Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my experience, if you're a good engineer, it is fairly straightforward to work to live. It is not particularly challenging. The problem is that you are, over time, shown powerful tools and processes capable of perceptibly increasing the rate of human technological progress. For many people, pursuing this goal is irresistible, and this is when you transition to living to work -- when you know that you are personall…
I can see the allure in that, but perhaps this is a false vision used to exploit people, similar to the "American Dream". Are you sure you're moving humanity forward? I can see those working in medicine, food, etc. helping people, but many of this technology is aimed at purposes that are detrimental to humans or at best conveniences that still contribute to climate change.
Given that context, I view Star Trek as a reasonably plausible view of future humanity. The Star Trek universe certainly has problems, and is regularly threatened with existential crises. There are many new terrible things in it, but there are also many new beautiful things. It's sort of a greatly expanded version of life as it is today; the inhabited universe is larger, more diverse, and as a direct result, there are, on the whole, more options and more possibilities.
So here's the question: Given the option, would you choose to live in today's universe, or the Star Trek universe?
You don't get to choose which individual you are in either scenario, it's a dice roll. You could end up a North Korean peasant or an Albert Einstein (or pick your own role model). You could end up an admired Federation leader or a Borg drone.
But, if you could choose the present day or the Star Trek universe, which would it be?