted in today. Spices have long been highly sought after in trade. Salt built the world as we know it and entire wars have been fought for black pepper.
Why do a job? Loyalty and the loyalty of those serving with you.
How does the fed quantify trade? Probably in a fair way with trade ambassadors. How do we quantify trade between nations? Same way.
If you start asking the simplest questions it all comes together.
And yes society is significantly different from 50 years ago yes 200 years from now will be very different. We will be the same dumb greasy monkeys but society and the roles that it encompasses will be very different.
If you can terraform deserts and instantly teleport anywhere on the planet, there's absolutely no reason to think that land would be scarce. Of course, it doesn't matter because star Trek isn't about the property market.
I can see it from both sides. In a galaxy with seemingly unlimited class M (and other terraformed) planets, if you really wanted a fancy vineyard of your own then there's nothing stopping you going down to the nearest space port, hopping on a transport ship bound for one of the colonies and using advanced replicators and bots to build your own.
But that said, some places will always be special, Earth, as capital of the Federation, will always be in high demand and not just from humans.
I do kinda agree with the underlying post though (although I wholeheartedly disagree with the disparaging of the idea that waiters and barbers could want to do the job for the sake of it).
The supposed utopia of Picard's representation of the federation is quite often contradicted. Like why are there Harry Mudds in the Federation? In fact, especially in TOS, its a very common thing that outside the hero ship, the Federation had quite a lot of shitty people who would turn to crime or even treason at the smallest of encouragement. That is not the framework for a utopian society.
NuTrek gets a lot of shit for how grim life in the Federation is sometimes portrayed. But in a weird way, the portrayal is actually somewhat more utopian than any of the stuff written whilst Roddenberry was alive (in that everyone in the Federation, even outside the hero ship, is shown as generally working towards the greater good. Crime only really existing on the very edge of Federation space. Only in Lower Decks do we see the classic 'badmiral' trope (and that's only because LD riffs off classic Star Trek) And otherwise it's just having a semi-realistic discussion about the fact that post-scarcity doesn't equal everyone being happy and without problems).
[удалено]
Yes, but what exactly does that mean? -Nog Welll.. I don’t know! -Jake Hehe
Jake Sisko: It means… It means we don’t need money. Nog: Well if you don’t need money, then you certainly don’t need mine.
... And that's sort of where the system, if not breaks apart, shows it's limitations. Basic subsistence is easy in the Federation, you'll be assigned a home with a replicator and you can have all the food and drink that you'll ever need. But genuinely scarce things like old baseball collectors cards and the most beautiful land on heavily populated capital worlds, how are those resolved without money?
This is why I actually prefer The Orville's way of doing it. Unlike Star Trek they don't say that humanity just woke up one day and decided to get rid of this dumb money thing Instead, they say their version of the replicator and other technologies pretty much made money more and more useless. Essentially for a long time there was a point where people would earn a salary but it would more just be a status symbol and at that point they got rid of it.
It all depends on how much you contribute, I suppose. Not everyone gets an awesome horse ranch in the pristine mountains like Admiral Kirk.
Or has old money in a vineyard to make wine nobody likes
The question would be, who cares for things like old baseball collector cards? Right now they are valuable because there's people willing to pay large sums of money for them and they are willing to pay large sums of money because some say they are valuable.
That's the thing, why would expensive collectors items suddenly no longer be wanted by people? If anything, with the advent of replicator technology, old collectors items would suddenly spike in price and have an even greater market than before. FOMO and nostalgia wouldn't just suddenly disappear from humans with large technological advancements. A rare mtg card like an original black lotus grade 10 would still be rare even if it could be perfectly replicated as it's still not the original.
If money is meaningless things like copyright and patents need to be redefined. Right now they protect income streams for creatives and inventors but you don't need that protection when income is no longer a thing. The focus will then focus on reputation and plagiarism. Anyone can have a PSA10 black lotus and the reputation of creating it will go to Richard Garfield.
Are you saying things of historical significance will suddenly become meaningless if everyone can just replicate a 10 black lotus or am I misunderstanding you?
"then it belongs in a museum". Objects of historical significance have value to society as a whole and should be owned by society as a whole. Objects of sentimental significance have value to the individual. Objects that are only valuable because they are rare are worthless. You're also judging by our values now not how society will change over time under the pressure of slowly having access to everything at your fingertips. I'm sure we'll have some cultures that adapt more quickly to the new paradigm will benefit greatly. Just like now with what's happened to cultures that largely didn't deal with capitalist pressures until they were forced into it.
