Page 3 of 5
Re: New Movies's contributions to canon
Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2009 5:09 pm
by thecursor
BSG was dead to me after Season 3.
Re: New Movies's contributions to canon
Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2009 5:14 pm
by WarpGirl
I couldn't handle Starbuck being a girl, or Boomer for that matter. Then there was the whole thing of is this a person or a cylon or both? Nope Sorry. The debate over whether currency is apart of ST is VERY confusing to me. Somehow people must be componsated for services and products. I always assumed it was only Earth that discontinued money.
Re: New Movies's contributions to canon
Posted: Sat Jun 06, 2009 2:44 am
by JadziaKathryn
Here's the thing: human nature isn't perfect. We're greedy and lazy. We need rules and incentives. (Perfect example: the former Soviet Union. Communism worked great on paper, but people with human flaws messed it up big time.) So I agree that people have to be compensated somehow. If the dentist is making the same wage as the receptionist, why bother going to all the trouble of learning dentistry? Thus the idea that you get rid of money entirely strikes me as ludicrous.
On the other hand, I don't object to "credits" because I can see them as currency. Like, all these countries got together and said, "Right, we need a planetary currency. What should we call it?" And then someone said, "Well, multiple countries use the word 'dollar.'" Someone else, likely the French representative, objected to the Anglicanization. (Nothing against the French, but they do have that reputation for a good reason!) 'Euro' was suggested but nobody outside of Europe liked that. Next up was 'yen,' but too many people objected to a word that you don't add an s to in order to make it plural. The British made an eloquent argument for the adoption of 'pound,' but alas it was in vain; the rest of Europe refused to use it, muttering about the British insisting on being different and exclusive, the Americans thought using the same word for weight and currency was just silly, and most of the rest of the world associated British with colonial domination. And so on it went until at last a bright spark suggested 'credit,' which could easily be translated into every language.
Re: New Movies's contributions to canon
Posted: Sat Jun 06, 2009 2:54 am
by WarpGirl
WOW I wish I had your brain tonight mine is MUSH!
Re: New Movies's contributions to canon
Posted: Sat Jun 06, 2009 12:45 pm
by Alelou
JadziaKathryn wrote:Someone else, likely the French representative, objected to the Anglicanization.
LOL. Yep. I think it would go exactly the way you say.
TNG's claims about not having currency didn't make sense to me from the very first episode when we see Crusher saying, "That would make a lovely dress!" and I'm thinking, "And if you don't have any of your own money, who the hell decides that you can have that lovely dress? Maybe what the ship really needs right now is stem bolts!"
Re: New Movies's contributions to canon
Posted: Sat Jun 06, 2009 1:24 pm
by thecursor
Beverly Crusher always struck me as an evil villain, actually.
Where'd Dr. Pulaski go? Crusher got her!
Jack Crusher? He was pushed!
Get rid of the boy, ship him off to school.
Now make googly eyes to the captain and wrap him around your little finger.
I'm telling you, the next TNG movie would be about the evil Cardassian Agent they suckled to their breast for all those years.
But I digress...credits to me implies that they're actually trading resource commodities as the basis of their currency. You're allocated a certain amount of "resources" a year according to your species need (food, water, medical care, etc.) but you can earn more or sell goods and services made from said resources.
Re: New Movies's contributions to canon
Posted: Sat Jun 06, 2009 3:46 pm
by justTripn
Yes, in this same conversation with my boss where he pointed out the economics Star Trek reference, he told me about a science fiction story from long ago with realistic economics. There was an intergalactic currency pegged to a valuable resource and it worked but it kept inflating and crashing as the supply changed with new discoveries of the resource.
In the first Firefly episode, which I rewatched recently, the crew was smuggling, trading, and having gun fights over these valuable "bricks." You you just assume they are gold or something. Turns out they are highly concentrated nutriants: "One brick can feed a family of four for a month. Longer, if you don't really like your kids."
Scarce medicines are another possible basis for currency. And your currency can be based on absolutely nothing if you can all trust each other and the agency "printing the money," which seems unlikely in an intergalactic setting.
Re: New Movies's contributions to canon
Posted: Sat Jun 06, 2009 3:59 pm
by WarpGirl
Maybe it's an incredibly complex barter system. And hey knock off the Beverly hate!
Not you JT!
Re: New Movies's contributions to canon
Posted: Sat Jun 06, 2009 4:08 pm
by Alelou
JT really doesn't like Beverly. But don't worry, WG, she was my favorite next to Picard. (So I couldn't STAND Pulaski or season 2!)
I know this may be an example of bad taste and hopeless shipping on my part, or at least of extreme tolerance for mediocre acting, but so it is.
Re: New Movies's contributions to canon
Posted: Sat Jun 06, 2009 4:10 pm
by WarpGirl
Their are people who don't like P/C
I may have to...
Re: New Movies's contributions to canon
Posted: Sat Jun 06, 2009 7:17 pm
by panyasan
thecursor wrote:Beverly Crusher always struck me as an evil villain, actually.
Where'd Dr. Pulaski go? Crusher got her!
Jack Crusher? He was pushed!
Get rid of the boy, ship him off to school.
Now make googly eyes to the captain and wrap him around your little finger.
I'm telling you, the next TNG movie would be about the evil Cardassian Agent they suckled to their breast for all those years.
Makes her much more interesting...
Re: New Movies's contributions to canon
Posted: Sat Jun 06, 2009 7:55 pm
by justTripn
I hope you don't mean Ensign Ro? But back to the topic. Strangely I started this topic by announcing I'd found four important contributions to canon. But I only covered 3 . . . what was I going to say? Stupid brain!!! Hmm . . . probably had something to do with Vulcan. I loved the insight into Vulcan schooling, interesting to see bullies are the same everywhere, loved those wierd sideways rocks on Vulcan, amd the buildings hanging down from the peaks of them.
Well, to change to topic slightly, in this reboot (doesn't change canon) I love the way THIS Spock does not seem ashamed of his human side. That was one of the best moments:
To which disadvantage do you refer?
Why your human mother.
I must decline your offer of admission into the Vulcan Science Academy.
NO Vulcan has EVER declined admission to the Vulcan Science Academy.
Since I am half human, your record remains intact.
*Snicker* Well, someone can correct me .. . .
Also a nice echo if not a reboot of canon: That Christopher Pike ends up in a normal wheel chair in stead of a "yes"/"no" wheelchair, LOL . . .
Re: New Movies's contributions to canon
Posted: Sat Jun 06, 2009 8:04 pm
by Alelou
I loved that scene too, but I am a little uncomfortable that in this movie all you ever have to do to make Spock lose control is perform some variation on "yo momma." Is Vulcan training good for ANYTHING?
On the other hand, I didn't grow up on Vulcan with a human momma.
Re: New Movies's contributions to canon
Posted: Sat Jun 06, 2009 8:27 pm
by WarpGirl
I've got to see it first but you can bet I'll have a theory.
Re: New Movies's contributions to canon
Posted: Sat Jun 06, 2009 8:40 pm
by thecursor
"Yo momma's so human, she thought Heisenberg was served at Wendy's!"