Star Trek oneupmanship

[Wawona Girl]

Lack of money in Star Trek. How the hell does that work? In my sci fi books, money has to exist in the future in order to live and advance. But if people in the future don't earn money, then oneupmanship can't exist. And that's pretty boring. Do you agree or not?

 

[JunkMonkey]

In some alternate universe The Crew of the Enterprise would, week after week, instead of teaching advance civilisations the joys of base human emotions - "Love!" - would introduce them to sound fiscal arrangements and the benefits of strategic tax planning.

This would usually involve Kirk getting his shirt torn while wrestling with double entry book keeping.

 

[j.grey]

There is a school of thought that suggests that if we don't get rid of money and total reliance on ego very soon, we don't have a future.

 

[Zebra Wizard]

Boring, no. Different, yes.

It's like saying a pure socialist society would be boring to read about. I think theres a place for both. Theres plenty of mega corp/capitalism sci-fi out there.

 

[goldhawk]

The fashion industry isn't boring and money is no object there. Having the fattest sporran gets replaced with being first with something new.

 

[Wawona Girl]

Personally, I like the idea of Kirk getting his shirt off, and in the original series of Star Trek it happened often. But putting that thought aside, it is money that drives all of us forward. The laid back attitude that the Next Generation had, as if everything was put in front of them day in day out, was disturbing. It was as if they were prisoners living in a false paradise. Money makes the world go round and greed will always exist. Mankind is not perfect, by no means, but we have to strive in life. And sailing across the stars on a starship of families with beaming smiles at the ready to make contact with aliens, ain't going to cut it.

 

[Phyrebrat]

There's no money? Try telling that to Quark...

pH

 

[ratsy]

I think within the federation there is not supposed to be currency, but I mean, who doesn't want a pile of gold pressed latinum to sleep over?

 

[Wawona Girl]

That's right! The Ferengi! A good point. Their culture revolved around commerce. But that was one race. Can you think of another in Star Trek, and there were a lot, who also were money-orientated?

 

[Phyrebrat]

Malon

 

[Wawona Girl]

Who?

 

[Phyrebrat]

The Malon used to be space-salvagers/trashers who got into it with Janeway for spoiling their business.

I might have the species name wrong tho. I'm very newb re Star Trek

pH

 

[The Big Peat]

The Malon used to be space-salvagers/trashers who got into it with Janeway for spoiling their business.

I might have the species name wrong tho. I'm very newb re Star Trek

pH

Google suggests you are right - Malon

To answer the OP - there are other forms of oneupmanship than money. Clearly the next iteration of Star Trek will feature the Captain telling his crew to suck on his superior Twitter follower count.

 

[Phyrebrat]

Who'd take most selfies tho? I imagine that has to be Tiberius!

#yesiknowwhattheTstandsfor

pH

 

[Toby Frost]

Iain M Banks' Culture series was basically about just this. The citizens of the Culture had pretty much anything they wanted at hand, and didn't need money. They could do exactly what they liked. Some just lazed about, but most got bored with that and became skilled at the things that interested them. The most dedicated citizens were often recruited by the secret service when necessary. The hero of The Player of Games was an expert gamer. Eventually, aliens attacked the Culture, but they lost, partly because the Culture had too much to lose to give in easily.

It's also worth saying that, in the absence of literal money, something will take its place as a way for citizens to look down on one another, whether it's manners, prestige, class, honour, work credits, or something else.

 

[ThomasG]

I find it difficult to imagine a society in which there is no exchange of needs and wants, therefore money.

 

[ralphkern]

They're living in a post scarcity world where I would suggest oneupmanship comes from achievement rather than material goods.

There might be a vast class of people who, because they don't need to work... Simply don't. Or maybe their education and engagement systems are so penetrative this has been expunged.

The ideals sound somewhat familiar...

 

[zmunkz]

I think any world different from ours can be interesting, as long as there is a story to tell and engaging characters to see it through.

As to how it is supposed to work...

The worldbuilding in the star trek universe, at least by the TNG era, included some socialist / pseudo-utopian elements. The idea was all of civilization's basic problems were solved (mainly) by huge advancements in medicine, and with the invention of replicators: food/water and even "things" were immediately available to everyone, removing poverty, desperation, lack of education, crime, and competition in the process. This allows a civilization to grow wherein 100% of people's time can be committed to culture/arts/passions/sciences/education... whatever floats their boat.... and thus, a total inversion of our current economics. Everyone is in a job they love, or else they don't work at all.

Personally I think elements of that are against human nature... we are evolved around a world of limited resources and competition, and that won't change just because our environment changes. That said, technology like a replicator would surely have profound repercussions throughout society and government. It is hard to imagine what such a world would be like... I suppose on the individual level, you can think of it as if you'd hit the Mega Millions and knew you never had to work again. Personally, I'd spend my time doing things I loved (writing, say) without worrying about financial compensation. It seems possible (though debatable) that lots of things in society could function purely by the efforts of whatever people happen to love doing that particular thing.

 

[j.grey]

What you have to remember is that money is not a very effective motivator. It is, at best, a measure of success but rarely personal. The world is currently being under-educated so that it thinks money is essential but it's not. People want money to acquire things, which is a very childish response to the world. An adolescent measures itself according to material gain but we are meant to outgrow that as we mature.
More sophisticated people use money to achieve their ends, support their family, travel of pay for training to take the social role they want. In all of these examples, money is actually an obstacle, it's in the way of success.
As an example, we're writing. I'm sure that many of us realise that the chances of actual success are fairly slim. And yet we strive on with our dreams, supporting ourselves with a job we don't care about. Money is not the thing that gets us out of bed in the morning, it's against us all our lives.
Especially as sci-fi writers, we should questioning conventional wisdom, challenging ourselves with ideas of a better world and be striving to think of better things.

 

[JunkMonkey]

What you have to remember is that money is not a very effective motivator.

Maybe so. But I can tell you from personal that the lack of it is one hell of a motivator....