I think this is the first post with this combination of tags: economics, sci-fi, tv.
Rick Webb wrote The Economics of Star Trek on Medium.
"Traditional economics, of course, deals with the efficient allocation of inherently scarce materials. Post scarcity economics deals with the economics of economies that are no longer constrained by scarcity of materials — food, energy, shelter, etc."
"Take a mental journey for a moment with me: what if, one day, technology reaches the point that a small number of humans — say, 10 million — can produce all of the food, shelter and energy that the race needs. This doesn’t seem like insanely wishful thinking, given current trends. There’s no rational reason why the advances in robotics, factories, energy and agriculture could continue unabated for long periods of time. Of course I’m not saying they will, but rather, they could."
"I believe the federation is a proto-post scarcity society evolved from democratic capitalism. It is, essentially, European socialist capitalism vastly expanded to the point where no one has to work unless they want to."
Matthew Yglesias followed up Star Trek economy: Federation is only mostly post-scarcity.
"The central conceit of Trek is that technology gets better and better, so things that are mass produced and rationalized get cheaper and more abundant. So there's a post-scarcity economy where anyone can replicate any kind of consumer goods he wants. Webb sees a welfare state, but I actually see something different. It's simply that energy is abundant enough that people have unrestricted access to consumer-grade replicators. Under the circumstances nobody needs to work to survive and there's really no point in maintaining a cash economy. But by definition improved technology can't increase the efficiency of historical production techniques. If the promise of Sisko's is a home-cooked New Orleans meal, then Sisko's can't partake in the post-scarcity economy. Similarly, you can replicate wine in unlimited quantities but a Chateau Picard vintage is by definition a scarce commodity. People appear to operate these businesses for roughly the same reason that Starfleet officers cruise around the galaxy—for a sense of personal fulfillment rather than enrichment."
"So what do the producers of scarce goods do? Well, presumably they're giving a lot of stuff away. Friends and family get bottles of wine. Perhaps you send a case or two to some particularly admired athletes or scientists or other heroes. Maybe artisanal wine just isn't that popular in general. And maybe you barter some bottles for other artisanal goods. Maybe you have a friend who hand-carves furniture. But at its most fundamental level, it's a gift economy. The point of running your restaurant or your vineyard is essentially to show off your mastery, not accumulate wealth. There may be some more-or-less formal exchanges, but the key point is to get the output into people's hands and not work so hard as to make yourself miserable."
Joshua Gans adds That Star Trek economy thing.
"There clearly is some broad inter-governmental trade that is afforded by larger projects and more advanced technologies and that itself will provide a rational for a Federation-wide medium of exchange — hence, Federation Credits. That such Credits also find themselves into the hands of Federation citizens is also not surprising even if they don’t have to use them except when they go abroad."
"In conclusion, the Star Trek economy is a well-defined general equilibrium production-exchange economy with a large government presence. It is, therefore, capable of analysis using the tools of neoclassical economics. There is no need to dress it up any other way."
No comments:
Post a Comment