StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Is there any sources for the human population of the Federation? Im assuming humans exists in numbers in the billions. However, this brings up a question. For the population to grow, birth rates should be more than replacement level. Yet, high birthrates tend to fall in societies where people are poor and women have low status. I do not believe this represents humans in the era of ST TNG.

So how is the human race expanding? Is there cannon evidence to suggest it is?

Actually you can have population growth with a low birth rate. All you need is a low mortality rate. One that is less than the birth rate, but both are still quite low.

neoolong wrote:Actually you can have population growth with a low birth rate. All you need is a low mortality rate. One that is less than the birth rate, but both are still quite low.

True, I think lifespans are pretty long in TNG. I guess it would really help if we knew how many planets are colonized by humans and what the populatoin is.

I sorta think the world of Star Trek is like modern Europe or Japan where high standards of living and education has produced a negative growth rate.

People in the Federation can live up to 140-150 years (Dr/Admiral McCoy). Probably due to technology in healthcare has extended to very high level, so now they can live to be twice the age people can today.

So the show of age has probably been lift up by 20 to 30 years.
Isn't Picard to be around his 70?

Well, going to Graham Kennedys timeline of the Trek Universe, Picard turned seventy back in 2376.

Anyone else found it really weird that Bones would've lived that long and still be in SF?

probably just retired but still active in medicine

Aya wrote:Well, going to Graham Kennedys timeline of the Trek Universe, Picard turned seventy back in 2376.

Anyone else found it really weird that Bones would've lived that long and still be in SF?

Check out the ST:E

2305: Jean-Luc Picard is born
2327: Picard graduates from Starfleet Academy
2333: Picard assumes command of the Stargazer
2355: Stargazer is crippled and left adrift
2363: Picard assumes command of the Enterprise D
2371: Enterprise D destroyer
2372: Picard assumes command of the Enterprise E
2375: Star Trek Insurrection
2379: Nemesis (assumed)

He is 70 years olf as of Insurrection. He commanded his first ship at 28 and had the command for 22 years. He was 58 when he took command of the Enterprise D and 67 when he took command of the Enterprise E. If we assume there was a four year difference between Insurrection and Nemesis (that is the actual real world time), Picard is 74 years old by the time of Nemesis and has captained one Enterprise or another for 16 years and the Stargazer for another 22. He has captained ships for 46 years.

Then why the hell hasn't he made Admiral? How old was Kirk when he got promoted?

Darth Fanboy wrote:Then why the hell hasn't he made Admiral? How old was Kirk when he got promoted?

Picard is sitting on his rank. He doesn't want to be an Admiral.

Why would the Federation let him sit on his rank for decades? Don't you think they'd force him out after awhile? Maybe that's the reason the Federation sucks so much....no one in High Command positions is any good.

Alyeska wrote:

Darth Fanboy wrote:Then why the hell hasn't he made Admiral? How old was Kirk when he got promoted?

Picard is sitting on his rank. He doesn't want to be an Admiral.

In Generations, didn't Kirk advise Picard to not let Starfleet promote him, so he won't lose his ship?

Butterbean569 wrote:Why would the Federation let him sit on his rank for decades? Don't you think they'd force him out after awhile? Maybe that's the reason the Federation sucks so much....no one in High Command positions is any good.

You can not force someone to accept a promotion. You can only kick them out. They might not like Picard sitting on his rank, but they would rather he stay a Captain then kick him out of Starfleet. This isn't a matter of choice on Starfleets part, Picard won't budge.

neoolong wrote:

Alyeska wrote:

Darth Fanboy wrote:Then why the hell hasn't he made Admiral? How old was Kirk when he got promoted?

Picard is sitting on his rank. He doesn't want to be an Admiral.

In Generations, didn't Kirk advise Picard to not let Starfleet promote him, so he won't lose his ship?

Indeed, however Picard already had no intention of accepting a promotion. Back in his first year on the Enterprise Picard was offered an impressive promotion and he declined it because he wanted to stay where he was.

Alyeska wrote:Indeed, however Picard already had no intention of accepting a promotion. Back in his first year on the Enterprise Picard was offered an impressive promotion and he declined it because he wanted to stay where he was.

Yes, but you're talking about two parts of Picard's life separated by several years, even decades. Attitudes can change. However, there is no evidence that Picard ever changed his mind on his position. I'm just rambling now, aren't I?

Alyeska wrote:

Butterbean569 wrote:Why would the Federation let him sit on his rank for decades? Don't you think they'd force him out after awhile? Maybe that's the reason the Federation sucks so much....no one in High Command positions is any good.

You can not force someone to accept a promotion. You can only kick them out. They might not like Picard sitting on his rank, but they would rather he stay a Captain then kick him out of Starfleet. This isn't a matter of choice on Starfleets part, Picard won't budge.

