>doesn't his concept of labor-vouchers imply commodification of labor ? According to Marx, labour-vouchers are not money, but are simply a type of ticket or coupon which distributes goods (the communist system presupposing universal rationing of resources):
<Owen’s “labour-money,” for instance, is no more “money” than a ticket for the theatre.https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1867-c1/ch03.htm<For example, the social working day consists of the sum of the individual hours of work; the individual labor time of the individual producer is the part of the social working day contributed by him, his share in it. He receives a certificate from society that he has furnished such-and-such an amount of labor (after deducting his labor for the common funds); and with this certificate, he draws from the social stock of means of consumption as much as the same amount of labor cost. The same amount of labor which he has given to society in one form, he receives back in another. Here, obviously, the same principle prevails as that which regulates the exchange of commodities, as far as this is exchange of equal values. Content and form are changed, because under the altered circumstances no one can give anything except his labor, and because, on the other hand, nothing can pass to the ownership of individuals, except individual means of consumption. But as far as the distribution of the latter among the individual producers is concerned, the same principle prevails as in the exchange of commodity equivalents: a given amount of labor in one form is exchanged for an equal amount of labor in another form.https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1875/gotha/ch01.htmEBT Cards (food stamps) would be an appropriate analog.
As yet, we see that people prefer the liquidity of money to hard assets, so there is an inherent psychological issue. For example, would you rather be paid $400 in cash, $500 credit or $600 food stamps? Most people prefer cash to any other token.