While this is true if you try to interlock finger holes for common cuts, you can definitely compensate for kerf with common cuts along single edges (like the straight sides of pieces in this design). The trick is to just compensate for the kerf in each piece’s dimensions before they are joined (or in pre-planning dimensions before drawing if you use the pen tool to create them already sharing sides). With rectangles, that’s as simple as adding the kerf width to desired height and width. Since each side loses 1/2 kerf width, the total lost from each linear dimension is one whole kerf width. By common cutting along single edges, each piece just loses its 1/2 kerf width on that edge, vs half coming from a piece and half from scrap.
For more complex shapes, I use your brilliant stroke expansion/division method to get my kerf-adjusted final piece. I try to make as many common cuts as I can, but my vague rule of thumb is that it doesn’t work if the two pieces sharing a cut are meant to interlock along that cut, at least on more than two faces. I’m sure someone with better geometric relations skills could phrase that more effectively, with hard-and-fast rules.
Funny side note: I pulled up your post from my bookmarks so I could properly credit the user who wrote it, only to realize that user is you. 
Please accept my long-overdue, emphatic THANK YOU for helping to demystify finger cuts for me. I’m pretty good at most kinds of math, but I have a serious blind spot for geometric relations. Your post was the first thing I read that actually made it click.
EDIT: I think I just randomly stumbled on a way to streamline your process, at least in Illustrator. I’ll post about it over on your original thread so as not to hijack this thread too much.