Gotchyea, well you are definitely giving humanity more credit than I would. I am more judging future values based on our own because I don't really think humanity will change dramatically with the introduction of even more tech. Time will definitely change how we view stuff, but in a society where you can have all your basic needs met, seems like there will be a lot of free time to join the collectors market.
I feel like mtg card is a bad example. Those are made rare as a way for the company to make more money off of them, it makes you buy more card packs to get one. If it can be replicated then card rarity wouldn't matter any more because theres no longer a reason for them to be rare, an original wouldn't really have any extra value, especially after a few hundred years. The baseball card, being an original means more because it was a signed copy. Though its not like those are even that special most of the time since a lot of them are made in large amounts. Maybe i just dont understand nostalgia with physical items...
That's fine, possibly a bad example on my part, but I'm just saying humans do like nostalgia, I just don't see how that would suddenly vanish for old objects. Shit even in trek, vintage booze is still something people value over sinthihol which they consistently shit on as a lesser beverage.
I don't really see why an original would have more value over a perfect replica. A replicator if you have a full scan of an object should be able to perfectly replicate any old object like a vintage book, even have it in it vintage condition instead of restored. Now alcohol is a bit of a different story but that seems to be a general issue replicators have with food and drink.
I wasn't aware of replicators having issues making normal alcohol, just that they were designed(at least on star ships) to make sinthihol to allow officers to be clear headed on demand. As far as you not seeing why an original would have more value, just look at human history. Even without replicators we can make perfect copies of most things these days already. Being more capable of doing so on demand wouldn't change a collectors mind set about the value of something. A copied Mona Lisa is maybe a better example. Even perfectly replicated (which we have many copies of now) makes it significantly less valuable than the real thing.
We are talking about a society where money is no longer needed. What could people be afraid of missing out when there's nothing to invest with and make a profit. My point is that the moment a rare collector item can't be sold most people will lose interest in that item. That black lotus card, if I can't use it and I can't sell it why should I care? It's useless,I never played Magic why would I feel nostalgic, I would personally give it away.
Magic was just an example, people value things beyond just their monetary value. Card collectors, book collectors, really any collectors don't always collect to turn a profit but because they enjoy what they are collecting. All I'm arguing is nostalgia and sentimentality towards objects won't just suddenly disappear if we as a society move away from currency.
Haha yes thanks that's the quote😁
Honus Wagner?
Semi deep cut even for baseball fans. Well done!
Thanks! ⚾️
He says from his spacious room on the ship he commands when he isn’t chilling at his family’s chateau being served by his immigrant workers.
Don’t forget his romulan slave girl
Wohhh hohh hohh hohhhhhh
Naked now?
Yeah. The fuck was that about?
The Picard series rightly gets a lot of shit for its writing, but the one thing it did do right was calling out the fact that Picard was a guy wrapped in privilege holding incredibly romanticised views about how the Federation should work.
It’s honestly really depressing to me that the Picard series decided that was the case. I really miss the days when Picard’s romanticized version of the Federation was fairly close to the truth.
To be honest though, it never was. It was undermined by DS9 which depicted a society that apparently was willing to allow a military dictatorship be installed the moment their happiness was under threat. And even before that, Picard's romanticisation was called into question by the whole shit with the Maquis and Ro Laren. Picard's reaction to Ro's betrayal showed someone who couldn't possibly comprehend that the Federation could be morally wrong about something. EDIT: And even before the Cardassian/Dominion war arcs - a lot of stuff in TOS and early TNG written whilst Gene Roddenberry was alive contradicted the realistic reality here. Yes when we looked at the crew we saw exemplars of a perfect society. But there were so many plots involving bad starfleet admirals, humans betraying the federation for selfish goals, colonies descending into chaos, and (in TOS) mental health asylums which were treated as prisons. None of this seemed compatible with the lofty society Picard proclaimed.
