/strek/ - Star Trek

>>22072

Lies, we GAVE the answer to these hu-mans.

Gaahhh

See how perverted they are? They actually clothe their fe-males thus enticing others to unclothe them…..the very depths of perversion!

>>22073

What?

>>22072

>Ferengi Lets be honest no one can build up a society on greed etc.

What about the kikes? Being ruthless and without any moral is acutally pretty good for society building. It's natural selection.

>>22074

Do you even TNG?

>>22077

>What about the kikes

They don't fuck over their own.

The chosenites have a deep respect for their own and family.

The ferengi fuck over their family and arguably their own civilization for profit.

On the other hand considering that ferengi are literally telling you to your face they will sell you shit.

So logically every other ferengi should never buy from other ferengi.

They were a weak strawmen of capitalism by commies. Of course they're dumb.

>>22078

>The ferengi fuck over their family and arguably their own civilization for profit

"A contract is a contract is a contract…But only between Ferengi."

>>22080

At one point you have to ask yourself how stupid is having a dumb greedy capitalist caricature that not only exploits everyone.

It also can not hold its mouth closed about how it will exploit and cheat the people its making business with.

By quoting its (??? Religious text ???) foundation of its civilization full of commandments how to cheat and exploit its business partner.

>>22081

>But only between Ferengi.

is the only sensible line in all the rules of acquisition.

Contrast this with

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Rules_of_Acquisition

6 Never allow family to stand in the way of opportunity

111 Treat people in your debt like family… exploit them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PvFYBkesqGU

>>22083

>Roddenberry created

Did he?

Ferengi changed from their first canonical appearance on TNG.

>In "The Last Outpost", we were introduced to the Ferengi. Gene Roddenberry originally envisioned the Ferengi as the Federation's primary foe, to take the place of the Klingons and Romulans. This was part of the sea change in Star Trek's underlying theme, which was being revised from the 1960's Cold War to a left-wing liberal tirade against consumerism and capitalism. But the Ferengi were not simply greedy; they were powerful, mysterious, and dangerous. The very first Ferengi warship we ever saw was powerful enough to dice with the Federation's biggest, most powerful battleship, and its crew was highly aggressive. Despite their small stature, they were able to surprise and defeat a Federation landing party on the ground. Their appearance may have been odd, but these were clearly not people to be trifled with.

>When they reappeared in "Peak Performance", they were similarly threatening. They dropped out of warp at point blank range, opened fire on the USS Enterprise, and promptly disabled most of its combat systems. They demanded the surrender of the derelict USS Hathaway, and when Picard (seemingly) destroyed it rather than surrender it, the Ferengi captain grudgingly complimented him by saying that "I did not think the Federation had such iron!" A rather warrior-like sentiment, is it not? Similarly, Picard once recounted the story of how he lost his previous command, after his ship was reduced to a flaming wreck by a Ferengi warship. This is a far cry from the cowardly Ferengi of DS9, isn't it? But in every appearance, the Ferengi made reference to a profit motive, and that was more than enough to plant the brain bug.

>By the time the Ferengi showed up on DS9, their interest in profit had grown to encompass their entire culture. They were suddenly interested in nothing but the accumulation of wealth, and the writers' desire to simplify every alien society into a one-note joke meant that any non-financial elements of their society (including the strong martial tradition that was obvious from their initial appearance in TNG) vanished without a trace. Now, they were a laughingstock in combat, and they made frequent disparaging references to their own combat ineptitude. When Nog elected to join the Federation military, the decision was treated with shock, contempt, and derision by his relatives because Ferengi are businessmen, not soldiers. When Quark went on a mission to rescue his mother, they found a single Ferengi mercenary who was good with weapons, and the others acted as if he was some kind of freakish anomaly. What happened to the heavily armed Ferengi warships we saw in TNG? Did the writers suffer a massive collective amnesia attack?

>As time went by, this brain bug continued to grow. Not only was greed now the only defining characteristic of Ferengi society, but the writers figured they were on a roll, so they even made it the Ferengi religion! Instead of the Ten Commandments, the Ferengi had the "Rules of Acquisition", with which the viewers were bludgeoned with constant reminders of Ferengi greed. Instead of "astral plane" or "holy ghost", they had the "Great Material Continuum". We were told that the Ferengi had no loyalty to anything but money; not to friends, not to family, not to king and country. No one ever managed to explain how a society could possibly function along these lines, but no matter; the writers obviously had no interest in constructing an interesting or multi-faceted alien society for the Ferengi. Far from it; instead, they seemed to be interested in reducing it to a single element, just as they had done for the Klingons. By the time they were done, another society had been transformed into a farcical one-note caricature by the unfettered growth of a brain bug. Planted in TNG, and grown to the proportions of Jack's famous beanstalk in DS9.

The biggest argument against Ferengi society is that they are basically - let's face it - AnCap. The truth is though, because of the great amount of poverty and exploitation it produces, together with the fact that capitalistic societies rely on an extensive code of private law ("rules of acquisition"), it would require an enormous violent state apparatus to maintain such social relations. Yet the Ferengi are one of the most peaceful species in the galaxy (except maybe the early TNG Ferengi who had decent warships) and despise violence. Then please explain to me, how they stop unions from building, how they enforce verdicts, how do they protect private property.

It's also extremly unlikely that they'd use a hard currency (latinum) instead of fiat currency.

The same way you can't have capitalism in the interstellar age, you can't also have Japanese feudalism in the interstellar age (I'm looking at you, Klingons).

>>22085

>This was part of the sea change in Star Trek's underlying theme, which was being revised from the 1960's Cold War to a left-wing liberal tirade against consumerism and capitalism

Is that why we got the Borg, a ridiculous parody of communism? Is the Federation supposed to be the "good commies" and the Borg "the bad ones"? I always thought it was interesting to contrast the Federation, which is proto-communistic, to the Ferengi and what happens when these two systems clash like in DS9. However, I wish the writers weren't so incoherent.

In TNG, there are multiple occasions where Picard talks about "buying dinner for someone" and there is talk of "business property". However, in DS9, Sisko talks about "using up transporter credits" which means they'd have some sort of credit system/digital labor vouchers.

>they seemed to be interested in reducing it to a single element, just as they had done for the Klingons.

In defense of the Klingons, they got a lot more colorful in DS9. I think Klingon culture was portrayed more interesting as it was in TNG - you actually got to see weak and afraid Klingons, and what keeps them going and bunch of subtleties you normally wouldn't expect from them.

But yeah, the Ferengi reductionism was very stupid and the entire Ferengi arc in DS9 can be summed up with "EMPOWER WOMAN". To instead focus on the bigger contradictions and subtleties of Ferengi culture, it was all coming down to a parody of patriarchy which isn't very interesting. And Jesus Christ, I do not want to see Quark's mom naked.

>>22091

>Is that why we got the Borg, a ridiculous parody of communism?

What’s ridiculous about it? The fact the Borg are effective and innovative?

>>22093

Well if we take the actual definition of communism by Marx, it is supposed to allow humans to return to their species essence. The Borg don't just completely consume any form of authentic existence, they also replace it with another form of alienation which is their doctrine of constant expansion and the drive to assimilate everything.

>innovative

You must be fucking joking. The Borg almost got genocided by a logic bomb in TNG and can't even modify their nano probes in VOY. The Borg also always let an elite squad into the heart of the ship and plant a bomb there before they bother to get their asses out of their consoles. The Borg are effective, I give you that, but not innovative. I guess this is partly because the original Borg in TNG season 2 &3 were just too powerful, so they had to nerf them.

