It is difficult for some people to imagine money not being around, however, I do believe at some point in our human evolution we will out grow the need for it. Some people are also convinced that relgions and gods will always be around, and look how much religion has changed over the centuries.
Money and wealth are man-made concepts that do not exist outside human imagination. Humans are the only beings on the planet that use currency to facilitate interaction. Like many human constructs, money has become more important than the people it is supposed to serve. We've given the concept of money so much power over us that an entire nation can be destroyed simply by ruining its economy! This is the single reason money will fail.
Ideas can not survive without people, but people can survive without certain ideas and money is one of them!
Good luck!
Star Trek is basically like a communist utopia, where there is no money, and everything is more or less nice. Communism, unfortunately, doesn't work that well. Russia tried to create a communist country. The plan failed, and Stalin took over, made himself dictator, and tried to make everyone think that that was what they were going for when they created communism. Money is going to be around for a long, long time.
Don't hold your breath for Star Trek any time soon. Although frankly Gene Roddenbury made so much damned money we almost had to go back to barter in the 1980's.
The future is in credits, not replicators.
I believe within time we will get rid of paper currency but I think that regardless there will always be some form of "money". Even back in the cave man days, no one did anything without getting something in return. If one cave man came back with a surplus of meat one evening, chances are another traded something for some of it. And so on. So unless by some miracle we all have everything we need for the rest of our lives and no longer require buying things (extremely unlikely), we will always need some form of money. And there will be a lot more problems if there were no money. We would all hold the same status economically, we would all be competing for the same things. Think about it... If everyone owned everything, then no one would own nothing.
They used money in Star Trek, by the way. Plenty of episodes mention "credits".
The idea of abstract stored value is so good it is unlikely it will ever go away. They type of money evolves over time but not the existence of money. Gold, silver, copper, signed credit notes, printed bills, electronic currency. That part will continue to change.
We may someday get rid of the paper and the coins. But the 'currency' on Star Trek, which was never explained, is a utopian idea that someday we will all receive 'economic justice'. That cannot ever work. Who is to decide that Captain Picard will make $X, while Commander Riker only gets $V (which is less)? Certainly it is someone, just as it is now. But apparently it's always the same council (or whatever) who decides for everyone and for every job. Otherwise Riker might want to complain that a miner on a certain planet makes more than he does.
If jobs are paid according to their value, who is to say that what the miner mines is not more valuable? It must be more valuable to someone, or he wouldn't make more. If there is some truth table that says a Commander must make more than a miner, then why would a miner who risks his life every minute he works make less than a Commander who only risks his life in certain situations, and who gets his medical and his clothes and his food free?
If the mine owner (who is part of the Federation, or this wouldn't matter) can make the value of a shuttle craft every day and has only 100 men working for him, he needs to pay them what they are worth or no one will work for him (provided they have other options). Because someone is willing to pay the mine owner so much, he makes in one month what Picard makes in one year.
So the 'no money' system either is as fair as our money system (or not as fair, as you see it); or there is some general council who determines that Picard is worth more than a mine owner because he protects the Federation.
In that case, the mine owner and the miners are slaves. They are worth more, because what they mine is very valuable to someone; yet the council says they cannot be as valuable.
If everyone is equally valuable, if Picard and the miners make the same amount of money, why would the miners risk their lives every minute they work?
The Star Trek model doesn't work. If people are not paid according to what someone is WILLING to pay them (capitalism), then the whole system breaks down. If Picard thought the guy who washes the dishes in the kitchen made as much as him, what's the point?
Money is simply a way of seeing ostensibly what one earns and has saved and has spent. I suppose it isn't necessary. Debit accounts have numbers in them that say how much is there. But the utopian system on Star Trek is about utopian socialism. The airline pilot wants to make more than the dishwasher.
Yes and no. A world somewhat like Star Trek in some ways will eventually arrive, but....people will still want things that are limited in availability, like housing in a certain place, or original artworks, etc. And so they will want to trade goods/money with each other.
So some form of money in some sense will always be around.
Not if its mine! Bring back the Gold Standard!
I'm pretty sure money will always be around..