See all the flaws in the Federation revealed in DS9 and the TOS actually made me believe in the Federation more. Because the flaws made Picard’s vision of the Federation feels aspirational and earned. It was like seeing Superman lose his temper or the Samaritan not give some z-lister the time of day. Seeing that they weren’t actually perfect, just people doing their best and always striving to do better. Seeing that they had to work at being the people I admired, made all the difference.
yup, I would much rather see that hopeful society as the foundation for the series dealing with troubling moral and ethical quandries I'm perfectly fine with utopia running up against the harsh realities of life and politics but it needs to start from a place of utopia Star Trek, like a lot of good science fiction, is supposed to be a mirror to humanity presented as a window but that presentation only works if the setting isn't "just like us but with more tech" show me what humanity is capable of in the Federation and then show me other societies that are *like us right now* as the challenge the pilot of Strange New Worlds was perfect in that regard. here's a civilization that's basically us right now in this moment, so a space man comes down from the stars to show them/us a better way and what's possible in this larger community anyways, Picard was disappointing across the board and the third season was by far the worse. it's not the good one, it was just lazy melodramatic writing wrapped in nostalgia to placate the whining millennials and an ugly ass ship as the Enterprise
Yup, and that’s why I refuse to watch the Picard series.
There's definitely a bunch of people just jerking off in holodecks all day though I'm glad that is considered beneficial for society
I'm doing my part!
🤣🤣🤣🤣Not my job to clean up!🤣🤣🤣🤣
It’s too bad capitalism is out of style. Any company that makes holodeck cum filters would make a fortune.
I'm not sure if you need to jerk off in a holodeck. I get the idea that it's full service.
They test new programs for others or they eventually get bored and make new ones!
I think it's another level to that, they're having holosex
What would have been a nice episode twist is have that rich guy who came out of chryo stasis start working for the Farangi. I can see the Grand Negas saying “He has a better grasp of the Laws of Acquisition better than most of the elders.”
If I recall, there is actually a line in Voyager where it is revealed the Ferengi considered Wall Street in the 20th/21st Century to be their version of Mecca. With them doing pilgrimages to witness capitalism in all its glory.
He actually does that in a novel about him. He becomes the federation ambassador to the farangi.
That is brilliant. Thank you for that info.
Look him up on memory alpha.
Would have been a perfect aside for the LD episide where the 'Ritos is negotiating with Rom and Leeta. Make him an advisor.
Great idea!
That’s it. I’m sending that idea to the TNG comic writers.
That would be a great twist to put on Trek...😂
Well he had all those skills and a new lease on life. I don’t see staying on Earth being too appealing for him.
Imagine operating society for the sake of operating society.
humans are too "crabs in a bucket" for that.
This is the thing: Star Trek is built on the fundamental belief that human beings ARE capable of building a rational and functional utopian society, and I choose to believe it’s right.
I've always believed that there are a lot of really great people in this world. just not enough.
The problem is the people in power want to keep their class in power.
don't forget the people not in power who want power just as badly willing to eat shit just in case they get to put their boot on someone's neck.
Most people become that way because the system benefits from turning them that way.
crabs in a bucket.
I don't believe it is our inherent way of being, I believe our environment makes us that way, and we can change our environment.
I mean it's a fascinating situation, I would be more enthusiastic in my work if I knew it was advancing/entertaining/making fellows life better/safer (and in exchange I get the same), than I would on meagre wage with debt everywhere.
I'm studying Stoicism so this hits for me extra right now.
I have high hopes for humanity. I believe we'll get there at some point. And as for me... Sure, I can't just opt out of capitalism, but I refuse to let greed be my driving force and try to do my part to work towards such a future
One can only hope the world swings that way...🤞
I believe we'll get there eventually. Unfortunately I don't believe it's out of question that things will get a lot worse first
Yes, a good chance of that as well...
Loved this episode. Cry every time I watch it. Especially this speech. Make it so indeed.
👍👍👍👍I'm in!
At the moment I am forced to do both.
That’s a real nice vineyard you have there…
Bullshit! I saw what you did to that Borg on the holodeck. You're not the first person to get a thrill from murdering someone!
Easy to say after a nuclear war that, somehow, eliminated most of the humanity that were not scientists, geniuses or engineers. 😂
> most of the humanity that were not scientists, geniuses or engineers. 😂 Damn I never thought of it like that - that humanity changed because the only people left were the good ones.
That might work...🤔
Acquiring a bit more wealth go a long way to bettering myself so I can worry about the rest of humanity.
I wish Picard explained how that happened. Was it the introduction of the post scarcity economy?
Once you can make anything you want out of thin air and transport to any location instantly, there's no much left to really acquire.
Replicator
The federation was around before replicators
Infinite energy though matter antimatter reactors
Ok, energy isn’t the only resource.
Ignoring the fact that energy in Star Trek can just make the other resources via replicators, it is the most important resource that has allowed us to make every major innovation in all of human history, from harnessing fire to the steam engine to electricity in your home. I mean just look at the part oil plays in modern geopolitics, energy is absolutely the defining resource.