>>22072

>Line break after every single sentence

People like to bitch abouit reddit spacing but here it is in its purest form. Learn to format your posts in a non-retarded manner

>>22083

>Vectorised reddit reaction image

What the fuck is happening to this board

>>22097

>Well if we take the actual definition of communism by Marx, it is supposed to allow humans to return to their species essence.

Marx had a fucked up definition of species essence, since communism is no marriage, no religion, and no parenthood, working in a factory as a member of a commune. Also, this revolution must spread to encompass the whole world for communism to take root. The borg are merely applying this to the galaxy.

>>22097

>You must be fucking joking.

Best of Both World Borg adapted to everything thrown at them. The ‘lol hologram bullets’ villain decay came afterward.

>Logic bomb

Absolutely no indication that would have worked anyways, and since the Hugh ‘mind bomb’ was localized to a cube it probably would have done that at most.

>>22091

>the Borg, a ridiculous parody of communism?

Fascism, actually.

All kinds of sublimating one's identity to the collective. No kinds of open access to the means of production, unlike the Federation with its "uber space replicators for all" bit.

>>22105

Fascism has the concept of personal property, identity, tradition, religion, and culture. The borg lack these things and are multiethnic and multicultural, things which fascists would find abhorrent. These are all components of a communist society however.

Something tells me you didn’t think this through and, like all arguments with the left, you just threw the insult back at the other side nonsensically, like claiming nazis are the real soy eaters are something silly like that.

>>22074

It's their very first Star Trek appearance, on television, not in the cannon trek chronology though.

>>22077

Shall I destroy him?

>The borg lack these things and are multiethnic and multicultural

No, the borg mind is NOT "multicultural," you fucking retard.

>>22091

FYI

The quoted stuff is from a small essay on the ferengi.

I don't agree with the author 100% of the time however the important parts are:

>In "The Last Outpost"

>The very first Ferengi warship we ever saw was powerful enough to dice with the Federation's biggest, most powerful battleship,

>and its crew was highly aggressive.

>When they reappeared in "Peak Performance"

>They dropped out of warp at point blank range, opened fire on the USS Enterprise,

> "I did not think the Federation had such iron!" A rather warrior-like sentiment, is it not?

>Picard once recounted the story of how he lost his previous command, after his ship was reduced to a flaming wreck by a Ferengi warship. This is a far cry from the cowardly Ferengi of DS9, isn't it?

>non-financial elements of their society (including the strong martial tradition that was obvious from their initial appearance in TNG) vanished without a trace

>Now, they were a laughingstock in combat

>hat happened to the heavily armed Ferengi warships we saw in TNG? Did the writers suffer a massive collective amnesia attack?

The Ferengi are space jews. That's it. Fin.

>>22108

I fail to understand how your statements are relevant to the discussion on how hard of a joke the ferengi are and how their DS9 greed based society can not possibly work.

>>22084

>>22113

>The Ferengi are space jews.

Not really what jew can argue with

>>22079

Also:

>>22078

>>22084

>6 Never allow family to stand in the way of opportunity

>111 Treat people in your debt like family… exploit them.

>>22111

>>22112

>This entire autistic thread was just a thinly-veiled premise to screech "rooooo! Ancaps get out!1!"

I should be surprised but I'm really not.

>>22116

No.

I seriously wanted to talk about the ferengi without

AnCaps

Jews

Libertarians

etc.

He started it by talking about AnCaps

>>22117

>I seriously wanted to talk about the ferengi without

>AnCaps

>Jews

>Libertarians

>etc.

Why can't people talk about the AnCap/Libertarian Space Jews without raising these subjects? :^)

>>22118

>Why can't people talk about the AnCap/Libertarian Space Jews without raising these subjects? :^)

Because the tentacles of /pol/ probe far and deep, nowhere escapes their grasp.

The Ferengi are literally just capitalists of today (except a bit more deregulated; so more like China than the USA). They only seem like overdramatic caricatures because you see them next to the utopia post-scarcity goody-goody Federation.

There is LITERALLY NOTHING that Ferengi do that your average businessman of today doesn't do. This includes fucking over their family and their country/civilization in the name of profit.

>>22079

Rule 57: Good customers are as rare as latinum. Treasure them.

So no, a repeat customer would probably get a refund.

>>22238

sorry for the weird formatting PC is acting up, also there's rule 139: Wives serve, brothers inherit.

>>22236

It's interesting how the Ferengi have a rule for everything that is logical.

>>22090

> Ferengi society is… basically - let's face it - AnCap

By what stretch of the AIDS-addled imagination?

>The truth is though, because of the great amount of poverty and exploitation it produces

You're talking about AnCap? I don't suppose you have any evidence or analytical arguments to substantiate this, do you?

>private law ("rules of acquisition")

Were you being savagely raped by a bear the entire time you were watching DS9? Were you somehow too distracted to notice that the Rules of Acquisition are issued and enforced by a central, planetary state with galaxy-spanning influence and funded by compulsory taxation, and not by competing private courts, participation in which is voluntary? How could you possibly have interpreted anything about Ferengi culture as private law? Money changing hands does not capitalism make.

>it would require an enormous violent state apparatus to maintain such social relations

Then it's not AnCap. First you call what is obviously state law "private law", then you say that said law requires a state, thereby asserting that it's state law. You can't even keep your own story straight.

>Yet the Ferengi are one of the most peaceful species in the galaxy (except maybe the early TNG Ferengi who had decent warships) and despise violence.

They don't see much profit in violence (whenever it's convenient for the plot). The writers are pretty schizophrenic on this point. Canonically, though, their supposedly market-driven society has prevented them from having wars, slavery, and genocide. This is an interesting departure from the blatant anti-capitalist propaganda that characterizes the franchise.

>Then please explain to me, how they stop unions from building

The state.

>how they enforce verdicts

They often don't.

>how do they protect private property

Again, they often don't. The sense one generally gets from watching the show is that a Ferengi can't rely on his government. The FCA seems mostly interested in enforcing regulations, and that palms can always be greased to avoid even this. I can't recall a single instance of any Ferengi even threatening to call the FCA to somehow protect his business or property. They always seemed to be showing up to shut somebody down or take their cut.

>It's also extremly unlikely that they'd use a hard currency (latinum) instead of fiat currency.

Extremely unlikely for the highly centralized state in the show; not for AnCap societies in general.

>The same way you can't have capitalism in the interstellar age

And what way is that, pray tell? You've made a number of assertions, but you haven't substantiated anything. You seem certain that capitalism produces poverty and exploitation (somehow) and point to a fictional state. You hold up that fictional, bureaucratic/dictatorial centralized global state with extremely intrusive business regulation and monopolistic state law as an example of a stateless society with competing market-driven law. Then you assert that for some reason, interstellar societies simply cannot exist without a centralized state interfering in the market, despite the fact that interstellar societies are precisely the kinds of societies which are simply too vast and complex for any centralized authority to possibly keep track of, much less manage efficiently.

The Ferengi are an interesting case, not because their society itself is anything worth emulating, but because it shows a fascinating process taking place across the writers' table over the course of years. What first began as a careless attempt to parody and demonize capitalism gradually evolved, over the course of the writers having to think about them for several years, into an increasingly sophisticated culture with its own virtues. To be sure, the vices never left; the Ferengi remain an attempt to lampoon free-market advocates. What's interesting is that we can pretty clearly see that the longer the writers thought about how their idea of a market society would function, the more and more concessions they themselves found they had to make to reason. Some of the Rules of Acquisition (as inconsistent as that text is) make interesting counter-arguments to the criticisms of capitalism: "When the customer dies, the money stops a'comin'" or "a dead customer can't buy as much as a live one". Some of them are even downright virtuous; "Good customers are as rare as latinum; treasure them". What we see is the writers, slowly and perhaps not consciously, realizing that capitalism may indeed have some virtue to it, and that a culture driven by the market has real, material upsides and mechanisms that restrict wrongdoing, even if they don't line up with the writers' worldview.

