It would not work right now, but it is definitely a future worth aiming towards. People are not evolved enough yet to live in a society like Star trek for countless obvious reasons.
Personally though, I don't think humanity will ever survive unless it actually goes down the road to a more empathic society, I think that's the only hope humanity have. If humanity don't go down that road we are just gonna go back to the stone age again or simply eradicate ourselves entirely, either through our own stupidity or say we keep holding ourselves back that we couldn't do anything if the universe decided to kill us. Like giant meteor, sun dying or any other way we might get destroyed.
Most Helpful Opinions
Nope. Too many corrupt opportunists. We need precious metal-backed currency more than ever. SPECTRE in the form of the WEF and the Davos crowd want your liberty.
I've actually seen 'Star Trek' (TOS & TNG), and I don't like the way their society works at all. Everyone seems so anodyne, so bland and boring (ex. they don't have alcohol anymore, they listen to classical music and read Shakespeare, and they're virtually sexless).
What Girls & Guys Said
Opinion
5Opinion
Perhaps a few hundred years, if greed kind of becomes less of a thing... people attacking other for their jobs, etc. Learning to live a sparse kind of life.
I wonder what else would be a factor... cleaner energy resources? Population? Automation?
Other franchises have posed the idea that less people on Earth would mean less fighting for resources, and therefore a Utopia (One world in Sliders instituted a "lottery" that would also kill people)... There's millions of people on the Moon in Riker's time (as well as countless other worlds), so are people spread thin? or since there are so may habitable planets, we can house and take care of millions overall?
I think if replication technology worked well, that would be a big thing. Energy conversion would be huge. But until we figure out a good reliable source of renewable clean and safe (r) energy, and more space for real equipment/storage food storage, etc... then I think greed will be a more common thing, even if dollars/yen/loonys/whatever don't exist.
Hard to say what the economics were... obviously some people sort of made "money," or "credits," as Riker had credits with Quark at DS9 at some point (which he gave up for favors/information). So maybe money becomes interchangable with other things. At Siskos, were customers secretly learning how to prepare the food? Paying for the meals by having lessons in culinary arts, so they get rewarded, and they work for their supper kind of thing? They prepare food for future customers? or maybe they trade in other ways. (dishwashing/cleaning/wrestling the Sisko's gator up on the ropes every night...) Was it some other sort of barter? People who pay in credits didn't have to work, perhaps. Or they'd pay in energy somehow. It was said that Sisko's dad preferred "real" food (Perhaps Maurice and Yvette Picard; and therefore Robert and Marie's family, I think) not replication, which means growing crops somewhere, but that was seen as fairly unusual. Energy had to come from somewhere.Even if you had replicator tecnoligy and free energy to use it, which star trek clearly does not. People are not self-motivated to act without some kind of benefit. They would mostly all spend their time in holidecks until that collapsed and were forced to actually trade for finite resources and time again.
No, not until we have protein resequencers and stuff.
I like how the only way socialism works is by introducing barter; which is capitalistic.
No that’s fantasy. Propaganda from rich.
The only opinion from girls was selected the Most Helpful Opinion, but you can still contribute by sharing an opinion!
Learn more
We're glad to see you liked this post.
You can also add your opinion below!