Talk:Labour voucher

message: The article seems to take a strongly socialist view. I also have trouble believing a lot of the claims made in the article, especially that such a system would make theft impossible, that it's fundamentally different from the capitalist idea of currency, and the labor voucher literally requires the existence of a labor market and wage labor, even if it is centrally-administered, or else there is nothing to assign labor vouchers for. If anyone has something to add please do, but I feel as though this whole article needs an overhaul to bring it in line with a NPOV.
Carlitos9595 (talk)
: Theft of labor vouchers (theoretically) is impossible because they can be printed per-person, or electronically or whatever. It is different (according to socialists/marxists) from currency since LVs can't be exchanged (since, again, they are printed per-person). Since these are socialist ideas I don't think it's a serious concern that the article focuses on marx and his contemporaries. Baldersmash (talk) 00:42, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fails to maintain NPOV 

message: I'd prefer to see one article develop into a complete article on the subject, before acting on a
merge request.  The article should include photos of specimens of the vouchers.
 
But we need a more international perspective, since Josiah Warren and Robert Owen seem to originate
the idea along with the Utopian and Anarchist ideas developed along with them.
The current time-based currency article mentions nothing about them, and the Labour voucher article doesn't mention
what influenced Robert Owen's ideas.  Some articles say that Warren influenced Owen.
If labor notes was the original genesis of that idea, it should be called that. rhyre (talk) 15:56, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't think a merge is indicated here.  I'm pretty sure that labour vouchers have been the primary subject of several treatises (though probably most or all of them would be at least a century old, and thus less likely to find on the Web).  Someone more familiar with them could doubtless provide the appropriate citations. —Psychonaut (talk) 23:36, 19 February 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  Time-based currency 

message: If they aren't transferable between people, who pays the worker when someone, e.g., needs their house painted? 
I'm not convinced there wouldn't be loopholes. For example, the same motor can be a means of sustenance or a means of production depending on how it's used (well pump or drill, for example) just like grain can be feed or seed. It's impossible to prevent one being used for the other. 107.77.165.9 (talk) 20:31, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: In your paining situation, the labor voucher authority (i.e. state bank) would print labor vouchers for the painter in accordance with the amount of labor they worked, and whoever called for the job to be done would have some amount of labor vouchers removed from their account. Baldersmash (talk) 00:42, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
thread_title:  Help explain? 

message: I propose to merge labor notes (currency) into labour voucher. They are basically both synonyms, as labor notes is simply what labour vouchers were originally referred to. Moreover, the labor notes article is quite short and can be easily integrated into this article. BeŻet (talk) 16:19, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge [[labor notes (currency)]] into [[Labour voucher]]