>>22324

What we witness with the Ferengi is the writers realizing over time that in order to demonize free market advocates, they had to tell a thoroughly inconsistent story about them. And as they told more stories and had to iron out those inconsistencies for the sake of narrative coherence, they had to go one of two ways: either acknowledge the ways in which the market drives their society, or depart from the idea of a market-driven society and instead depict a state-controlled society. To the extent that they did the former, we see Ferengi culture growing more inviting and virtuous. Insofar as they did the latter, we see the exploitation, greed, and corruption that we were initially promised. Best of all, the writers do not appear to have been conscious of this process; so what we see is that even those who demonize the market, and have the omnipotence of an author's pen, must invoke the state in order to conjure up the evils of which they accuse the market. Whether the writers realize it or not, their explorations of the Ferengi demonstrate the inescapable pure logic which shows the superiority of the market over the state. It is like watching a man, in trying to argue his case, proving his opponents' without any need for his input; a monologue of unaware revelation.

>>22324

"You can't make a deal if you're dead."

It's a truism, but a good enough argument for peace. Humanist Feds BTFOed.

>>22324

>By what stretch of the AIDS-addled imagination?

There is not really a state, there is just the FCA which is just some sort of employer's association watching over business conduct, there is no police, no army, no taxes. It might not be full AnCap but it's has AnCap as it gets for a fictional society. Note that I'm talking about DS9 Ferengi here.

>You're talking about AnCap? I don't suppose you have any evidence or analytical arguments to substantiate this, do you?

If we are taking about a fully developed capitalist society, yeah, it would an dystopia. Corproations could charge for rainwater and air, there would be no social security net, no retirement funds, no minimum wage (= living in cages like in Hongkong), Mad Max style shot outs, etc. - a practical example of free markets allocation in the social sector failing are rich western cities with empty apartment buildings, yet there are homeless people. Another example would be the lack of healthcare in the USA. This can also be contrasted with the high living standard in western countries with a solid social security net, such as Australia. On a local level I see this in my own city where the government has privatized the real estate market, whereas my birthcity, public building projects provide affordable housing and reduced unemployment.

>Were you being savagely raped by a bear the entire time you were watching DS9? Were you somehow too distracted to notice that the Rules of Acquisition are issued and enforced by a central, planetary state with galaxy-spanning influence and funded by compulsory taxation, and not by competing private courts, participation in which is voluntary?

First off, they didn't know taxation before the series finale when Rom took over. The "government" as in, the Grand Nagus, seems to be more of a corporate overlord who himself participates in the market and due to his sheer dominance, the business standards he works with become common practice. Similarly, you'll find the terms of conditions of smaller companies mimicking the ones of corporations in our world. Courts can hardly be voluntary because the verdicts have to be enforced, that word is an oxymoron. Anyway, the Ferengi did not believe in such most of the times, mostly it was just cleared up through bribes and compensation.

>Then it's not AnCap. First you call what is obviously state law "private law", then you say that said law requires a state, thereby asserting that it's state law. You can't even keep your own story straight.

Private law is enforced by the state you chucklefuck, that's why I said AnCap will never work. Private law has existed before the state (ius commune) and had to be upheld by the state once capitalism dawned. The state brings about capitalism and maintains capitalism. The state is the ultimate stratification of the class relations in capitalism. I was trying to point out the predicaments of Ferengi society and why it doesn't work.

>The state.

Which is exactly what I'm saying: AnCap is impossible without a state. In the entire history of capitalism we have strikes being cracked down upon simply by sheer violence employed by the state.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain

>The FCA seems mostly interested in enforcing regulations, and that palms can always be greased to avoid even this.

The "regulations" are all designed to protect private property, when there is a strike in Quark's bar, the FCA shows up to cut it down, the only reason this is against the interests of Quark his because he sort of doesn't want it because they are his friends and he as a protagonist will have to display some sympathetic characteristics. In the real world, 99% of company owners would not mind it.

>And what way is that, pray tell?

Well for once we see technology so advanced in the Star Trek universe that the reliance on wage labor as a means for the proletariat to sustain itself is impossible on a generalized level (~90% employment). Secondly, most goods would attain no value as no labor time went into them. Space exploration also requires an initial non-profit incentive as well, as it isn't profitable in the beginning.

>Then you assert that for some reason, interstellar societies simply cannot exist without a centralized state interfering in the market, despite the fact that interstellar societies are precisely the kinds of societies which are simply too vast and complex for any centralized authority to possibly keep track of, much less manage efficiently.

The opposite of capitalism is not centralization. In fact, capitalism often creates centralized systems, such as any modern nation state that we know in the 21st century. Feudalism for example, was decentralized, yet it was not capitalist.

>>22334

>I know nothing about economics, the post

>>22324

>Some of the Rules of Acquisition (as inconsistent as that text is) make interesting counter-arguments to the criticisms of capitalism: "When the customer dies, the money stops a'comin'" or "a dead customer can't buy as much as a live one". Some of them are even downright virtuous; "Good customers are as rare as latinum; treasure them".

Those rules are not virtuous or good, they are just tools to make profit. The counterargument to this is that if we assume that the Federation is a quasi-communist society (which it sometimes isn't because this has been written inconsistently), the concept of "being a customer" does no longer exist because there is no valorized relation between a consumer and the service or good itself. Therefore, the rules of acquisition are not transferable to the Federation, the only time they are relevant is when a Fed is forced to act amongst Ferengi circles, for example, when Nog helps Jake to acquire a card, and Jake doesn't have any money because he's a human. This wouldn't be a problem if he was in the Federation society, where he doesn't need money, but in Ferengi society, he needs it. That doesn't make one standard "better" than the other, it's just how social relations undergo reification depending on the mode of production.

>To the extent that they did the former, we see Ferengi culture growing more inviting and virtuous.

In what way? The only thing that really changed was the Grand Nagus turning into a basic bitch left-liberal. I think you are kinda missing the point here. The Ferengi weren't supposed to be "evil" or "virtuous", rather they functioned as a comedic parody of a hyper-capitalist society that was supposed to make the viewer chuckle over scenarios and hilarious absurdities he knows only too well from his own capitalistic society in which he lives in. They're not trying to be edgy or offering some social critique.

>You seem certain that capitalism produces poverty and exploitation

It always produces exploitation as a simple economic fact due to the MCM' cycle. This is not up for debate.

Capitalism doesn't produce poverty. It produces great riches, however, it produces new poverty as a side effect, and once it's fully developed, it produces more ill than good due to the tendency of the rate of profit to fall. It certainly has a place within its own historical horizon.

>>22335

Great argument there, buddy.

>>22336

Fine, now that I have some time I'll try and pick apart your retardation.

>Corproations could charge for rainwater and air

False. They can't restrict the supply of these things, they have no control over distribution, there's no way they could reasonably charge for these things.

>no social security net

The welfare state is a retarded idea and has never worked. It promotes living on bare sustenance without advancing (thus lowering the quality of life for the poor), while systematically reducing the economy's productivity over time. The incentive shift created by any kind of welfare makes it less desirable to earn income and more desirable to live off of welfare. This causes more people to live on welfare, which increases the financial burden of the welfare state, which necessitates a tax increase. This decreases disposable income at the upper levels, which means there's less of an incentive to reach those upper levels, so even more people begin to take welfare, which increases the financial burden… and so the vicious cycle continues until you've destroyed all economic growth and productivity in the country and you're left with a shithole like Venezuela. You lefties love to bitch and moan about "income inequality," right? Well, the welfare state is one of the quickest and surefire ways to make sure society is divided into the consuming masses and an extremely wealthy elite, with nothing in between.

