Gold Pressed Latinum (a look at inconvenience)

[Darth Tedious]

Let's not forget Encounter at Farpoint where Beverly bought some fabric and asked to put it on her account (something like that). This implies that she was getting paid in some way.

IIRC, the UFP and Starfleet don't use wages internally, but pay staff so they may trade/purchase from other cultures/societies. It makes perfect sense, there's no reason the question of money in this case needs be an either/or.

[Baffalo]

I've been reading over everyone's comments and remembering back to the shows, so I'll use quotes to try and piece a few things together.

Tom Paris (VOY: Dark Frontier) "When the New World Economy took shape in the late 22nd century and money went the way of the dinosaur, Fort Knox was turned into a museum."

At some point in the 22nd Century, money no longer became the same thing we think of it as. That doesn't mean it no longer exists, but it doesn't serve the same function as we use it. We use money as an equivalent of exchange, meaning we work to earn money which we trade for goods and services. In the 22nd century, replicators didn't exist, so goods still had a tangible value, but access to space meant certain elements (such as nickel and iron) were much more common, so the value of materials went down.

However, that's not to say that money in some form doesn't exist. Kirk says to Picard in Generations, "This is my house, I sold it years ago." If there's no money, how could Kirk sell the house? Then there's Picard's line in First Contact, "The economics of the future is somewhat different. You see, money doesn't exist in the 24th century... The acquisition of wealth is no longer the driving force in our lives. We work to better ourselves and the rest of Humanity." These two statements might seem contradictory, but when you add Sisko's comment that he used up a month's worth of transporter credits to beam home every night, it seems to suggest that perhaps the economy is different in that humans trade their efforts for credits equivalent to their worth and status as individuals.

Suppose you took two people, one a Starfleet captain and another a worker with no particular skills. As a contributing member of society in helping protect the people of Earth, the Starfleet captain might be given additional housing credits towards a home he may want, as well as transporter credits and additional credits for various things such as gourmet food and luxury livings. As a normal worker, the other may be given basic housing credits and basic food credits good at various locations. You wouldn't treat the two equally because then there's no incentive for the Starfleet Captain to put his life on the line when he's no different than a normal everyday man.

Now, that wouldn't seem fair if the worker was never given a chance, but the education system is different as well. School is probably free to attend as long as you do well enough to justify your staying there. The education you earn then goes towards your future, whatever that may be, and then that goes towards your contributions to society. And of course, there's also justifying expenses. If it costs you credits to eat at a restaurant, then a man like Ben Sisko's father might collect these credits and spend them for things such as oysters and other prime ingredients. The people trade him the credits for their dining experience if they feel he's worth it, then those credits go towards keeping the restaurant going. There's no real material wealth, just credits going towards enhancing the experience of the restaurant itself, improving it with time.

[Crazedwraith]

Suppose you took two people, one a Starfleet captain and another a worker with no particular skills. As a contributing member of society in helping protect the people of Earth, the Starfleet captain might be given additional housing credits towards a home he may want, as well as transporter credits and additional credits for various things such as gourmet food and luxury livings. As a normal worker, the other may be given basic housing credits and basic food credits good at various locations. You wouldn't treat the two equally because then there's no incentive for the Starfleet Captain to put his life on the line when he's no different than a normal everyday man.

This is clearly not how it's supposed to work. Remember Picard's spiel in 'The Neutral Zone'? Starfleeters don't do it to get better credits than the average joe, they do it becuase of a genuine desire to explore for exploration's sake. Y'know Star Trek's driving focus as a show?

[Enigma]

That is just Picard. Just because he said it, doesn't mean it actually reflects on Starfleet or the Federation as a whole. I doubt a civilian freighter captain shares the same goal as a Starfleet captain.

They may not have hard currency but they might just a digital version or something like a line of credit which each officer is afforded one and the value of the credit is based on their rank. They can use their LoC to pruchase things and pay it back by their continued service.

Pure speculation but still... I have a very hard time that everyone would do their job for the sake of doing it.

[Nephtys]

In DS9 Cassidy Yates seemed to run a business in the sense that we'd see it today. She had a private merchantman, and commented during one episode that if she was delayed at DS9, she'd have to abort a delivery and then suffer fees in the contract. Admittedly she was an international trader, but the fact that she seemed to own the ship or at least had some sort of stake in the business suggests a great deal. Of course she said she enjoyed being a freighter captain and travelling, but talking about their margins and such does highly suggest a not entirely alien sort of economy.

[Cesario]

A few theories.

1) Picard is the only one not getting paid. There was some sort of paperwork fuckup at Starfleet command, and Picard's pay checks aren't being deposited. His quarters, free-use replicators, and frequently recieved gifts from friends and admirers keep him from looking like he's in abject poverty, and he's never really questioned it. He doesn't realize that everyone else is getting paid.

2) Money exists, but not as we understand it in modern times. They basically have a very strong welfare state. Everyone's basic needs are met, so there is literally zero possibility of starving to death on the streets, or not being able to afford basic medical care. People work to be able to afford luxuries, not necessities. Automation means the labor pool needed for the necessities at least is small enough that they really can feed everyone on just the labor of the .001% of people who's life's ambition really was to be a farmer.

