Trekonomics - a new book about Star Trek's futuristic economy

Most of these ideas would in reality require a massive war, tyranny, and genocide in order to implement. That certainly hasn't stopped the communists in the past though, so it could still be scheduled.

But in theory, the end product could work once all competing interests have accepted their submission to world government run by a corrupt oligarchy.
Good thing capitalism was voluntary and no war was fought to promote it. Of wait-

Even today people don't really need to work. You don't need fucking magical teleporters and duplicators. Today I bet if everyone worked 4 hours you could have most things you ever need in your lifetime without any shortages. With productivity increasing we need even less and less manhours to make the same amount of shit.

This is the thing with capitalism, its really that good, in fact its too good for its own sake: Productivity becomes so high that nobody can afford to consume it. This is why we are discussing this whole basic income thing, we desperately need to increase consumption. So its ironic hearing people say that there isn't enough stuff to go around when its the exact opposite in reality (and has been for some decades or even centuries, I dunno).

Therefore I can imagine in the 22nd century basic income will have become widespread, so that in the 23rd everyone will be receiving a massive basic income, finally in the 24th the whole thing will have become pointless.
 
Good thing capitalism was voluntary and no war was fought to promote it. Of wait-

Even today people don't really need to work. You don't need fucking magical teleporters and duplicators. Today I bet if everyone worked 4 hours you could have most things you ever need in your lifetime without any shortages. With productivity increasing we need even less and less manhours to make the same amount of shit.

This is the thing with capitalism, its really that good, in fact its too good for its own sake: Productivity becomes so high that nobody can afford to consume it. This is why we are discussing this whole basic income thing, we desperately need to increase consumption. So its ironic hearing people say that there isn't enough stuff to go around when its the exact opposite in reality (and has been for some decades or even centuries, I dunno).

Therefore I can imagine in the 22nd century basic income will have become widespread, so that in the 23rd everyone will be receiving a massive basic income, finally in the 24th the whole thing will have become pointless.

I agree. I think we're heading to a very new type of system in the not too distant future regardless. Capitalism as a system I don't think will last.

I think we will be heading to a more collectivist system whether people want to or not.

The logical conclusion of (crony) capitalism is collectivism. Once those at the top acquire and consolidate all the wealth and power, they will naturally want to eliminate competition from the system, and take full management of everything. For better or for worse.
 
I agree. I think we're heading to a very new type of system in the not too distant future regardless. Capitalism as a system I don't think will last.

I think we will be heading to a more collectivist system whether people want to or not.

The logical conclusion of (crony) capitalism is collectivism. Once those at the top acquire and consolidate all the wealth and power, they will naturally want to eliminate competition from the system. For better or for worse.
Its not about those at the top, its the exact opposite. People produce way too much surplus value to be bound to the idiocy of wage slavery.

Also, as usual, you are being moronic in fearing this world government. Nations and ethnic groups are not bound to one political or economical system. A culture is so much more than barter, I mean, moving to a star trek economy does not mean that your nation will stop existing. If it does, it means that it was defined only by the dollar, it had an extremely consumerist and "materialistic" culture. Therefore it deserves to disappear.
 
Most of these ideas would in reality require a massive war, tyranny, and genocide in order to implement. That certainly hasn't stopped the communists in the past though, so it could still be scheduled.

But in theory, the end product could work once all competing interests have accepted their submission to world government run by a corrupt oligarchy.

This is the paradox. In a peaceful society with great abundance and no money, a corrupt oligarchy would have a much harder time finding fertile ground. If everything is in abundance, what would they hoard? But money is a common thread through all countries, and even 'democratic' nations are riddled with corrupt oligarchies. The problem is getting from A to B.

The resources on our planet are of such abundance that pretty much everyone on the planet could live the lifestyle of a millionaire. The problem has never been availability of resources. The problem has always been inefficiency.

You want to see real inefficiency, go to a boat dock at a large Marina. Hundreds upon hundred of boats sitting idle. So many that there are boat warehouses several stories high, where boats sit for months completely dormant;

insidesmall.jpg


It cracks me up. It is so amusing listening to a radio commercial about a car that is a new model of efficiency that gets an extra whatever miles per gallon, as I drive past conservatively, 200 cars and SUV's sitting motionless and inert in suburban driveways, as I make my way out to the main road.
 
Last edited:
Its not about those at the top, its the exact opposite. People produce way too much surplus value to be bound to the idiocy of wage slavery.

Also, as usual, you are being moronic in fearing this world government. Nations and ethnic groups are not bound to one political or economical system. A culture is so much more than barter, I mean, moving to a star trek economy does not mean that your nation will stop existing. If it does, it means that it was defined only by the dollar, it had an extremely consumerist and "materialistic" culture. Therefore it deserves to disappear.

It's always about those at the top, because they are managing things and are moving things in that direction both deliberately, and naturally. They will, if things continue on the same path, remain in power.

Whether I like it or not, is irrelevant. But based on their behavior up to this point I have no reason to believe they won't abuse their power incredibly once it is monopolized fully. They will care about the efficiency of the system much more than the interests of any common person. The interests of the common man become nothing.

The utopian vision of star trek is in theory possible, but it defies real world examples of power dynamics.
 