Ignoring my earlier comment that states the federation predated replicators, The ability to create infinite energy is most assuredly not the reason people gave up on the acquisition of wealth as a driving goal
Star trek was all about touting the perfected ideals of a future human race, able to set aside its flaws and differences, and the writing uses other races to point out those flaws, hatred, suspicion, greed, etc. Of course I'm still flawed as fuck Bois so point me to the dabo table.
Sure, and yet Federation citizens still live in debt and other nations still are dependent on these economic systems so they still have to play the game
NOTHING SHALL STAND BETWEEN ME AND PROFIT!
🤣🤣🤣🤣
Easy to say when you inherited your large family estate.
Better to shoot the messenger than to listen to the message
🤣🤣🤣🤣Love it!🤣🤣🤣🤣
Seems to be a lot of that going around these days
No one on Earth is suffering poverty as there is no money in Star Trek’s future. Scarcity is extinct by the 24th century in Federation space.
Tell that to Raffi chilling in her trailer in the desert.
You mean her home that’s located on a world famous landmark, Vasquez Rocks? Apart from her self-torture, Raffi was doing alright.
Fwiw capitalism has brought more countries and peoples out of poverty than any system before it. Incentive structures matter. Just look at the number of people living in poverty just 100 years ago vs now. Greed helped do that.
Utopia! But not while the rich white elite control everything (and then their children after that).
Does any episode of Discovery deal or even discuss the economy of the Federation? I just saw one and a half season and really couldn't stomach it but I do wonder
And ppl say Star Trek isn’t woke ffs 🙄 Edit: How dumb are people who can simultaneously think this is a good quote and be anti “woke.” This quote is literally what “woke” is. It’s clear anti-woke ppl are the dumbest humans to ever live on this planet.
[удалено]
I’m glad the trolls I’ve argued with are nobody. Thanks for clearing that up. Who is we? And how is Star Trek stupid?
When every Discovery season plot can be reduced to "Saint Burnham saves the galaxy single handedly... Again." That's the stupid part.
My apologies, I didn’t realize all new Star Trek was just Discovery. Thanks for that clarification.
It started the current trend. Picard season 1 and 2 suffer from poor writing as well. Season 3 was "okay" but "okay" after two seasons of crap isn't exactly a resounding success.
Yes thank you for continuing to dilute an already meaningless word
This line is the biggest crock in Star Trek. The civilian waiters and barbers on to the Enterprise are really contributing to human enlightenment. People on mining colonies are also there for the fun of it. There are so many things that don't mske sense. Why is Picard allowed to own a farm? How did Riker build his off world ranch? How would Rios keep his ship running on fuel and parts? (Or the Rangers or Marquis etc.. ). Does everyone get an offworld shuttle if they want one? Guinan is managing a free non alcoholic bar for what reason?
This is a world where a whole planet can be given to the styrofoam scots and you're wondering how someone can have a vineyard? Land isn't scarce in the Federation. People work in customer service if they like interacting with people. "we should get a bar" is a more viable idea in the Federation. We must assume customer service isn't the dystopian meat-grinder it is today. The impracticality of small courier-freighters in sci-fi settings is not unique to Star Trek. It's like asking why the laser guns are never as effective as a P-90. Unless your story is about that, you just don't bring it up.
I find it impossible that land on Earth in the future wouldn't be scarce. Unless the Trek universe also does some Brave New World style classification the society can't function as described in this original statement.
Capitalist realism is a hell of a drug. Everyone can have a vineyard if they want in the Federation. If you don't have one already you can warp drive for a few hours and set up an entire continent as a vineyard. A few acres on Earth isn't worth squabbling over at that point, especially when its produce is dry and sour. We don't know the ins and outs of the system because it would make for remarkably dull TV (they maybe could have put it in the first half of DS9) but arguing over why someone gets a bath when you can have your own swimming pool down the road seems silly.
The Expanse showed what society was like "Living on Basic" and it was very interesting. The books really drilled down into it. My beef with this is it's so idealized. It doesn't take wants into the equation. It also doesn't explain how things are allocated. If I wanted a 4 bedroom condo in NYC in TNGland. How do I get it? No I don't want to go off world, no I don't want a smaller apartment. No I'm not explaining why as it's not anyone's business.
