17
What is the minimum standard of living on Earth? (startrek.website)
submitted 3 years ago by to c/daystrominstitute@startrek.website
10 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

In Star Trek Picard we see Raffi living at rock bottom for a while. She has no job after her discharge from Starfleet, and is clearly not doing as well. She describes her life as humiliation and rage.

And yet by modern standards she has a home, food, and power. Her drug usage isn't condoned but she's left largely alone to do it. By modern 21st century standards its a very soft landing.

Does it get worse than this? What is the worst possible economic outcome someone living on 24th Century Earth is likely to face.

The events of DS9: Past Tense imply that things aren't as bad as sanctuary districts and mass homelessness, but there's a lot of range between that and where Raffi landed. So what evidence do we have about how bad it can get?

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 6 points 3 years ago

Earth is a functional paradise. It doesn't alleviate people from all suffering, especially emotional suffering, but there is nothing that Raffi could not have if she wanted it including a different house in a different part of the world. She is self-isolating, but she doesn't have to.

There is no "bad" economic outcomes on Earth anyway. I suspect that economic stratification comes in the form of human diaspora. Once you leave Earth to live on a colony or even just to live off-world, you might find that the world you move to doesn't have bustling cities yet and so there are no tickets to the opera.

But these are choices that we assume are more freely available.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
    •