>no retirement funds

Without the tax burden imposed by "social security" programs people would have far more disposable income which they may invest and/or save at their own discretion for retirement. Private companies offer pension plans as well, they've only decreased in recent history because of increased regulations.

>no minimum wage

Minimum wage laws destroy lower-level jobs and cause a net increase in unemployment. Jobs are either consolidated (one man earning $7 an hour doing the work of two fired workers who each earned $3 an hour), or replaced by machinery because, thanks to the increased cost of labor, they're now cheaper to operate than workers. Further, by artificially pushing up the range of income all you've done is increase the rate of inflation, raising price levels and as a result eliminating the marginal benefit you might have gained from the minimum wage. This is basic economics.

https://mises.org/wire/yes-economic-laws-still-apply-minimum-wage

>Mad Max style shot outs

This is just retarded and doesn't warrant a response.

> a practical example of free markets allocation in the social sector failing are rich western cities with empty apartment buildings, yet there are homeless people

That's caused, among other things, by rent control, Keynesian "stimulus packages" from the government that incentivize nonproductive investment, and the Fed manipulating interest rates to the point that firms can't accurately predict time-preference and future market behavior. You didn't actually provide an example so I really can't provide a more in-depth answer.

>Another example would be the lack of healthcare in the USA.

Healthcare in the United States is far from free-market, and is in fact one of the most regulated industries in the entire nation.

https://mises.org/wire/how-government-regulations-made-healthcare-so-expensive

>This can also be contrasted with the high living standard in western countries with a solid social security net, such as Australia.

Embed related. It deals with Scandinavia instead of emuland but the same arguments by and large apply.

https://mises.org/library/australias-uncreative-destruction\

https://mises.org/wire/social-expenditures-us-are-higher-all-other-oecd-countries-except-france

>On a local level I see this in my own city where the government has privatized the real estate market, whereas my birthcity, public building projects provide affordable housing and reduced unemployment.

You don't actually provide anything concrete here. However, in general government-sponsored housing is a net loss because a) inability to gauge prices and consumer demand means they will either over or under produce, and the government's price inelasticity means that construction contractors will grossly overcharge them for the project, increasing taxpayer burden and further reducing efficiency. Such projects inevitably hurt the economy far more than they help it, even if you normalize for low-income segments.

https://mises.org/library/public-housing-necessary

https://mises.org/wire/how-governments-outlaw-affordable-housing

https://mises.org/wire/government’s-war-affordable-housing

https://mises.org/library/scandal-housing-vouchers

>>22340

>First off, they didn't know taxation before the series finale when Rom took over.

Incorrect, they didn't know of a progressive income tax before Moogie's puppet Rom took over.

>he "government" as in, the Grand Nagus, seems to be more of a corporate overlord who himself participates in the market and due to his sheer dominance, the business standards he works with become common practice

The Nagus is a religious authority more than he is a governmental or economic one.

>Courts can hardly be voluntary because the verdicts have to be enforced, that word is an oxymoron

Two parties in disagreement agree on a court or other arbiter to settle the dispute, and then voluntarily sign a contract agreeing to abide by the decision of a court. This isn't such a complicated idea.

https://mises.org/library/private-courts

https://mises.org/library/possibility-private-law

>Similarly, you'll find the terms of conditions of smaller companies mimicking the ones of corporations in our world.

Nigger what? The business models are vastly different with highly different approaches to both market conduct and what policies they desire. Small-to-medium businesses tend to favor less regulation, for instance, because they have low profit margins and greatly appreciate any kind of reduction in overhead. The largest corporations (usually the ones you lefties paint as the boogieman) by contrast favor more regulation, because they're big enough to just eat the extra cost, while knowing that most of their competition isn't, and as such will be driven out of business and increase their market share.

>Private law is enforced by the state you chucklefuck, that's why I said AnCap will never work.

See above regarding private courts.

>Which is exactly what I'm saying: AnCap is impossible without a state. In the entire history of capitalism we have strikes being cracked down upon simply by sheer violence employed by the state.

Hmm, so you mean the state, with its monopoly on violence and coercion, was the one to engage in anti-labor behavior most often, rather than the capitalists themselves? This only serves to prove you wrong.

>Secondly, most goods would attain no value as no labor time went into them.

>the fucking labor theory of value.

NO.

It is beyond retarded, and STV has been proven superior time and time again. I've had to deal with this shit multiple times in the past week and I can't be arsed to do so again so just read:

https://mises.org/wire/labor-theory-value-refuted-nobody-cares-how-hard-you-work

>The opposite of capitalism is not centralization. In fact, capitalism often creates centralized systems, such as any modern nation state that we know in the 21st century. Feudalism for example, was decentralized, yet it was not capitalist.

Most ancaps will point towards feudalism and monarchism as a superior system to the one we have today, so not really an argument.

>Those rules are not virtuous or good, they are just tools to make profit.

Those two are far from mutually exclusive, there's nothing inherently evil about profit.

>This is not up for debate.

YES IT FUCKING IS, BECAUSE THE LABOR THEORY OF VALUE IS SHIT AND DOESN'T EXPLAIN CONSUMER BEHAVIOR. READ, YOU NIGGER, READ!

>it produces new poverty as a side effect

False, the poorest people in capitalist societies live far better than the most powerful aristocrats just a few decades ago. The tide raises all ships.

https://mises.org/wire/poor-us-are-richer-middle-class-much-europe

https://mises.org/wire/inequality-doesnt-create-poverty

>>22334

>There is not really a state, there is just the FCA which is just some sort of employer's association watching over business conduct,

Wrong.

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Ferengi_Commerce_Authority

>there is no police

What are the Liquidators, then?

>no army

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Ferengi_Alliance#Military

>no taxes.

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Tax

Did you even watch the show?

>If we are taking about a fully developed capitalist society, yeah, it would an dystopia.

Again; proof?

>Corproations could charge for rainwater and air

A corporation can't charge you for what you already own, and you'd have to be actively-killing-yourself-retarded to somehow invent a property claim that didn't include water rights.

That's just not how property claims work; you don't get to just say "that's mine now gimme money". There's more to it than that. Also; feel free to provide any evidence for anybody but a government doing anything like this.

>there would be no social security net

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Friendly_society

>no retirement funds

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Investment

>no minimum wage

Unambiguously a good thing.

>(= living in cages like in Hongkong)

Haha, are you serious?

>Mad Max style shot outs

Oh lordy; you're a cartoon. Again; feel free to provide any substantiation to this.

>a practical example of free markets allocation in the social sector failing are rich western cities with empty apartment buildings, yet there are homeless people

Oh yes; clearly there are no laws or government programs involved here. Of course the owners of these properties find it MUCH more profitable to have them just sitting there collecting dust than to actually derive rent from them. Those greedy capitalist pigs turn such a huge profit when nobody buys what they're selling.

>Another example would be the lack of healthcare in the USA

Gee, it's almost as though healthcare and banking were the two most heavily-regulated industries in the United States. I wonder what healthcare looked like in the US before the government got involved? Hmmm…

http://www.freenation.org/a/f12l3.html

>This can also be contrasted with the high living standard in western countries with a solid social security net, such as Australia

You'll notice that those countries which have productive enough economies to afford government "safety nets" also tend to be much more business-friendly than their less comfortable counterparts. It's almost as though it had much more to do with the ease of doing business than with public spending.

>the government has privatized the real estate market, whereas my birthcity, public building projects provide affordable housing and reduced unemployment.

