Star Trek Economy

[GePap]

Originally posted by Park Avenue
Let's see your train of logic here guys...

1) It was once thought impossible to do x

2) x was then accomplished

3) Anything someone thinks is impossible, will therefore be accomplished!

Great work lads! Nice logic skills!

No, that is not the train of logic. The train of logic is for somoene to say "it is impossible" is NOT enough. So please elaborate why it is impossible.

As for whay it would be possible, I go by Einstein's equations that matter=energy, and also what physicists tell us about the masisve amounts of energy out there. If we found a much more efficient way of turning matter directly into energy without all the waste of fission or even fussion, then the oportunities are massive. Imagine we were able to tap the ENTIRE energy output of the sun- for all intents and purposes that is "infinate energy" for us. BUT in the scale of the universe, it would not be so incredable a thing, given the sun is just one of trillions of trillions of stars.

[Natalinasmpf]

Yes, because current chemical or even nuclear reactions merely just rearrange the bonds around to gain energy. Inefficient.

[Blake]

Hmm, scarcity can never really be eliminated. Whatever you have, you can always have more. If you own an entire country, you could want a whole world, how about a whole galaxy, the entire universe?
Although, that is scarcity based on egotism rather than any practical use or need. The real question is what happens when scarcity of basic needs is eliminated, that is:
An abundance of quality food and fresh water.
A fair allocation of land and living quarters rather than trading it as a commodity.
(inter)Net Access.

Although it is interesting to note that the Market economy is not leading towards such abundance, for example fresh water is becoming less abundant and more expensive, often as a direct result of the market economy, for example the fertilizers, pesticides etc applied to land to make production more "economical" pollute the rivers and reduce abundance of fresh water. Heavy industry and often agriculture pollutes the water table.

I also see, all around me, evidence of the Market Economy reducing (or atleast, not heading towards) abundance of food, my home region has been almost entirely paved over with vineyards, replacing land that use to be producing food, with something more profitable, wine to sell to the rich.

Now I'm not saying that the Market Economy will never evolve into a system where there is no scarcity of basic nessecities (anywhere in the world), but it's going to take longer than in an ideal system. Like when the technology finally arrives to filter slurry into pure drinking water, it'll probably be in the hands of some souless corporation that wants to make lots of money from it for as long as they can - and for a currentely "moral" reason, profits for the shareholders.
Altough it seems almost inevitable that even if nothing changes with the market (like the type of money used) then eventually some "opensource" group will invent, reverse engineer or steal a self-replicating nano-replicator device and in weeks there could be one in every house in the world and almost overnight the old market would wither away. Ofcourse it's impossible to predict how long it would take for such a farfetched solution to the worlds problems to come about.... there are less farfetched solutions.

[Dis]

I"m not sure where you live, but the U.S. has no scarcity of fresh water or food. even with contaminated groundwater and such, we still have plenty.

People drink bottled water because they want better taste, or have some illusion it is healthier.

The U.S. is a good example of having no scarcity of resources. Even oil we have plenty of. We ***** about gas prices, but realistically, we have more oil than we need. There's enough oil that people can drive anywhere in the world if they want to.

The U.S. is an example of what happens when you have no scarcity of resources. People get fat and lazy. People don't remember what it took to get there. Immigrants have more of an appreciation of the good things in life than citizens.

This is the problem I have with star trek. Unless something is done with human psychology, I don't see people acting like that. Yes the military is different. And I would expect the academy to accept the "best of the best", but from what I've seen on TNG episodes, regular civilians act that way as well (no greed etc). A bit unrealistic to me.

[Az]

They do act with greed to some stuff. But mostly, what is there to crave?

[Solly]

Diss

the U.S. has no scarcity of fresh water or food. even with contaminated groundwater and such, we still have plenty.

If there was no "scarcity" then the price would be zero.

(Note that if something costs nothing, that doesn't mean in reverse that it isn't scarce)

[Dis]

the price of water is pretty much 0.

Where I live, they raise the price just to get people to conserve. If it weren't for artificial rate hikes and taxes, our water is essentually free.

But I won't bull**** you. There is a scarcity of water where I live. But only because we live in the desert. If people didn't insist on having jungles in their yards, and grass covering every square inch, we'd have plenty of water.

[Solly]

the price of water is pretty much 0

So no-one ever pays anything for water in Nevada?

[The diplomat]

Some kind of replicator technology (like in Star Trek) is required to have a moneyless society because you can only have a moneyless society if work is uneccessary.

[Natalinasmpf]

Humans : correct in making the leap from wealth as currency to wealth as
energy. But logic failure : wealth ultimately is extension of desire, fluctuating
with emotions and state of mind. Desires : when all are supported in purely adaptable
system, true wealth is achieved.

[Kidlicious]

I think it's wrong to assume that energy will be free in unlimited quantities. The higher our technology for creating and distributing energy the higher our demand for energy will be for other high-tech energyn using devices. I could be wrong though. Maybe efficiency improves.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Dissident
I"m not sure where you live, but the U.S. has no scarcity of fresh water or food. even with contaminated groundwater and such, we still have plenty.

This from someone who lives in an area where the reseviors are down 50%.

In South Florida, water shortages are reaching a crisis. They want to build pipelines to start bringing water from North Florida to the thirsty South.

[Dis]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


This from someone who lives in an area where the reseviors are down 50%.

In South Florida, water shortages are reaching a crisis. They want to build pipelines to start bringing water from North Florida to the thirsty South.

compared to third world countres we have unlimited fresh water almost.

If people would stop watering their lawns and maintaining jungles in their yards, we'd have unlimited fresh water where I live.

[The Viceroy]

I can see no way in which a star trek economy could occur without
1) more energy than we could consume
2) more "USABLE" space than we could fill
3) a cure for obesity that didn't involve excercise

1 is certainly the case, but we do not have the technology to harness it yet.

2 is not the case, unless we consider other planets, or technology to create more USABLE space .. ie under water, space, other planet etc ..

3 from the looks of my junk inbox, this was solved years ago ha ha ha .. but seriously though, human health will in my opinion be a major problem if we did have more energy and space than we could use.

The way I look at it is, image a civ map with no bounds, and all the land gave as much resource and food as you fancied .. the game would change dramatically ! (be well boring wouldn't it ???)

[alva]

I'm sure that when we are able to fulfill one, we can three easily.