You're confusing "How we did it" with "How it has to be done" - that's an appeal to tradition fallacy. We've had civilization for some ten-thousand years now, depending which great leap forward you choose as a start - and we've had employer/employee relationships for 200 years -it is not the only way to produce anything. It is not even the only way to trade labour. Hell in the very next paragraph I gave you an example of labour trade that doesn't involve employers and employees (worker-owned coops).
We haven't had millennia of global economic growth or rising standards of living. That's a new thing and employment in the modern sense is a big driver of it.
Also, I don't consider worker coops to be a significantly different sort of employment than employment with a traditional employer. It may have different expectations, but it's still trading something you value (money, place to stay, intangible experiences, etc) for work the coop or other employer values.
The thing you're ignoring is that trading labour is trading the single most valuable resource on earth - for pennies. You're trading your time alive to another. A resource you cannot renew. A resource you can never replace. Hell it's a resource that even if you buy it you cannot get more off. And you get way too little of it to sell it for less than a good life.
And you choose to trade your time alive to another. My view on human needs is that people can provide for their own basic needs unless they are extremely disabled in some way. And who has a stronger interest in deciding what you need and stronger interest in delivering that need than you do? It would be great if those needs could be provided trivially, but we don't live in that sort of world. Thus, it's quite reasonable for the person who needs, that they work themselves to deliver that need.
Actually - they do. Terry Pratchett wrote that the single greatest tragedy in the world is all the people who never get to discover what they are great at.
I strongly disagree. Doing stuff you find you don't want to do is a great way to determine what you do want to do. You also can learn some important lessons that you can apply at your dream activity.
Or you can use that drudge job to not be a leech on society. That works for me too. I consider peoples' survival and freedom of action more important than whether or not they do something that they're really good at.
It's even more worth noting that Star Fleet was a clear exception - and that exception existed for very good reasons.
Many such exceptions exist for plenty of other jobs in the real world.
Cisco's father had a restaurant that sold traditional Louisianna food - not to live of the proceeds, just because he enjoyed cooking it and enjoyed watching people eat it.
So Cisco's father can just decide to cut out in the middle of dinner? It's still a job, where you have to work just due to the expectations you create in your diners, even though you gussy it up.
In the TNG era this is not the state of the universe - but it is the state on earth. On the other hand - the Ferengi have the same level of technology - and they are hardcore capitalists with jobs and bosses and an ingrained desire for great wealth. Infamous for their greed and lack of ethics. A libertarian writer I know called them a 'cruel and unrealistic parody of capitalism' - I call them a euphemistic portrayal of it's horrors.
I agree with the parody viewpoint. Star Trek is fantasy and they were doing a hatchet job on capitalists with the Ferengi. And I don't buy these proofs by Terry Prachett or Gene Rodenberry. It's fine to use fiction for your metaphors. But we need to remember that fiction is not real and as a result, metaphors may not accurately reflect the real world.
I'm not so sure you're right about that, even so - you need a fairly large section at the very least. That said, I never said we are there, I merely said we are starting to develop the technology to be able to go there if we so choose.
Again, I strongly disagree. What's magical about having say a billion people on board that you couldn't do with a small city?
I'm sticking with what works
And fuck all the people who get destroyed by it's flaws ? Should mankind not always be seeking to advance ? Always be seeking to improve ? Do you really believe we cannot improve over a mere 200-year old system that was, itself, an improvement over 10-thousand years worth of other systems ?
Do you have something that works better? If not, then shut the fuck up. What's the point of your moralizing when my choice is better for humanity?
I find it remarkable that your argument is that there should be something better out there, but a something which we have no real world example of. I have never taken the position that modern capitalism/democracy was the best possible, but rather the position that it works better than anything else we have tried so far.