Public housing programs have objectively done more harm than good:

https://spoa.com/how-the-government-killed-affordable-housing/

>First off, they didn't know taxation before the series finale when Rom took over.

Wrong again:

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Tax

>the Grand Nagus, seems to be more of a corporate overlord who himself participates in the market and due to his sheer dominance, the business standards he works with become common practice.

But that's wrong:

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Grand_Nagus

>Courts can hardly be voluntary because the verdicts have to be enforced, that word is an oxymoron.

I swear, have you ever opened a book?

http://www.daviddfriedman.com/Academic/Course_Pages/legal_systems_very_different_12/LegalSystemsDraft.html

https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1703598

https://web.stanford.edu/~milgrom/publishedarticles/The%20Role%20of%20Institutions%20in%20the%20Revival%20of%20Trade,%201990.pdf

http://www.ozarkia.net/bill/anarchism/PolycentricLaw.html

>Private law is enforced by the state you chucklefuck

A) That makes it not private, but state law. B) That's wrong. See any of the links from the previous section.

>Private law has existed before the state (ius commune)

Therefore it was enacted without the state, therefore you are admitting that it does not require a state and that your previous comments were wrong. You can't have it both ways.

>and had to be upheld by the state once capitalism dawned.

>once capitalism dawned

>The state brings about capitalism and maintains capitalism.

What do you think capitalism is? Property rights and free trade didn't just "dawn". They pre-date humanity.

>The state is the ultimate stratification of the class relations in capitalism.

>class relations

Awwww; it thinks Marx was coherent. Isn't that just precious?

>AnCap is impossible without a state.

>statelessness is impossible without a state

You clearly don't know what words mean. When the state interferes, it is not capitalism.

>>22341

Oh, and if your attention span is too short to read articles here's something you can passively listen to:

>>22334

>when there is a strike in Quark's bar, the FCA shows up to cut it down, the only reason this is against the interests of Quark his because he sort of doesn't want it because they are his friends

Except Brunt didn't show up to break up the strike: he showed up to threaten Quark into breaking up the strike. Did you forget that part? If it were to protect Quark's interests, there wouldn't have been a need for him to show up. Quark didn't call him. He showed up because it's fucking Ferengi law. Again; did you actually watch the show?

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/Bar_Association_(episode)

>proletariat

>labor theory of value

>Space exploration also requires an initial non-profit incentive as well, as it isn't profitable in the beginning.

That's not how economics works. Your economic theories are even worse than your objectively poor recollection of Star Trek.

>The opposite of capitalism is not centralization. In fact, capitalism often creates centralized systems, such as any modern nation state that we know in the 21st century.

Considering that capitalism is precisely the lack of state interference in the economy, and therefore a pluralistic decentralization of economic influence, it's simply astonishing how you can keep looking at enormous forcefully-centralizing nation-states interfering heavily in economic affairs, turning to people who keep explaining over and over in painstaking detail that this is precisely what they are against, and bellow that it is precisely what they advocate for.

Your accusations are directly analogous to (and every bit as coherent as) saying that pacifism cannot exist without perpetual war, and pointing to international wars as prime examples of pacifism, and blaming pacifists for all war. You're turning to the people who say "don't do that" and blaming them for every time someone has "done that" and insisting, against logic and evidence, that "doing that" is the inevitable consequence the "don't do that" policy.

Nearly every sentence in your post has been shown to be factually incorrect.

>>22336

>Those rules are not virtuous or good, they are just tools to make profit

Regardless of the motivation; the principle of "killing people is a bad idea" is a virtuous one. You may not like the spirit in which it is expressed, but regardless it holds the well-being of others as a value. A man who is good for what you feel are the wrong reasons is still good.

>The Federation isn't a customer of the Ferengi

>points to examples of people in the Federation being customers of the Ferengi

>Therefore, the rules of acquisition are not transferable to the Federation

The Rules of Acquisition govern Ferengi behavior, not their clients'. A Ferengi follows the RoA no matter who he's dealing with; Ferengi or otherwise. A dead human customer is just as incapable of buying things as a dead Ferengi.

>This wouldn't be a problem if he was in the Federation society, where he doesn't need money, but in Ferengi society, he needs it.

This has been addressed in another thread on this board; Earth doesn't use currency, but the Federation does. They drop lines about buying things all the time.

>In what way? The only thing that really changed was the Grand Nagus turning into a basic bitch left-liberal.

I already gave the example of several of the Rules of Acquisition holding virtue (of a sort) as a profitable policy, showing that the market incentivises pro-social behavior. Broadly, Ferengi culture was shown at times to be nicer than expected in its own ways. Businessmen investing in each other and helping each other, perhaps out a mutual desire for profit, but nonetheless cooperating. Even the Star Trek writers couldn't conceive of a way to make the profit motive universally bad in practice.

>The Ferengi weren't supposed to be "evil" or "virtuous"

The demon faces, razor teeth, incessant scheming, and constant opposition to the protagonists of TNG didn't tip you off? The writers even originally envisioned them as the primary villains, since the Federation had formed an alliance with the Klingons.

> rather they functioned as a comedic parody of a hyper-capitalist society that was supposed to make the viewer chuckle over scenarios and hilarious absurdities

Not at first. They moved toward that as DS9 moved along, and part of balancing out their vices to make them into a believable culture was to add virtue of a sort. Maybe not what you would recognize as virtue, but pro-social behavior nonetheless. They went from being unambiguously evil to being more "neutral with cultural quirks we don't approve of but tolerate because the Federation is so awesome".

>They're not trying to be edgy or offering some social critique.

Star Trek maintains a constant undercurrent of socialist propaganda. The setting is predicated on the idea that getting rid of money created a utopian human society. The Ferengi are a clear manifestation of that theme; depicting a civilization so opposite to the core values of the show's creators which takes every opportunity to be icky and slimy and bad. That softened over time, but it never went away.

>It always produces exploitation as a simple economic fact due to the MCM' cycle.

That's cute; it really is, but Marxist economics are so flagrantly wrong that it's frankly embarrassing that anybody tries to bring them up with a straight face. You may as well ask about much impact the money the Tooth Fairy creates has on inflation.

> It produces great riches, however, it produces new poverty as a side effect

That's not even a coherent idea. Poverty is not a side effect of wealth.

>tendency of the rate of profit to fall

Oh boy; this old myth. Profits tend to fall in an unchanging economy. Here's the thing, though; the economy constantly changes. The tendency of the rate of profits to fall only describes an isolated factor of the economic process which simply demonstrates the necessity of economic development and innovation. If you remove that development from the economic process, of course everything eventually grinds to a halt, but that depends on literally nobody ever changing their behaviors in pursuit of profit, which is never going to happen.

>>22340

>False. They can't restrict the supply of these things, they have no control over distribution, there's no way they could reasonably charge for these things.

Make that clean water and air, and oh yes they can. Try and find clean, fresh water in the middle of a city that doesn't come out of a bottle or a tap. I'll wait. And consider places like Beijing where the air is thick with smog to the point of toxicity.

>be onna farm, draw water from aquifer

>BigMcLargeCo™ buys a plot upstream, turns it into a landfill

>you object

<you can't control what I do with my property

>suddenly aquifer is poison

<lol buy my bottled water goy

Or while I'm bitching, how about this scenario.

>be onna farm

>have well developed water plan such that the most rainfall possible is retained in the soil and any excess is diverted safely

>neighbors upstream and downstream go 'nah, that sounds like work'

>neighbor upstream has insufficient drainage, whenever it downpours it spills over into your property and washes out your fields

>neighbor downstream has insufficient drainage, and whenever it downpours it blocks up with debris and floods your fields

>you object

<see previous rebuttal

And that's assuming a 'best case scenario' of stupidity rather than active malice. What if BicMcLargeCo™ up and down stream did this deliberately with the intent of running you out of business so they could buy the land for nothing?

