Marx, in CotGP: Labour vouchers! Labour vouchers! Labour vouchers!

Just normal money.

It is literally called "money" you stupid fuck.

Literally just money but labor time counted as the backing value

It's not money - non-accumulative and not able to purchase means of production. This is a meme.

In what way have I not accumulated vouchers here?

And who says I can't purchase means of production?

Communism is imaginary.

The cake belongs to the state you filthy capitalist piggu

All ideologies are imaginary.
We have a word for such things around here.

duh, money does circulate, unlike labour vouchers, also if there was an labour-wage correlation in our money-based capitalism, then porkies would earn much less, asshat.

You misunderstand what is meant by accumulation. We don't mean "I had 5 vouchers, now I have 10 after 5 additional hours of work," we mean there's no method of investing vouchers to create more vouchers for less work. You can save every voucher you've ever earned, but you'll never have more than what you personally have worked for since they are non-transferable. Someone with more vouchers can't set up an operation where he hires people to extract a portion of the value they create through labor for yourself, nor can such operations be expanded through such methods to continuously increase the surplus extraction by the person who started it. You only receive proportional the time and labor you put in per period of time.

Something less autistic like normal money.

Or something extremely autistic like a simulated market.

I could always trade my cakes away for vouchers.

Some people may not want to go through the whole hassle of cake assembly, perhaps we can both benefit from a voucher exchange?

should point at

that's personal property.
now, try to build up a giant industry with your bare hands and then make profit through it in a labour voucher system.

got a readable version?

i do, i thought the one i posted was big enough.

More to the point, can I not own an axe to chop wood or a bow to hunt game? If not, then I am truly a slave.

With either of those things I could barter for vouchers using the fruits of my labor. Were I successful enough, I could only chop wood and hunt game to sell fresh-cooked meals for vouchers and earn more vouchers than any of my customers, maliciously feeding on the fruits of their labor to my delight.

Or are some labors worth more than others?

of course you can, since it's personal property, not private property, as the axe only needs one person to be used, the thing you can't do is to make profit with that axe, not because it's forbidden, but because the tools necesary to make that axe are avaible in the markets, and if you try to increase the prices of your services, then people will end up making their own axes since it's more convenient for them.

You could certainly, as is the intent, but those vouchers are "dead" upon leaving the hands of those who worked for it; you won't be able to further exchange it for more cake-making materials. That's not to say you won't be compensated for your labor if it is productive (the exchange of self-made product for someone vouchers seems to indicate that is the case), but the compensation is not facilitated through the exchanged vouchers. Rather, you would receive your own vouchers proportional to the the work you've done. If cakemaking is the type of production you enjoy and are willing to partake in, you'll have already proven at that point that there is demand for said production, and community resources can thus be democratically allocated to your productive enterprise based on that demand (especially if you've put forward some of your own personal labor gains towards demonstrating your proficiency as a baker). Once production has been established, others who wish to partake in the productive process may then do so proportional to the manpower necessary to meet the demand, and they would work cooperatively with you in the operation.

And yes, specialization of labor is absolutely essential to modern society: people would by no means be expected to bake every cake or personally partake in every productive process that facilitates daily life. The point of the things I was describing is to help ensure that the production process is able to proceed with the greatest degree of direct control by those participate in the productive process while eliminating exploitative labor practices and still meeting general demands of said production.

If the vouchers have no value after leaving the hands of one spender, who is accepting them?

Wtf, are you serious? are you a libertarian/ancap?

Fucking STOP bullying anarchists!!

A good post on:The dreaded labour notes…..libcom.org/forums/theory/dreaded-labour-notes-02042009?page=1

...

The producer/distributor of the good/service in question would be accepting and likely logging the exchange. If they fail to accept a valid labor voucher (whatever form that may take), there is the risk that the work of said producer is determined to be non-productive (producing goods for the sake of them sitting in a storage room indefinitely is not a constructive use of resources) and subsequently the community resources put towards that production might be pulled. Additionally/alternatively, the work being determined as non-productive would mean that the producer in question would no longer be receiving their own vouchers for their work.

Also as a side point, it is usually assumed that the vouchers are for non-essential products and such. Things like food, housing, etc would likely be provided outside this system through other channels of planned economics.