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

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

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

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

  • Value SubtractedA
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’ve never been able to decide whether Vasquez Rocks is meant to be standing in for itself in that episode.

    • LibraryLassM
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      Memory Alpha seems to think that Vasquez Rocks is playing itself in that instance

      • majicwalrus
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        My assumption was that Vasquez Rocks was playing itself and that it was no longer a state park because there was no longer a state. Most of the Earth outside of cities has probably largely been left to the wilderness and as such parking your RV in any place is probably allowed if not unusual.

        • constantokra@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Here and now, you can camp in plenty of locations, as long as you leave after a certain period. It may be that her trailer, or whatever it is, can just pop up and move, so she’s just moving around. What does it really matter when you can transport anywhere?

        • LibraryLassM
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Probably, though one would presume protections would be in place for notable natural features.

          • majicwalrus
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yes this is likely a consideration, but I also wonder if the ability for humans to live both without interference and in harmony with natural surroundings is now taken as a given such that no one is expecting anyone to deface or damage the redwoods even if they had set up their camp there to complete their research.