On labour vouchers

i saw here some dumbfucks that are against labour vouchers, i wonder what's their argument, exactly?

Other urls found in this thread:

kapitalism101.wordpress.com/2010/05/13/law-of-value-3-das-mudpie/
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

aren't labour vouchers just money with a different name

No. There just proof you did labor.

Lets see:

Now lets see the differences

Now you have two options
This turns into something like the mudpie argument, where any labour, no matter how much it is done, pays the same.
Now you have to determine, somehow, which work is more important and who should get more labour vouchers

In addition to that, there is no self-correcting mechanism in place that incentivises people to work hard. If you can't make more money/labour vouchers, you might as well cut corners and hope the bureaucracy doesn't notice it.

At this point, you're better off just using a regular old market system with regulations, or use a simulated market. Or if you are capable of centrally planning the entire economy anyway, why not skip the labour vouchers entirely and just give people rations/allowances for scarce resources and make abundant ones free?

What if you stole them?

Depends on who you ask.

Most of the capitalists that circulate around here don't like them because either they can't wrap their heads around or don't like the fact that the vouchers don't circulate or accumulate.

The other side of the critique is that they have many of the same problems as currency, namely that (while they do not circulate or accumulate) they are reductive and will never be able to represent the true value of the labor done to earn it. That and some people resent those who see labor vouchers as a permanent fixture rather than a transitional measure for the reasons stated above, seeing it as ultimately a roadblock to actually achieving communism.

you can't. they're destroyed upon use

I assumed they would be some how linked to you and couldn't be used by anyone else. They also could be digital I guess.

I honestly can't see the accumulation argument though. If you make surplus extraction illegal, and have progressive tax systems, you can never meaningfully accumulate a fortune substantial enough to do any harm.

What if you stole them before they're used?

What if the man who makes them is in plot with rest of people producing them and conspires to gain more wealth by creating more of them?

see

you sound like centrally planned economy is somewhat not a good thing.
why would this be a problem? I do understand that labor of exceptional engineer helps society more than hole-digger, but low-skilled labor will be quickly automatized.

This is your mind on capitalist ideology.

so state bureaucracy should decide how much of which scarce resource person needs? This would be step back, not forward.

checked
They should be digital. Exchanging fancy papers and coins is outdated.

doesn't work that way. you need to perform labour to receive them. can't just be conjured out of thin air. any discrepancies would be obvious

is it a good thing, but money is there to aid in resource distribution and prevent having to plan 100%. Labour vouchers are the worst of two world. Choose one or the other.

You can't prioritize important labour over unimportant labour even if they have the same skill. And people having shitty jobs or hard jobs will feel fucked over, and this shit gives chance for nepotism. Ideally you want shit jobs to pay more, which you need a system for. An added benefit to this is that you can prioritize what to automate based on the pay, which indicated the shit-level somewhat.

What? You trying to say that isn't true? There are plenty of jobs that need to be done and dont give fullfillment or joy. In capitalism, these are paid shit because they are low skill. In socialism, they should be paid more because its shit work. If you have to work to survive, which is the state what likely most of the world will be in, it doesn't help your motivation if in addition to shitty work, there is no way to get paid more than your coworkers who cut corners.

An allowance of credits/money/vouchers to spend on scarce resources, smartass.

Yes you can. You can open more positions for more important labor and decrease number of positions of less important. People are prioritized for jobs by the efficiency by which they did similar work in the past.

No, it's true under any regime. People will often try to ditch any work, the only way to increase effectivity is either by propaganda or giving people work which they really enjoy.
Joyless work is for people who do not want to learn new skills.

then you are back at money/labor vouchers, aren't you?

That doesnt mean it gets filled
By who? More bureaucracy?

Wew, and you say I am the "mind on capitalism". Not everyone is able to learn highly required skills. Ever worked in a supermarket or something? There genuinely stupid people who just dont have the mental capacity to learn more complex skills.

Without the work.

This. This is exactly like Socialism being Communism but re-branded.

...

well, it's job of the committee to make proper economic plan. I don't see how is profit motive superior.

yes. You need similar bureaucracy even if you want to give some "bonuses" for "great work". Getting rid of this kind of bureaucracy is possible maybe only in some kind of FALC utopia.

Yes, I did work as low-skilled laborer. If they do not want to learn new skills, the only thing which will change for them is having more resources for similar work.

I can't comprehend this. You still need to work but instead of being payed for work, you work for free and get money for free? what? please, elaborate.

Its stupid as they aim to eliminate markets, but black markets will still exist

Labor voucher reinforce the Marxist stupidity that work is only about man-hours rather than quality of one's workmanship.

actually scratch that last paragraph. I somehow didn't associate theory of abolishing wage labor, with what you were saying, stupid me.

WRONG

kapitalism101.wordpress.com/2010/05/13/law-of-value-3-das-mudpie/