>>22347

>you can't control what I do with my property

In a privatized system your scenario would be considered an infringement on the farmer's property rights. Same with all other pollution performed in this manner. This would be reflected in privatized courts, and was even the standard practice in public courts, until Congress (see: the state) arbitrarily decreed that this type of property infringement was OK, because the polluting factory was working to the "benefit of society". Examples of this that haven't been cucked by state intervention is the possibility to successfully sue someone for excessively loud music, i.e. sound pollution.

https://mises.org/library/libertarian-manifesto-pollution

https://mises.org/library/law-property-rights-and-air-pollution

https://mises.org/library/pollution-and-government-failure-china

>>22348

For clarification, the guy you responded to wasn't me, the one you and the other anon made the effortposts against. I'll answer them tomorrow as I have to go bed, but boy, there is a lot to dissect there.

For future clarification I'll put on this flag.

>>22347

>>BigMcLargeCo™ buys a plot upstream, turns it into a landfill

><you can't control what I do with my property

That's not how property rights work. A property claim is not simply carte blanche to do whatever you like within a line of the ground. If you poison the aquifer, you've violated the property rights of anyone downstream of you. Before the EPA was created and effectively outlawed the practice, people used to sue and win over those sorts of things.

>What if BicMcLargeCo™ up and down stream did this deliberately with the intent of running you out of business so they could buy the land for nothing?

They'd get sued into oblivion, because property rights aren't just a fucking line on the ground.

>>22347

>>22236

Good point however it contradicts:

1)Actual ferengi behavior

Quark did not give refunds knowing it will only burn bridges and give a net negative benefits.

And his is game over for this theory.

Actually ferengi behavior is not a net analysis of benefits to costs (see pint 3).

2) The other problem is that other rules state to never give back the customers money

>Once you have their money, you never give it back.

What part of "never" and "money" don't you understand?

And this leads to point 3

3) The rules are silly because they are mostly meaningless statements who are self contradictory (see 2) and not actually practiced because actually ferengi behavior simply ignores

>Rule 57: Good customers are as rare as latinum. Treasure them.

4)

Also I can argue there is a way to obey

> Good customers are as rare as latinum. Treasure them.

and

>Once you have their money, you never give it back

Simply never give refunds.

And pretend like you care for he good customers and this is completely obeying the rules.

And this brings us to the the problem of ferengi ideology not understanding net benefits and cost analysis.

However thanks for a good counterpoint keep up the good discussion everyone.

>>22487

Like much of Star Trek, they were pretty bad at painting a consistent picture of the Ferengi. Bringing in lots of different creative influences to such a large body of lore over so many years produced numerous contradictions throughout the franchise. The Ferengi are no exception. I vaguely recall there being a rule to the effect of "bend the rules", but I'll be arsed if I can remember it.

Then again, on this particular point; maybe they're just a diverse species full of individuals who, like real-world humans, don't necessarily conform to their culture as portrayed on paper.

>>22488

>consistent picture of the Ferengi

My personal favorite are the episodes who actuality portray the ferengi are right and the no money federation is wrong in DS9.

Personally however I ignore the inconsistencies knowing their origins.

However I don't remember (maybe you can help me with this) even one instance of ferengies ever giving refunds on their faulty products (the mirror universe ferengi don't count because they are the opposite) even if its a token "15 free minutes on the holodeck" coupon.

And ignoring the rules, ignoring everything this is simply a stupid strategy on its own.

Anyone involved in real interaction with customers and a little thinking would realize this.

>>22489

>My personal favorite are the episodes who actuality portray the ferengi are right and the no money federation is wrong in DS9.

Oh those are pretty great. I love when Quark lectures the Vulcan Maquis on going to war. It makes me wonder what a Vulcan/Ferengi hybrid would be capable of. Ferengi are already pretty damn smart; if you throw in the Vulcan discipline, they'd be formidable.

>However I don't remember (maybe you can help me with this) even one instance of ferengies ever giving refunds on their faulty products (the mirror universe ferengi don't count because they are the opposite) even if its a token "15 free minutes on the holodeck" coupon.

Well I think Quark gave some things "on the house" from time to time, and I feel like he might have been worried enough to offer a pacifying refund once or twice, but I can't recall any specific instances.

>And ignoring the rules, ignoring everything this is simply a stupid strategy on its own.

I agree, but there's a difference between ignoring rules and bending them. The Ferengi have a number of policies that don't work in the real world but which exist in the Trek lore just to portray them in a certain way.

>>22072

>no one can build up a society on greed

Oh how wrong you are.

>the first generation ferengi would realize that not telling the rules to their kids is the best idea ever(and actually in accordance with the rules "exploit your family").

They don't tell their kids the rules, that's the whole point. Young ferengi have to buy the information, trade for it, or steal it.

Ferengi don't educate their kids, they work them as hard as possible until the kids figure out how to get out of work and earn money elsewise.

>>22078

>chosenites have a deep respect for their own and family.

No they fucking dont.

Jews jew each other only a fraction of an amount less than goys.

>>22090

>ferengi

>ancap

No they're not. They have two branches of government - the commerce authority and the office of nagus.

The office of nagus is backed up by the ferengi fleet and a million clerks that write regulations, although usually each nagus only approves one or two laws in his lifetime his main job is ensuring the ferengi fleet can protect the assets of a new venture.

The commerce authority is backed up by the board of liquidators, which acts as an institution that interprets and enforces contracts and laws. But instead of being voted in as in a democracy, the richest ferengi get to buy out a previous board member.

The check and balance works this way, the Nagus can impoverish members of the board which they consider a fate worse than death, while the board (in a unanimous decision) can remove a nagus.

So no, they aren't anarchists. They aren't even strictly capitalist, they are mercantilist.

tl;dr calling them ancap is retarded

>>22090

>It's also extremly unlikely that they'd use a hard currency (latinum) instead of fiat currency.

Also ^ is dumb. Latinum is valuable because it physically can't be reproduced, kind of like a bitcoin. Ergo if you have a pocket of latinum, it will retain its uniqueness for billions of years.

This stability allows for trade.

Modern fiat currency is a socialist invention, basically every country promises to shoot anyone who copies its money, and that's the only barrier to reproducing it. It's kind of like fairies, it only works if you believe in it really really hard.

>>22090

>>22512

>>22511

Basically I'm trying to say you are incredibly unintelligent.

>>22512

This issue with this is that they live in a civilization that is virtually post-scarcity and that can zip around mining whatever planets they choose, by the thousands and millions. It's logically ABSURD to suggest that there are ANY elements anywhere in the galaxy that are remotely "rare" enough to be used as a physical currency. Mathematically speaking, the amount of planets in the galaxy is so stupidly vast that it may as well be infinite, and as the Vulcans have taught us: infinite diversity in infinite combinations; this means that it's all but guaranteed that there is an entire planet composed of latinum around somewhere.

It would have been far more reasonable to say that latinum was a completely artificial compound, that was manufactured at prohibitive cost (aka a shitton of energy), akin to what the cost of creating antimatter is, today. That way it would actually make sense for there to be an extremely limited amount of it.

>>22529

>It's logically ABSURD to suggest that there are ANY elements anywhere in the galaxy that are remotely "rare" enough to be used as a physical currency. Mathematically speaking, the amount of planets in the galaxy is so stupidly vast that it may as well be infinite, and as the Vulcans have taught us: infinite diversity in infinite combinations; this means that it's all but guaranteed that there is an entire planet composed of latinum around somewhere.

