Today Hope would have said "voters."

I agree that STOS was based more on capitalism but that was before the Liberals took over Hollywood. When is the last time you saw a movie that even mentions Democrats? Every criminal in movies are part of some right wing group!!!!!!

Here's a good one!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQWmMfja...

Not to worry... when the robots take too many jobs the unions will buy enough politicians to fix things... Seriously, people will probably work less and do jobs like George Jetson. My button finger is getting sore just thinking about it. :)

Now your thinking like a liberal. Good One!!!

LOL

"I am mainly referring to the episode that they find some humans in a state of suspended animation"
This was a particularly bad episode. Here's an entertaining critical review of it:
http://blip.tv/sf-debris-opinionated-rev...

But who will teach the robotic burger flippers how to spit in the burgers of irritating customers?

A more appropriate response by Picard would have been that his law firm and his portfolio had been nationalized, then "planetized", then "galaxied" until any vestige of what had once been his had been eliminated. A simpler answer would have been that, since his being placed into cryogenic stasis, he had been presumed dead, and since the death tax was now 100%, his "substantial portfolio" had been used to pay down the national debt.

I know the episode filled with anti-capitalism propaganda and touchy-feely rubbish.

Picard would have to get a productive job as an arbitrator if the federation wasn't looting from all the producers who invent things for self interest at home, and from colonists who desire more and become brave pioneers creating new trade routes, and deveoping natural resources on new worlds.
There does appear to be an obvious difference in the federation between STOS and STNG. The federation in STOS is helping protect the private interests of producers and pioneers. In STNG the federation is pursuing their own holier-than-mere-producers interests. The STNG universe is filled with politically correct looters like Picard subtly telling everyone to be cute, fuzzy little altruists because he has this powerful warship, one of many, that won't tolerate mere self intersted free individuals. STOS is a free, late 19th century culture. STNG is a 21st century Mommy-state socialist empire. I choose a place where I can live free even if I must work to survive, not a socialist "eden" where the state as god dictates what I must do.

I understand what you are saying but I am mainly referring to the episode that they find some humans in a state of suspended animation and one of the guys that are brought back to life and cured of his ailments was talking to Captain Picard about how his portfolio must have grown since he was frozen. Picard's response is that they don't use money in the 24th century.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ui6g23yg...

"Pepper analyzes facial expressions, body language, and verbal cues, honing its responses and offering a dynamic and surprisingly natural conversation partner"
We see it flirting in the picture.

The Star Trek gov't varies a little depending on who writes the story. My interpretation is that automation has reduced the cost of most everything used in daily life in their society to a point where they don't have to think about trading stuff if they don't want to. My understanding is no one lives in the UFP lives in poverty, but the Prime Directive (PD) prevents them from introducing automation to undeveloped worlds because the people who created the PD feared any such contact would be inherently exploitative.

STNG is fiction, and unlike AS there are parts that are not going to happen. The particular part you refer to is statist propaganda. Unsurprising since STNG's "Federation" is a statist empire with a few trappings of liberty to keep the masses enslaved to the political system. Naturally that "boring" part is never displayed. The producers think the audience is too dumb (brainwashed) to be able to understand anything more than 'slavery is bad' or 'women can do everything that men can.'
I can't recall any screen depiction of the political system of STNG. That would have been a revealing episode albeit perhaps not a ratings winner,
More on that (with some speculation):
http://en.memory-alpha.org/wiki/United_F...

This may be a little off topic but lets look at StarTrek TNG. Picard says that we have no use for money, we have evolved beyond riches to self improvement or something like that.
If you notice though, there are still people living in mud huts as compared to others living in luxury on Earth. The so called military living the best. Shouldn't they all be living the same???

On another note: Robotics: They already have a machine that will make burgers and sandwiches to order and make them the way you want them. If they keep pushing for a "Living wage" for starter jobs, they will be replaced by these machines. I'm sure that day will come soon!!!

I would really would like to have the ExoSkeleton that was used in the "Edge of Tomorrow" movie. The way my skeleton is incurring an arthritic covering on alot of bones I'll need that mechanical suit in a few years. Then I won't need a robot to help me.

Aahh, I see.

I was on to the next problem.

Do not take my words for support for the current welfare and government system. There are still plenty of jobs that people can get to care for themselves and their families.

However, with the rise of technology that may not always be the case. It's one thing to tell people to get off their a-- and get a job if there are jobs, but if there aren't? What alternative do we have?

Automation has always provided new jobs to replace the old ones, but we can't count on that continuing to be true as the automation becomes more capable. At that point we need to rethink the requirement that people produce.

Does that make us a world of moochers? Maybe. We could require people to dig holes and fill them up to get food but I have no enthusiasm for non-productive activity. I also don't want a business to be required to hire people if robots are more productive for the same cost. That's just a hidden tax.

Well, that is the point isn't it. Where does it end?

At some point in the past, there was no government welfare, but now it is the largest part of our government spending. Seems there is 1) no incentive for those participating to get off, 2) ever-growing minimum needs, and 3) no plan to address it.

It's a variation on the theme. It allows someone whose skills are insufficient to make a living to still do productive work -- which I applaud. At some point, though, it doesn't make sense to have someone do the job at all.

You could, for example, hire people to weave clothes and pay them a nickle an hour, making up the difference with a negative income tax. But even then it's not clear they could compete with automated looms.

And at this point is there any real point to them doing it?

What do you think about a negative income tax (progressive rate, where it becomes negative below a level)? Seems better than welfare

There's a difference between being productive and earning an income. The original Luddites were trying to smash the automatic looms because they would put them out of work.
And they did. You cannot make a living weaving -- except for very high end specialty goods, and few people can afford them. I know a number of people who are weavers, my wife among them, but you can't make a basic living weaving -- yet we have more clothes than at any time in history, We can make t-shirt so inexpensively that companies give them away.

Musicians have pretty much also been automated away, not by actually automating the music but by recording. Local musicians have to compete with the best musicians in the world with the best production values. Yes, live music is still popular, but as my brother says, who's the best guitar player I've ever heard, "I'm a roofer because that puts food on the table".

How can you make a living spending hours doing something that can be produced for a buck?

That's actually what my sister was advocating when she told me about it. There are dozens of small things that cost people their independence.

One of the biggest ones is having something happen to you with no one to notice. "I've fallen and can't get up" is no joke. My wife had an aunt fall in her back yard and freeze to death before anyone found her. Someone else I know had their sister lie on the floor for three days before someone found them.

There are already tools for these things. There will be more.

Predators, politicians, little to distinguish one from the other..

Then there should be a lot of people learning to be musicians, sculptors, painters, videographers, goldsmiths, and other creative ways to earn a basic income. There are ways to be productive if there is an incentive.