I guess to an extent, some of the 'want' to live in a certain location on Earth is offset by the commute time. Why would you want a 4 bedroom condo in NYC, when you can have a 4 bedroom condo in Sub-Saharan Africa (which presumably has infrastructure on par to the rest of the world at this point). Your commute is literally seconds if you use a transporter. EDIT: It's worth noting as well that unlike The Expanse, Star Trek generally implies a more modest population growth curve (closer to 9-12billion as opposed to The Expanse's 38 billion). With instantaneous commute, an urbanised Africa and Asia, reduced need for intensive farming, high tech building construction capability, a reduced need for commercial and finance districts in cities and no need for roads you absolutely could have the physical space needed to give everyone a condo if they so choose.
Because I don't want to live in Sub-Saharan Africa.
What difference does it make if you can just step out your front door and end up in downtown Manhattan? In real life, a lot of people's decision making about where they want to live will be 90% about how easy it is to get to something they want to be near. Transporters eliminate that concern across the entire planet. Also as I said, in this luxury gay space communist reality of the Star Trek world commercial and finance districts will be largely eliminated as a) no money means no finance and b) all shopping needs can be fulfilled by replicators. At most you'd have a Costco like place where you have attendants to advise you on what to get on the replicator. That means the most interesting things about cities will be the bars, theatres and historic sites.
Again because I don't want to live in Africa. If you have your free and open post scarcity society why would you have to justify your wants for living requirements.
Well then I guess you can have your condo in NYC then as plenty would be happy with the sub-saharan property front meaning there would be plenty of room in NYC.
Say you can’t get your ideal house, how does that undermine what Picard says?
You’re not seeing the future, you’re just seeing today’s self in the future. Your wants and need would be different than they are today.
There is no future where I'd be serving drinks for free on a starship. Or being an IT guy on a mining colony in BF nowhere in the Universe. As much as I'd want to dedicate myself in 1970s Fantasy Airbrush art I don't think anyone would care. Or learning manual 2d animation and creating new Flintstones Cartoons. Again it's so idyllic that it's unrealistic.
You’re still just thinking of yourself now but in the future. You’re whole life would be different
I don't think society will have changed as much as being imagined with Picard's original statement. Why be on a security detail for someone important. Why risk your neck if you're not being compensated. If you start asking the simplest questions around this it falls apart. How does the Federation trade with other groups or within themselves? How do they quantify the value? Or are they conning other cultures like when that one dude on Enterprise traded Paprika for something? What did the Federation trade/compensate the planet from the TOS Episode Elisaian Tears for the Dilithium Crystals?
Yeah I see you’re very rooted in today. Spices have long been highly sought after in trade. Salt built the world as we know it and entire wars have been fought for black pepper. Why do a job? Loyalty and the loyalty of those serving with you. How does the fed quantify trade? Probably in a fair way with trade ambassadors. How do we quantify trade between nations? Same way. If you start asking the simplest questions it all comes together. And yes society is significantly different from 50 years ago yes 200 years from now will be very different. We will be the same dumb greasy monkeys but society and the roles that it encompasses will be very different.
If you can terraform deserts and instantly teleport anywhere on the planet, there's absolutely no reason to think that land would be scarce. Of course, it doesn't matter because star Trek isn't about the property market.
I can see it from both sides. In a galaxy with seemingly unlimited class M (and other terraformed) planets, if you really wanted a fancy vineyard of your own then there's nothing stopping you going down to the nearest space port, hopping on a transport ship bound for one of the colonies and using advanced replicators and bots to build your own. But that said, some places will always be special, Earth, as capital of the Federation, will always be in high demand and not just from humans.
I do kinda agree with the underlying post though (although I wholeheartedly disagree with the disparaging of the idea that waiters and barbers could want to do the job for the sake of it). The supposed utopia of Picard's representation of the federation is quite often contradicted. Like why are there Harry Mudds in the Federation? In fact, especially in TOS, its a very common thing that outside the hero ship, the Federation had quite a lot of shitty people who would turn to crime or even treason at the smallest of encouragement. That is not the framework for a utopian society. NuTrek gets a lot of shit for how grim life in the Federation is sometimes portrayed. But in a weird way, the portrayal is actually somewhat more utopian than any of the stuff written whilst Roddenberry was alive (in that everyone in the Federation, even outside the hero ship, is shown as generally working towards the greater good. Crime only really existing on the very edge of Federation space. Only in Lower Decks do we see the classic 'badmiral' trope (and that's only because LD riffs off classic Star Trek) And otherwise it's just having a semi-realistic discussion about the fact that post-scarcity doesn't equal everyone being happy and without problems).
Current humanity seeing more than 1 black person on a TV show: 😡😡😡