Which should the Feds a much larger economic base from which to produce AM.Uraniun235 wrote:The Federation is one of if not the largest nations in the traditional Alpha/Beta quadrant Star Trek setting. The Ferengi on the other hand appear to be a minor power, with a seeming emphasis on expanding their economic reach rather than their territory.
Conjecture. The Ferengi cannot be that weak or they would be in danger of being overun by other expansionist powers that are not as benevolent as the Feds-the Romulans and the Klingons come to mind. They CANNOT be too far out in the Boondocks for that because they still happily tromp about their respective territories, and if there are mutual defense contracts with anybody to prevent that I do not know about them.Given that military investments are almost always an economic loss (as warships don't put much back into the economy, and would require higher taxes to support - quite anathema to the Ferengi) they're not likely to build and support a particularly large navy, which would result in a far lesser military need for antimatter on the Ferengi's part than on the Federation's.
But not neccessarily private pleasure craft. Given their assumed tries to expand their economic reach, and given their general portrayal on the series, they should use the excess for business ventures...As such, the Ferengi would have more antimatter to use for other purposes.
The funny part is you propably even didn't notice the punThe Federation is in a state of expansion, and has been for over a century. Arguably, they have expanded faster than their military could defend, as witnessed by the often utter lack of backup available to the Enterprise in various episodes. Given this, Starfleet has probably continued expanding at an accelerated rate compared to the Federation in an effort to catch up; this could explain the seemingly recent explosion of such ship types as the Akira.
Because if Johnny Slackerbutt wants to do so and is willing to pay for the privilege, who are you to deny it to him?Given this, and given that even though the Federation's rate of territorial expansion may have slowed that their economic expansion will only continue due to increasing populations on the various colonies, it is clear that the need for antimatter will only grow as time progresses. The Federation may very well be building more antimatter production facilities, but it is also possible that this production expansion (which can only occupy so many resources; and, from a politician's standpoint, why should we spend an extra tenth-percentage-point of our GDP on more antimatter production just so Johnny Slackerbutt can tool around in the galaxy in his own little shuttle when he can get around just fine as is?)
Oh, and Johnny Slackerbutt can NOT get around fine. He can go where the Government wants him to. You want to go to a place we don't service, tough luck.
And if AM is so scarce as you try to make it out (simple solution:buy from the Ferengi), why does Starfleet regularly use capital ships as personell ferries? Hell, why can't Johnny Slackerbutt go directly to the Ferengi for fuel?
I'm sorry, but quite frankly that's a ridiculous understatement. Make a mistake handling hydrogen, and... what? It's not like it can spontaneously undergo fusion.Which are also complitely arbitrary becase A/M is no more dangerous intrinsically than hydrogen (except for handling, which would make it a 'hazardous material', nothing more)
Contrast with antimatter, which if accidentally released will likely result in a lot of dead and injured people.[/quote]
As just about any other hazardous material, except that people will radiation poisoning instead of conventional ones, there's still going to be burns and a higher fraction of the dead are going to be in pieces or vaporized as opposed to, say, a chemical fuel spill. And since the energy actually released is not going to be ANYWHERE e=mc^2, you're exaggerating the danger.
Could be, the additional cost may very well amortize itself through sales revenues, and who's going to steal an explosive that is likely going blow up in his face when there are better alternatives available, at least for blowing stuff up?Also, your suggestion that the UFP simply build so many AM production facilities that it doesn't have to defend them all is simply laughable. Such facilities could be very expensive to manufacture and deploy, and besides, there's the issue of how you're going to prevent unauthorized parties from simply stealing the antimatter from the unguarded stations.
I dunno. Because the Federation is not quite as lousy with terrorists as you would assume?Yes, but that power doesn't translate as easily to FTL travel.There's a lot of power in hydrogen, too, which is a lot easier to handle and all over the place to boot.
Also, if fusion warheads were so much better, why aren't they used... anywhere?
Wow. That's two, out of how many? Oh, and a mall does not a civilian installation make. Not that Farpoint was a Federation starbase, they were petitioning for membership...What, don't you remember Farpoint Station and it's mall? Or, fuck, how about DS9? There's a starbase and port of call wrapped into one.And vitually always seem to be the equivalent of a Navy base, not a commercial port of call. I shudder at the thought of a modern-day navy operating that way...
Propably. Too bad we never see any of this.And the mushroom stations could certainly support a dual-function of navy base and port of call.
You have ONE example of a freighter being operated privately (and that's assuming Cassidy operated under Federation jurisdiction). Whoopdy fucking do.So, what, they don't exist, and we're to discount the existence of Yates?But not cheaper than owning and operating your own freighter or passenger ship. Yer we see none of those, either (with the possible exception of Cassidy Yates)
Completely ignoring the fact that you HAVE a car, you CAN drive to NY if you so desire, that you might fly if you so desired, neither of which options are available to a Federation citizen. He either takes the train OR HE STAYS HOME.Analogies can only be taken so far, and this one is a good example of one being taken too far.For the same reason people do TODAY? Because they like their flexibility?
I own a car because, while I could theoretically go to work every day on the bus, it's far faster and easier for me to take the car. It's simply too short a distance for me to walk half a mile, take the bus for a mile, and walk another quarter mile.
If I wanted to go to New York, and if the only ways to get there were by car or by train, you bet I'd take the train, because it's a long trip and it wouldn't be entirely practical to take the car. Yeah, sure, it might be more flexible for me when I get there, but it's not really practical and it'd be a lot easier just to walk or rent local transit once I got there. (ooh, what a novel concept)
So fucking what? So is travel time for transoceanic sea voyages. Guess what? People still have yachts. People still book cruises. People are not forced to take their local governments equivalent of Aeroflot.Interstellar trips in Star Trek are not like a simple little hop across a continent; even for the big, fast Starfleet ships, transit times can often be measured in days.
All of which is true for intercontinental flights. Newsflash:Peole STILL have private jets, and people who don't will propably STILL fly commercial.If you're traveling to another planet, you're probably not just tooling around for the hell of it, you probably have some purpose to your visit; and even if you don't, it's still a lot easier just to arrange local transit once you got there rather than flying your own ship back and forth from point to point.
Did I mention that privately owned transportation goes back way into the annals of the Sailing Age? (Admittedly fuel was comletely free by then but still...)
My point exactly. Therefore they're much more suitable for people planning abuse.I daresay the fuel involved with those technologies is nowhere near as dangerous to handle as antimatter.The same equation apllies to any mass/energy conversion reaction whatever the efficiency. Are fission/fusion technology ALSO heavily restricted?
I'm not saying every man and his Maquis should be able to buy AM in the local Walmart (assuming they have such). But there's no reason to completely DENY access, which seems to be what you're advocating.(And, it's quite possible that such technologies ARE restricted.)
Which claims would that be?Also regarding your territory analogy: the various powers DO defend and enforce their "ridiculous" territorial claims.