Because it isn't internally consistent.
> It's consistent with techno-anarchy: scarcity is a solved problem.
You seem to think that I was using "inconsistent" to mean "inconsistent with some external expectations" or "inconsistent with my expectations of what is plausible", but I was referring to internal consistency, not consistency with external expectations.
> Without finite resources there is no longer any point to capitalism, a system which allocates finite resources.
Neither the absence of finite resources nor the absence of capitalism are consistent features of the economy in Star Trek.
> So people are left to live life how ever they see fit.
This is rather emphatically not a consistent feature of the economy of Star Trek.