What? No, that's crazy. First off, something doesn't have to be "rare" to act as a standard of exchange. The criteria are: accepted as valuable, durability, ease of comfort, and granularity. Rare goods are more likely to fit into these categories but they certainly aren't the only ones that can. To use an example, in colonial-era North America beaver pelts were used as a de-facto currency by the pioneers. But your second claim is one that is truly absurd. Yeah, it's theoretically possible that planet made purely of latinum, or gold, or clones of Selena Gomez. But anything like that flies directly in the face of how we know the universe functions, which follows some pretty well-established laws, including those that govern how solar systems form. We know that gold planets are pretty much impossible for instance because gold never forms in nascent solar systems, it can only be created by stellar fusion and deposited on planetoids through asteroids. As of yet we can't conceive of a way that stars would violate conservation of energy and start producing vast amounts of gold early in their cycle; the same applies for all observed scientific phenomena, and you can't defeat the laws of physics by the law of large numbers alone. That's like telling someone he'll make a lot of money betting on baseball games if he assumes that at some point, the ball HAS to pass right through the belt, through the stadium walls, and out the other side.

Further, you're really overestimating the number of planets a) in the galaxy and b) that the Federation has access to. Latest estimates put the number at around 100 billion planets in the Milky Way. Not a small number by any means but hardly infinite. Now, consider that the Federation has explored and settled a tiny amount of that. Even the wildest estimates of the writers put it at 8,000 light-years at its longest point, compared to the 150,000 light-years of the Milky Way's diameter. And travelling between these places isn't free, either. All ships need antimatter and dilithium to operate, neither of which is replicable (incidentally, Quark implies that dilithium is also used as a currency a few times in DS9). So even if there was a planet straight out of the goddamn Improbability Drive floating somewhere out there finding it isn't exactly free, and neither is travelling there.

>It would have been far more reasonable to say that latinum was a completely artificial compound, that was manufactured at prohibitive cost (aka a shitton of energy), akin to what the cost of creating antimatter is, today. That way it would actually make sense for there to be an extremely limited amount of it.

That makes less sense than a natural resource. Technology, energy efficiency, and so forth would no doubt progress faster than the rate at which new deposits are discovered, meaning that this artificial currency will be devaluated more quickly over time than a natural one, and that less stable price makes the artificial less viable as a currency.

>>22539

>something doesn't have to be "rare" to act as a standard of exchange

The value of latinum is stated to be the fact that it cannot be replicated. That means it's rare. The only reason ANYTHING has been used as a currency is when the government can directly control how much there is in circulation, whether because they are rare metals that are expensive to acquire (like gold and silver) or because they are a fiat currency that has security measures meaning you cannot counterfeit them (like dollars). If any shmuck can just go to the nearest asteroid field and mine up a million bricks' worth of latinum, it's useless as a currency.

This is so basic that I don't care what else you said; you're clearly a moron. Talking about things used in a BARTER SYSTEM (fucking beaver pelts) is not an argument that can be applied to a galactic economy.

>>22539

>Further, you're really overestimating the number of planets

This is true/

Star Trek universe posses technology far more advanced than anything humanity will probably ever develop and yet they've barely explored a quarter of the galaxy.

>>22546

>The value of latinum is stated to be the fact that it cannot be replicated. That means it's rare. The only reason ANYTHING has been used as a currency is when the government can directly control how much there is in circulation, whether because they are rare metals that are expensive to acquire (like gold and silver) or because they are a fiat currency that has security measures meaning you cannot counterfeit them (like dollars). If any shmuck can just go to the nearest asteroid field and mine up a million bricks' worth of latinum, it's useless as a currency.

And like I said before, rare goods are more likely to check the boxes of "good currency." However, this is because being rare and difficult to mine/acquire is just a supporting factor to that quality which makes it a good currency–in the case of gold, the difficulty of extraction keeps the price nice and stable. So rarity helps, but there's still two degrees of separation between rarity and good currency. Please be a little more comprehensive when you read in the future.

>Talking about things used in a BARTER SYSTEM (fucking beaver pelts) is not an argument that can be applied to a galactic economy.

1. Wasn't a barter system, I mentioned rather explicitly that they were a standard of exchange

2. I was just using them as an example of something that can be used as a currency even though it's not, strictly speaking, all that rare. I didn't apply this argument in the context of a galactic economy.

>the only reason ANYTHING has been used as a currency is when the government can directly control how much there is in circulation

That's a retarded thing to say. For one, governments never had direct control of how much gold was in circulation, which is one of the reasons governments have elected to choose fiat currency: it gives them a total monopoly over the money supply which they could never achieve with gold. In addition to gold, cryptocurrencies are a sound example of a standard of exchange operating entirely outside of state control, as are the high-value diamonds used by criminal cartels to transfer large amounts of money from one place to another.

>>22487

What you and many people here are failing to understand is that the Rules of Acquisition are a dictionary of justifications. Do you choose not to refund the money of some total fuckwad who just wants to sample your shit and not pay? Well, "Once you have their money, you never give it back". Do you choose to refund the money of your repeat customer because you know he's good for it? Well, "Good customers are as rare as latinum. Treasure them." The rules may seem contradictory, but that's because they're more complicated than a set of orders for automatons.

>>22559

Also, one must keep in mind that updates to the rules are made by the current Grand Nagus; as a result, seeming contradictions within the rules simply reflect differences in philosophy between one Nagus and the other. If we expand upon this further, the Rules could be almost like modern-era political soundbites: quick, easy ways of denoting what your administration's/pontificate's policy is meant to be. A hypothetical example of this could be Rules 34 (War is good for business) and 35 (Peace is good for business). It could be that these rules were penned by two different Naguses; the former was one who advocated provoking and false-flagging nearby powers into going to war with each other, while selling weaponry to both sides, while the latter could be one that negotiated an armistice between the aforementioned powers. This has the dual benefits of making windfall profits by selling aid to either side, venture capitalists investing in industries that were destroyed throughout the war, while also fostering long-term growth through deregulating trade and allowing the buildup of civic infrastructure on each side. Thus, what was played as a flippant joke in the series can be used to establish greater complexity within the Ferengi religion. In the event of contradiction, you could do what the Muzzies do with teh Qu'ran and say that the newest decree takes precedence in the event of any contradictions. Incidentally, this is one of the reasons why the "Religion of Peace" claims are utter bullshit even by theological standards: all of the peaceful shit in the Qu'ran, including the prohibition of suicide, is in the early passages of the book. And since it's quite explicitly established that the newer passages override the older, all of the later stuff about burning the infidel and martyrdom in the name of the holy war is explicitly canon, and takes precedence over any peaceful overtures.

>>22547

So they have access to 25 billion planets. I know that's a big number, and humans aren't good at understanding big numbers, but that's a really, really, REALLY big number. Trust me. You would have to reach the age of 792 to live through 25 billion seconds.

>>22564

Of course it's big; However the probability of finding a planet that defies traditional understanding of astronomy and scarcity and just happens to be made out of large quantities of latinum is decidedly smaller than 1 in 25 billion, which is the point being made. Moreover, it's a trivial issue compared to the other points discussed.

>>22505

Heavily underrated post.

>>22539

5-star post.

>>22546

>That means it's rare.

Actually that just means that its supply in the economy grows slower than the supply of other goods can. It's important to remember that in economic terms, "scarcity" isn't quite synonymous with "rarity"; it refers to the fact that the supply of all goods and services is finite.

>The only reason ANYTHING has been used as a currency is when the government can directly control how much there is in circulation

That's absolutely false. Lots of currencies have been used independently of any government. I'd suggest checking out a practice called "free banking", which used to be much more common in the developed world before various governments outlawed the practice in favor of currency issued by central banks.