I don't think Starfleet can kick someone out for not accepting promotion. I remember an episode of TNG where Picard was only a lieutenant junior grade. It was a Q episode where Picard was seeing how his life would be different if he didn't get stabbed by a Naurisican. Also remember that Deanna Troi tested for the rank of commander. There was some kind of big deal about taking the test. It would seem SF has some kind of limit on promotion to above lieutenant commander.

paladin wrote:I don't think Starfleet can kick someone out for not accepting promotion. I remember an episode of TNG where Picard was only a lieutenant junior grade. It was a Q episode where Picard was seeing how his life would be different if he didn't get stabbed by a Naurisican. Also remember that Deanna Troi tested for the rank of commander. There was some kind of big deal about taking the test. It would seem SF has some kind of limit on promotion to above lieutenant commander.

It's also like Riker declining to be a captain, I think on three seperate occasions.

I don't think Starfleet can kick someone out for not accepting promotion. I remember an episode of TNG where Picard was only a lieutenant junior grade. It was a Q episode where Picard was seeing how his life would be different if he didn't get stabbed by a Naurisican. Also remember that Deanna Troi tested for the rank of commander. There was some kind of big deal about taking the test. It would seem SF has some kind of limit on promotion to above lieutenant commander.

For this to happen Starfleet must not be using the "up or out" mentality we see in corporate American and the Military today. Maybe the system in Starfleet is more like the US Military before WW2. Where it is not uncommon to find a 30 yr old corporal and rank is acheived slowly.

How old is Patrick Stewart?

Also, does anyone else find it ironic that as Picard has gotten older, his has become more and more an action role?

Uraniun235 wrote:How old is Patrick Stewart?

Also, does anyone else find it ironic that as Picard has gotten older, his has become more and more an action role?

He's 62.

neoolong wrote:
He's 62.

Yeah, turning 63 this year.

At the risk of being chided for a comparison to Star Wars in the Pure Star Trek forum....

It would appear that Gilad Pellaeon's status as the most excruciatingly slow riser-through-the-ranks has been usurped. He, at least, was promoted from captain to vice-admiral in his fiftieth year of service. It would appear that Jean-Luc Picard has spent nearly as much time as a captain as Pellaeon had spent in naval service, in all grades, by the time he finally received his flag.

Publius

Vympel wrote:

neoolong wrote:
He's 62.

Yeah, turning 63 this year.

Yes, well not until July 13.

If human population doubles every 30 years then there'll be over 24 trillion by TNG era. If there is no catastraphic war or plague.
I think the show implies closer to 24 billion though.

Starfleet should just tell Picard that being an admiral means he gets to be captian of his own desk.

"Air-to-nerd missile!"

Galaxy wrote:If human population doubles every 30 years then there'll be over 24 trillion by TNG era. If there is no catastraphic war or plague.
I think the show implies closer to 24 billion though.

The Star Trek timeline does include at least one and possibly two or more catastrophic wars. It is not entirely clear if the Eugenics Wars were the direct precursor to the nuclear exchange that brought on the "post-atomic horror" that Picard referred to as being the model for Q's kangaroo court, or if it might not have been all part of the same tangled snarl of alternate history. Whichever it was, though, the human species obviously suffered a definite population drop.

Another consideration is that the human population does not necessarily have to double every 30 years. If the world of the Federation is as stable and comfortable for its citizens as it is made out to be, just maintaining a stable population base might be difficult. If a child is nearly certain to survive to reproductive age, and if that child is not needed as cheap labor on the family farm, there would be no real incentive to have more than one or two children, or an average of 1.5 children per couple. Averaging that out to the total population and assuming that all humans in the Federation enter into relationships for the sake of reproduction, one would end up with a replacement rate of just 0.75 offspring per capita. The Federation could actually be facing a long-term population crunch. There is just no incentive to have more children, unless one brings in religious reasons to have many children (unlikely in the Federation) or a sense of duty to the state (also unlikely in the Federation and far too reminiscent of Hitler's medals for "hero mothers" who received medals based on the number of children they produced).

In fact, if the Federation achievements of free housing, clothing and food for all were around for any length of time prior to the era of TNG, the population likely achieved some steady-state level. Colonists on new worlds might well have more children than average for the first few generations, but soon they would settle down to the same replacement-oriented birth rate as on Earth and other long-settled worlds. Some return mirgration of colonist children to Earth and the other long-settled worlds could serve to boost the flagging population levels there.

The above is strongly supported (if only in my mind) by the fact that shots of Earth urban and rural areas, especially in the TNG, DS9 and Voyager eras, appeared to show a lightly populated world in which even the urban areas are far from crowded, and are very parklike.