>>16977215 The other issue that arises in a world without money is another double edge sword. Removing monetary incentive removes a massive pressure on people who are working endlessly to simply put food on the table. The Federation of the 24th century has eradicated world hunger through the widespread use of replicators, and providing shelter does not seem to be an issue. This creates a problem, however. If people don't need to work to live, who would do the unsavory jobs necessary for a society to function? Star Trek has provided a half assed answer for this, using AI and automated systems to carry out the majority of these functions, although this does raise another issue regarding the ethics of creating a permanent slave race. The problem is only half solved, however, as through the various shows it is shown that there are still actual people who are in jobs such as bartending or waiting on tables, but what's the point if there is no wage and no opportunity to progress in this career? Not everyone can be a business owner, so surely there must be ten subservient roles needed to be fulfilled for every one privileged owner, with no apparent way to escape this. The Federation economy is one of those science fiction concepts that sounds, on paper, to be utopian. But the further the concept is explored, the more holes can be found in its logic, and various societal dark underbellies are shown. It may seem like a freeing notion, to not be tied down by the necessity to make money each and every day to survive. But strangely, by removing this, the Federation has managed to find a way to solidify even further the massive class divide that exists today. Ironically, it's impossible to eliminate poverty by taking away all the money. It only seems like this is possible because audiences are only shown the lives of the social elites, such as Picard.