>If any shmuck can just go to the nearest asteroid field and mine up a million bricks' worth of latinum, it's useless as a currency.

If the supply of other goods and services in the economy increases at roughly the same rate that the supply of latinum increases, then the economic value of the latinum remains stable. I think it's pretty safe to say that an interplanetary economy would be growing pretty damn fast. If it were easy to increase the supply of latinum at a faster rate than the supply of other goods and services, then it wouldn't have come to be used as currency, but you have to remember that a "million bricks' worth of latinum" is probably a drop in the ocean when compared to the Alpha Quadrant economy. Think of how big the current global economy is, then multiply that by hundreds of inhabited worlds; even without the technological progress, that's insanely large.

>Talking about things used in a BARTER SYSTEM (fucking beaver pelts) is not an argument that can be applied to a galactic economy.

All trade is just a special case of barter. Talking about things used in a BARTER SYSTEM (fucking beaver pelts) is not an argument that can be applied to a galactic economy.

Currency is just a simplification of barter. All the economic principles are absolute and universal; the laws of economics don't change because of the size of the economy, or what's being traded.

>>22602

>If it were easy to increase the supply of latinum at a faster rate than the supply of other goods and services, then it wouldn't have come to be used as currency

This is dangerously close to "it works because it works in canon so fuck you". We pick apart each and every bullshit pretense and trope in Trek, but somehow this one is off limits? What fucking hard-on do you have for latinum that you're so incapable of seeing its obvious logical flaws?

>>22559

> Rules of Acquisition are a dictionary of justifications

Then they are quite irrelevant.

>that's because they're more complicated than a set of orders for automatons.

Sounds more like RoA are inferior bullshit everyone uses to quote to justify anything.

> Do you choose not to refund the money of some total fuckwad who just wants to sample your shit and not pay? Well, "Once you have their money, you never give it back"

>Do you choose to refund the money of your repeat customer because you know he's good for it? Well, "Good customers are as rare as latinum. Treasure them."

This is better explained by net benefit calculations combined with probability (how likely is it that this customer will shop again at me and give me more befits as a result in a reasonable time frame) + some gut feelings (is he trying to extract free products from me).

I get what you are trying to say.

However I think you are engaging in apologetics who treys to twist something nonsensical into something reasonable

Example:

>"keep your friends close however keep your enemies closer"

<Clearly this is talking about keeping surveillance and being informed on your enemies.

You can try to twist it into something else, however then the original quote fails to explain this detail making them bad.

The

<Oh you philistine can you not understand subtly

<They are better because only intelligent people can understand them this way

Is a final maneuver some apologist tries to play.

>>22560

I like this.

Great idea for a fan fiction.

I also recommend watching (youtube purged all the clips)

Voyager False Profits.

http://memory-alpha.wikia.com/wiki/False_Profits_(episode)

It has the ferengi contemplating the RoA and literally saying :

>No, you idiot! He goes to the Rules of Acquisition.

>Unabridged and fully annotated, with all forty seven commentaries, all nine hundred major and minor judgements, all ten thousand considered opinions. There's a rule for every conceivable situation.

http://www.chakoteya.net/Voyager/224.htm

>Ferengi religion

Why is everyone saying its their religion?

I understand they have a after life however I don't think the RoA or Nagus are part of it.

>>22631

>its obvious logical flaws?

Latinum is one of the few things in Star Trek that actually makes sense. If you can accept that it can't be replicated like they say in the show, then the rest of it is basic economics of commodity money. The only thing that kind of doesn't make sense about it is the idea that such an interventionist government would allow people to use it, instead of granting itself tremendous economic power by issuing a monopolistic fiat currency. Maybe the Ferengi Alliance is just too big, and Ferengi merchants too canny and cautious of the follies of fiat currency, to enforce such a currency. Maybe they've already tried it and it failed right away due to lack of restraint on the part of the government. Maybe I'm putting more economic thought into this than the writers did.

>>22636

Their heaven is a "Divine Treasury" made entirely of latinum (which begs the question: how do you fucking walk around there when latinum is a liquid?), so it seems money is a large portion of what little religion they have. It has nothing to do with the RoA, though. While it was meant as a tongue-in-cheek reference to people who have a Bible quote for every situation, the RoA are in no way a scripture, despite their obsession over it. You could call it more like the way gun nuts worship the Second Amendment, in that it's still a reverence, but secular rather than sacred. Their guidelines about business, but there is more to life than business, even to Ferengi.

>>22655

>Maybe I'm putting more economic thought into this than the writers did

We all are. The writers just wanted a counterpoint to the money-less Federation, and so invented a culture than still used money. Only they wanted it to be a currency that was not fiat because they wanted the Ferengi to be "primitive" (so like a regression to the Gold Standard). This ran into problems with their own canon that everything can be replicated from pure energy (which is, for practical purposes in the show, limitless). So they just went, "durrr, uh, it can't be replicated?" and were done with it. Since sci-fi writers have no sense of scale, they didn't consider that rarity is completely subjective, and largely irrelevant for a spacefaring race. It forced them to just retcon new things about it when, in DS9, lots more people besides just the Ferengi started using it, and the Ferengi became a lot more than just the comic-relief Space Jews of TNG.

>>22658

>"Divine Treasury"

I was under the impression it was a religion that a money interested people would create.

A reflection of their culture.

Not that the Nagus is some space pope.

>You could call it more like the way gun nuts worship the Second Amendment

I think the comparison is correct.

>>24798

>Personally I think the Ferengi where simply written to be often moronic caricatures who are impossible to exist in reality (in like if they where real and thought about their previous actions they have a break down from all the internal contradictions).

Yep, that's exactly what happened. Roddenberry was always more than a little socialist, and with the freedom he had early TNG decided to make an antagonist faction that represented what he thought of free enterprise.

>>24801

Only early TNG Ferengi where nothing like DS9 Ferengi because they engaged in war and where not basically space jews.

See:

>>22085

They did have honor and where warriors with militaries not the space jew comedy of DS9.

>>22501

>They don't tell their kids the rules, that's the whole point. Young ferengi have to buy the information, trade for it, or steal it.

Factually wrong. Quarks father bought him his RoA and his mother helped him memorize it like the 10 commandments in some Christian family.

>>24798

so basically "ds9 has poorly written aliens"

>>22079

bruh ferengi ideals demand that you monopolise and create a captive market, you cant buy HDDs from anyone else as im the only person selling the ones you need.

>>22236

and also this

>>25839

>you monopolise and create a captive market, you cant buy HDDs from anyone else as im the only person selling the ones you need.

True however:

1) This is never true on the show since Quark is independent and not something like a McDonalds manager who must report to the corporation constantly.

2) Arguably you can buy from other establishments see "Rivals".

3) it is implied that other civilizations are selling and are outside the Ferengi ownership.

4) Never really explore however replicators exist.

5) Arguably the federation can give you free stuff for free however this is never even attempted to be explored.

>>25833

Partially true, I say they are written inconsistently where Quark jumped from comically incompetent caricature in most episodes to smart one especially in "Rivals".

>>25850

yeah that's the issue with ds9, it's partially shit.

>>26132

that's honestly one of the many problems of star trek, we only see the federations side of absolutely everything and anything else is either a means for the plot or a metaphor for commentary so the only aliens who are fleshed out is the ones who are the most popular, hence only federation dominance. I would honestly like to see a star trek show where every episode is a different race solving the same kinda interesting wonders you could theorize in space.

>>26165

it'd be better then federation trash

>>26165

Totally agree!

>>26165

It is only right.

>>26165

>likes of Duras

I read that as "kikes of Duras".

>>33704

>>22079

Like anyone to comment on this.