Closed dartiss closed 7 years ago
This proposal is open for discussion and voting. If you are a contributor to this repository (and not the proposer), you may vote on whether or not it is accepted.
Vote by entering one of the following symbols in a comment on this pull request. Only your last vote will be counted, and you may change your vote at any time until the change is accepted or closed.
vote | symbol | type this | points |
---|---|---|---|
Yes | :white_check_mark: | :white_check_mark: |
1 |
No | :negative_squared_cross_mark: | :negative_squared_cross_mark: |
-1 |
Abstain | :zipper_mouth_face: | :zipper_mouth_face: |
0 |
Block | :no_entry_sign: | :no_entry_sign: |
-1000 |
Proposals will be accepted and merged once they have a total of 2 points when all votes are counted. Votes will be open for a minimum of 7 days, but will be closed if the proposal is not accepted after 90.
Votes are counted automatically here, and results are set in the merge status checks below.
@dartiss, if you want to make further changes to this proposal, you can do so by clicking on the pencil icons here. If a change is made to the proposal, no votes cast before that change will be counted, and votes must be recast.
Can you provide a source for the "recognised as an unfair method" part? I'm split on this as I would like to see a non-means-tested basic income, for example, but in the current state of our economy, means testing allows focus on those who really need it. Perhaps it's a transition thing?
Closed automatically: maximum age exceeded. Please feel free to resubmit this as a new proposal, but remember you will need to base any new proposal on the current policy text.
Means testing is an unfair system if allocation of resources, particularly for those just outside of the boundaries of the means test.