This is the paradox. In a peaceful society with great abundance and no money, a corrupt oligarchy would have a much harder time finding fertile ground. If everything is in abundance, what would they hoard? But money is a common thread trough all countries, and even 'democratic' nations are riddled with corrupt oligarchies. The problem is getting from A to B.

The resources on our planet are of such abundance that pretty much everyone on the planet could live the lifestyle of a millionaire. The problem has never been availability of resources. The problem has always been inefficiency.

You want to see real inefficiency, go to a boat dock at a large Marina. Hundreds upon hundred of boats sitting idle. So many that there are boat warehouses several stories high, where boats sit for months completely dormant;

That is indeed a bit of a paradox, or at least a game changer. Currently I think the driving force is power, not money so much, at the highest levels. Money leads to power so it is very important, but it is still a means to an end.

But the dynamics certainly change once the consolidation process has been completed. What then? It's an excellent question.

I think the focus will be on efficiency. How to squeeze as much efficiency out of the system and grow the system to be more and more powerful. Without an enemy as a driving motivator that isn't a given though. It's an interesting problem.

This dynamic, if it is indeed the case, means that we will likely see Eugenics enter in a big way, as well as trans-humanism. The system will likely take over human reproduction as well, so demographics can be finely tuned to needs of the system.

The Borg was the star trek depiction of the logical conclusion of transhumanism
 
Last edited:
That is indeed a bit of a paradox, or at least a game changer. Currently I think the driving force is power, not money so much, at the highest levels. Money leads to power so it is very important, but it is still a means to an end.

But the dynamics certainly change once the consolidation process has been completed. What then? It's an excellent question.

I think the focus will be on efficiency. How to squeeze as much efficiency out of the system and grow the system to be more and more powerful. Without an enemy as a driving motivator that isn't a given though. It's an interesting problem.

This dynamic, if it is indeed the case, means that we will likely see Eugenics enter in a big way, as well as trans-humanism. The system will likely take over human reproduction as well, so demographics can be finely tuned to needs of the system.

The Borg was the star trek depiction of the logical conclusion of transhumanism

I think the first big change will hit when we get north of 75% of our power from renewable sources. When electricity is abundant everywhere and nearly free, that will change a lot.
 
I think the first big change will hit when we get north of 75% of our power from renewable sources. When electricity is abundant everywhere and nearly free, that will change a lot.

Absolutely energy is a big factor. I don't think we will see anything like free-ish energy like that until a new system is in place though.

That would be very disruptive to the control mechanisms of today, as it would provide independence from central authorities. Unless we see clean and cheap power plants which people still would rely on.

I think the primary concerns of today is getting everyone under the command of central authority, so anything that promotes independence runs contrary to that.

That would be a positive though, of a new system. Technologies that are deemed disruptive today, could be released without destabilizing the system. I do think clean energy is in our future. No doubt.
 
Last edited:
Absolutely energy is a big factor. I don't think we will see anything like free-ish energy like that until a new system is in place though.

That would be very disruptive to the control mechanisms of today, as it would provide independence from central authorities. Unless we see clean and cheap power plants which people still would rely on.

I think the primary concerns of today is getting everyone under the command of central authority.

That would be a positive though, of a new system. Technologies that are deemed disruptive today, could be released without destabilizing the system. I do think clean energy is in our future. No doubt.

Ironically, when it comes to energy, capitalism is going to actually help. All of the property owners in my office park complex are making money every month from the power company thanks to solar panels.

Not doubt that some technologies are repressed though. I had a fucking 1981 Jetta that got 57 MPG for fuck sakes

swpq54.jpg


We made cares that got 57 MPG 34 years ago.
 
There's always the option of "taking turns" doing the shitty jobs, for everyone except NASA or doctors who save people's lives.

I don't want to do the shitty job. Who is going to force me?
 
They were supposed to be extremists for sure but they are a fairly accurate view of eccentric crony capitalists.

Theyve also never been to war amongst themselves because its not profitable.
 
I don't want to do the shitty job. Who is going to force me?

Nobody will force you, but they won't allow you to do the good job you want until you take your turn like everybody else.
 
Nobody will force you, but they won't allow you to do the good job you want until you take your turn like everybody else.

Or you could work for Holodeck credits :icon_lol:
 
Oh boy would I ever.

If I had a holodeck I would be completely addicted to it. I'd be a slave for that holodeck time.

It would probably have to be restricted for that reason. Can't have your system grinding to a halt because people are spending all their time in the holodeck.
 
It would probably have to be restricted for that reason. Can't have your system grinding to a halt because people are spending all their time in the holodeck.

That's true. But it would be kind of like restricting fossil fuel use and big salty burgers in the modern USA. Rage, riots, sadness.

Just lemme holobang bro
 
Nobody will force you, but they won't allow you to do the good job you want until you take your turn like everybody else.

Yeah, but who says I want to do any "job"? My personal interests may not align with the needs of society so the things I personally want to do might be worthless.
 
The basic issue for me with trek economics as with other eutopian systems is that people just plain aren't smart enough to do central planning on a large scale.

Sure some ultra advanced AI can handle that for you but that things going to have its own ideas about how things should be run.
 
I get the weird feeling that the way to pacify the WR would be a ST binge watching session .
 
Back
Top