On Guard for Thee Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 I'd like to see the voting age raised to 30, and restricted to property owners. What the hell does owning property have to do with anything? Sounds a bit elitist to me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Topaz Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 Wasn't the reasoning behind 18 years old voting, was if they were old enough to go war, then they should be able to vote, drink and be an adult, at least in some countries? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 (edited) There shouldn't be a voting age; it is ageist anyway. The requirement should be to have a high school diploma (which is about 18 anyway). This would be a small incentive for people to finish high school. Edited June 18, 2014 by -1=e^ipi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 There shouldn't be a voting age; it is ageist anyway. The requirement should be to have a high school diploma (which is about 18 anyway). This would be a small incentive for people to finish high school. Unh ... no. Voting is a right, not an "incentive". . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 Unh ... no. Voting is a right, not an "incentive". . More correctly, voting is a privilege. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jacee Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 More correctly, voting is a privilege.Unh ... no.It's a right. . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 Thirty year old property owner is just trolling, Argus. And, actually, it would be massive interference in the property market as well. It's not trolling if I actually do believe this would produce a better, more sophisticated, more responsible and knowledgeable electorate, and I do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 What the hell does owning property have to do with anything? Sounds a bit elitist to me. That was the condition for being allowed to vote back in the old times in England. In large part becaues it was only property owners who paid taxes. For the most part, that's still true. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 Unh ... no. It's a right. . It is a right, but it should be a privilage. Unfortunately, it's like a club that let's anyone join - free. Nobody respects it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PIK Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 To low, it show be raised to 21. That way most people will be working or not and paying taxes, and understand what is going on. Instead of trudeau getting in ,because a bunch of young basement dwellers voted him in for one reason, legal weed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PIK Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 You've almost got it right... But in Canada we use the age of anal sex consent to determine voting age. If certain parts of the left get power, age to vote will be about 12. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 Unh ... no. It's a right. . If voting was a privilege, then I'd be concerned about the condition of our so called 'democracy'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 If certain parts of the left get power, age to vote will be about 12. lol "THE LEFT THE LEFT"!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PIK Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 lol "THE LEFT THE LEFT"!! My mistake 14. Policy #45: WHEREAS the current law discriminates against unmarried same-sex couples by not permitting unmarried persons under 18 to legally engage in consensual anal intercourse; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Liberal Party of Canada urge the Federal Government of Canada to bring the age of consent for anal intercourse in equal pairing with other forms of sexual activity. http://www.poletical.com/trudeau-is-amoral.php Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The_Squid Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 My mistake 14. Policy #45: WHEREAS the current law discriminates against unmarried same-sex couples by not permitting unmarried persons under 18 to legally engage in consensual anal intercourse; BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Liberal Party of Canada urge the Federal Government of Canada to bring the age of consent for anal intercourse in equal pairing with other forms of sexual activity. http://www.poletical.com/trudeau-is-amoral.php LOL Hillarious... 2006... Justin Trudeau... Liberals love anal sex for boys... trudeau is amoral.com.... pure gold!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
-1=e^ipi Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 (edited) Unh ... no. Voting is a right, not an "incentive". What is wrong with making the vote an incentive to graduate high school as well? Being a right/privilege and incentive are not exclusive. Edited June 18, 2014 by -1=e^ipi Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 It's not trolling if I actually do believe this would produce a better, more sophisticated, more responsible and knowledgeable electorate, and I do. The thing is you dont seem to understand the whole point of democracy. The main point is making the electorate feel like they are part of decisions made by government. The process needs to be inclusive. And citizens dont micromanage. They either vote for an ideology, or people that inspire trust in them for whatever reason. Your vote has no more value than that of a 24 yearold 16 yearold. Quite frankly your idea is so ludicrous that its laughable. You would be taking the right to vote away from millions of adults... home owners, business owners, people raising families etc... it would do nothing to improve the quality of our system and it would disenfrachise millions of people and create a huge backlash. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keepitsimple Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 If voting was a privilege, then I'd be concerned about the condition of our so called 'democracy'. The point went right over your head. There are countries who still do not have the right to vote - and there are those that are fighting for that right. Those who have struggled and fought for the freedom we have today would without doubt consider us privileged - and its a shame that those who do not vote fail to recognize that privilege. One of the most apt definitions of "privilege" is: Any of the rights common to all citizens under a modern constitutional government: "We enjoy the privileges of a free people." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GostHacked Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 (edited) The point went right over your head. There are countries who still do not have the right to vote - and there are those that are fighting for that right. We have the right, because that right was fought for us in the past. The places were you do not have a right to vote are places that are not democratic. If I do not have a right to vote, the government does not have the right to tax me. Since taxpayer money is what drives the government. Those who have struggled and fought for the freedom we have today would without doubt consider us privileged - and its a shame that those who do not vote fail to recognize that privilege. One of the most apt definitions of "privilege" is: Any of the rights common to all citizens under a modern constitutional government: "We enjoy the privileges of a free people." If you do not have rights, you do not live in a democracy. I will also add, the government works for you and me, not the other way around. Edited June 18, 2014 by GostHacked Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
On Guard for Thee Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 That was the condition for being allowed to vote back in the old times in England. In large part becaues it was only property owners who paid taxes. For the most part, that's still true. So with the current property values, most people in Vancouver or Toronto will be about ready to retire before they are able afford to vote. Yeah that makes a lot of sense. And BTW, whenever you put gas in your car you are paying lots of taxes whether you own a house or not. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Remiel Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 It's not trolling if I actually do believe this would produce a better, more sophisticated, more responsible and knowledgeable electorate, and I do. Then you are wrong, because it is not better and it is not most responsible. I grant that it might be more sophisticated and knowledgeable, but in this case those would become elitist values. A system in which adults are disenfranchised is a system in which the disenfranchised have far less responsibility to the state. By granting an elite minority power over the rest you could also be setting the stage for a civil war right here in Canada. As well, the idea of land ownership is so anachronistic as a measure. People increasingly do not own their own land for lifestyle and employment reasons. Creating a land requirement for voting would probably be taking a giant crap all over the economy as labour became even less mobile. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 What is wrong with making the vote an incentive to graduate high school as well? Being a right/privilege and incentive are not exclusive. I think it makes more sense to allow kids to vote, and build a class in civics around it. The fact is your average Canadian adult is a very low value voter. They either vote ideology, or party, or they make up their minds based on 30 second sound bites and political attack ads. Kids in school could be taught to really research important issues, and given time to do so. Contrary to what people here are claiming if we did as I suggest they would probably be the best informed voting demographic that we have. And with voter turnout dropping and political apathy increasing I dont see how it can hurt to try to get kids interested in the process earlier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hitops Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 Maybe not land ownership, but there should be something that in some even distant way implies a voter has a vested interest. My suggestion would be those that pay taxes. Not sales taxes, since even non-citizens pay those, but actual taxes (income or property). Something that implies you have a more substantial connection to the governance of the country beyond just choosing whoever promises to make everyone else give you the most free money and stuff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dre Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 Maybe not land ownership, but there should be something that in some even distant way implies a voter has a vested interest. My suggestion would be those that pay taxes. Not sales taxes, since even non-citizens pay those, but actual taxes (income or property). Something that implies you have a more substantial connection to the governance of the country beyond just choosing whoever promises to make everyone else give you the most free money and stuff. Its a really really bad idea, and it wont happen in a million years. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argus Posted June 18, 2014 Report Share Posted June 18, 2014 What is wrong with making the vote an incentive to graduate high school as well? Being a right/privilege and incentive are not exclusive. Why not say you have to graduate from college or university first? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.