3) Extensive social engineering and subtle direction during the education process, aided by advanced computers has resulted in a perfect mix of people going into any given career. The result is that all the labor that is needed gets done, while the people doing the jobs love their work so much they don't need to be paid to do it. With all the work getting done, there are enough resources and goods being produced that everyone can basically take whatever they want.

4) The explanations for their economics are highly inaccurate not because they're being deliberately deceptive, but because they're being incredibly patronizing. They view the universe through a lens of cultural superiority, so when they go to explain their economic system, they start from the assumption that these people are the most ignorant primitives to ever walk upright. Whether the primitives are Ferengi businessmen or 21st century human defrostees. They don't even try to explain their economic system because they believe the other guy is too stupid to understand some fairly basic nuance, like the difference between a value versus debt based exchange medium, so instead they just go with "we don't have money".

[Connor MacLeod]

I suspect what alot of the "we don't have money" things actually means is - the Federation basically did away with capitalism in almost all its forms. That means probably any sort of physical currency (noone seems to carry a wallet on hand.), corporations, the accumulation of wealth and all its implications and so on.

I do think they run an economy of sorts. They do have small business owner types (Picard's brother's vineyard, Sisko's fathers restraunt, etc.) but there doesn't seem to be anything that is ever remotely resembling modern economics - which often is the benchmark of comparison I've noticed. The closest I could maybe think of are mining and large scale construction (like shipbuilding) but even they don't neccesarily have to be corporations or businesses in the sense we know.

As far as what the economy is based off of, I suspect it's probably purely electronic... based probably on a combination of energy and resources. Or rather another way, the "replicator rations" and similar measures we saw in Voyager may represent the actual Federation economy. The only difference being that energy and resources (plus efficient recycling) in Federation society are fairly plentiful, which means they don't have to be strictly rationed all that often (except maybe during wars, or emergencies.)

actual, physical money seem to be a purely federation concept. It's possible it is a purely starfleet or even just purely human concept. I don't remember 100% but it seems to be that again context wise we usually see humans talking about this to other humans (or at least in context to humans.) Or it may just be purely internal to starfleet. Member planets may be allowed to handle economics/finances their own way (EG they can have money) and of course we know of cultures outside the federation that handle economics in their own way (phyiscal currency, etc.) And we do see Starfleet people "buying" stuff (at least from people who are civilians or extenral to the FEderation.) - I'd guess there might be some sort of economic exchange rate and trade going on which covers all this (exchanging for a nother culture's currency or to buy something in the equivalent of that currency could be worth a certain amount of "replicator ration" equivalent, or something.)

Sub-points to this: There quite likely is a fair bit of social engineering on some level to this, at least given the whole "gave up acquisition of wealth and focus on self enhancement" statements tend to infer that. The whys/hows of this I dont know, but it seems obvious it exists somehow and to some extent.

I suspect that "jobs" and "wages" do exist, to a certain extent. Basic necessities are covered to certain levels (people can be clothed, fed, educated, etc.) and they can find entertainment (and probably pay for it at least to some level.) Everyone in the Federation seems to have a job of some kind - I don't ever recall there being someone who didn't do something (even if it was just housewife. Who knows that might actually be considered a career, since producing children would be a neccesity for society, I'd think.)

As a sort of justification of this, consider Kes and Neelix and seven of nine. all became members of the crew at some point, and all served some sort of job or function. Neelix and KEs, I think, may have been the most interesting, because you would thinkt hat even with replicator rations, they actually wouldn't be in danger of running out of food or energy so long as they have fusion reactors (somehow I can't think that replicators run purely on antimatter. Maybe whatever base material stocks the replicators used had finite limits and had to be rationed, but even then I doubt it would ever totally run out, at least where food, clothing and certain things are concerned. Hell I'm even sure Voyager showed us the recycling functions associated with all that.) But what they do offer is something tangible but also useful from a psychologicla perspective - plants and grown vegetables, as well as home cooked meals and hand-prepared food (a "luxury" of sorts.)

I do not think that "want" (as in desire) has been eliminated either. Rather it is "greed" and excessive want that has been curbed (Again possibly a consequence of whatever social engineering happens.) I mean people "want" things - Janeway wants coffee. People sometimes want real food or alcohol. Or maybe they want to buy a nice outfit, but we're not talking capitalistic "want" or greed. People aren't playing the stock market or trying to screw each other over just to make more wealth.

Following on the last bit, there seems to be sort of two "tiers" when it comes to material goods. There's replicated/synthetic stuff, and then there is what we might call "real" stuff. Like synthehol vs real alcohol. Synthehol might be considered cheaper and more readily available, but there is also a demand for alcohol for whatever reason (psychological or whatever) - but given their attitudes I'd imagine they either eliminated alcohol addiction or they've steered their culture away from excessive indulgement in alcohol. Probably the same for "junk" foods or sweets- it exists and can be obtained, but it is probably something they don't indulge in heavily as a rule. This could also apply to clothing, artwork, "grown" or raised foods, etc. These might be considered the closest to luxury items in the future, because of their origins.

I think I covered much of the large points, but I'm sure I also missed out on specific details.