Lowering Voting Age to 16

[eyeball]

There is nothing more collectivist than the sentiment, you're either with us or you're with the fill-in-blank-here and this comes more naturally to the hypocrites who coined that phrase in the first place than anyone on the planet.

[eyeball]

Okay i'll admit it isn't communist, but by it's own mission statement it is collectivist.

There is nothing more collectivist than the sentiment, you're either with us or you're with the fill-in-blank-here and this comes more naturally to the hypocrites who coined that phrase in the first place than anyone on the planet.

[ProudCanadianConservative]

There is nothing more collectivist than the sentiment, you're either with us or you're with the fill-in-blank-here and this comes more naturally to the hypocrites who coined that phrase in the first place than anyone on the planet.

Agreed, however i'm not arguing collectivism is wrong, it's simply an ideological viewpoint on how society should function. Collectivism is more putting society's needs above the individuals. We Day over arching goal is for youth to focus more on the power of community instead of individuals.

I personally believe you need elements of both collectivism and individualism to have a well-run society.

[Moonbox]

We don't have wars, and the military is strictly voluntary (and VERY well-paid). Get back to me when we start drafting people.

but we allow 18-19 year old kids to enlist and be commissioned, so what does it matter if they're drafted or not? We trust them with extremely dangerous weapons and expensive equipment, but in your esteemed opinion they can't be trusted to vote.

Right...

[Bryan]

but we allow 18-19 year old kids to enlist and be commissioned, so what does it matter if they're drafted or not? We trust them with extremely dangerous weapons and expensive equipment, but in your esteemed opinion they can't be trusted to vote.

Right...

We probably shouldn't allow that either. Teenage brains are not fully developed. They are impulsive and routinely make colossally bad decisions that go against their own best interests. I say no military and no voting until AT LEAST 21. Even that is probably too soon for some people.

[On Guard for Thee]

We probably shouldn't allow that either. Teenage brains are not fully developed. They are impulsive and routinely make colossally bad decisions that go against their own best interests. I say no military and no voting until AT LEAST 21. Even that is probably too soon for some people.

Maybe you'd prefer we wait until we are old and f**** feeble. Then we'd all vote conservative?

[Bryan]

Maybe you'd prefer we wait until we are old and fucking feeble. Then we'd all vote conservative?

People need to be capable of understanding the consequences of their actions. Teenagers are incapable of it -- their prefrontal cortex is not fully developed. It's the same argument for an age of majority for anything.

[PIK]

It should raised to 21. That way we will have a higher turn out and it should be only people that want to vote , and understand what is going on. And yes the left would love it, trudeau's pot policy would get him elected very easy and is that want we want, people voting because someone might legalize weed, but have yet to work or pay taxes.

[Black Dog]

Lower the voting age to 16 and revoke voting rights at 65.

[Black Dog]

I think it should be raised to 30. Most twentysomethings are too unsophisticated and ignorant to be allowed to make important decisions.

So is most everyone over 30.

[hitops]

I would also agree to 25-30.

Realistically there's no perfect criteria, how do you judge? But I think some basic exposure to life and the effects of public policy on said should be the bare minimum.

Kids at 16 have not the foggiest clue what it really means to support yourself and conduct yourself in society. Nearly all are totally financially dependent on their parents, and don't even come to close to understanding what it would be like without that safety net. This leads to beliefs that are not based in reality, but in a pseudo-reality bubble that is created for them.

When you provide your own roof, food and clothes for a few years, is when you get the first inklings of what it really means to hand over 20-30-40% of your income to gov. All of a sudden where they spend that money starts to matter.

I would be willing to bet your average 16 year old could not even describe the structure of our government, or correctly assign the major services to their respective level of government, much less make an informed voting choice.

Edited November 17, 2014 by hitops

[Moonlight Graham]

We don't have wars, and the military is strictly voluntary (and VERY well-paid). Get back to me when we start drafting people.

Voting is voluntary too. If they're mature enough to make that decision they're mature enough to vote on who we go to war with etc.

[guyser]

I would be willing to bet your average 16 year old could not even describe the structure of our government, or correctly assign the major services to their respective level of government, much less make an informed voting choice.

Why limit that to 16 yr olds.

The same likely could be said of those a little older, a lot older, and even the ancient.

[Black Dog]

I would also agree to 25-30.

Realistically there's no perfect criteria, how do you judge? But I think some basic exposure to life and the effects of public policy on said should be the bare minimum.

Kids at 16 have not the foggiest clue what it really means to support yourself and conduct yourself in society. Nearly all are totally financially dependent on their parents, and don't even come to close to understanding what it would be like without that safety net. This leads to beliefs that are not based in reality, but in a pseudo-reality bubble that is created for them.

When you provide your own roof, food and clothes for a few years, is when you get the first inklings of what it really means to hand over 20-30-40% of your income to gov. All of a sudden where they spend that money starts to matter.

I would be willing to bet your average 16 year old could not even describe the structure of our government, or correctly assign the major services to their respective level of government, much less make an informed voting choice.

Why not set an income limit to for voting? Or require passing a short civics exam before you can register to vote? Better yet, why not just dispense with this whole voting business altogether?

[Boges]

Why not set an income limit to for voting? Or require passing a short civics exam before you can register to vote? Better yet, why not just dispense with this whole voting business altogether?

Just allow white male land owners to vote.

There may be politically engaged 16-year-olds but short of their education, the effects of government don't effect their lives very much. I also think it would be way to easy for a teacher to influence a 16-year-old's voting habits.

Edited November 17, 2014 by Boges

[The_Squid]

Just allow white male land owners to vote.

There may be politically engaged 16-year-olds but short of their education, the effects of government don't effect their lives very much. I also think it would be way to easy for a teacher to influence a 16-year-old's voting habits.

Why would you think teachers would have more influence than parents?

I think you overestimate how much politics are actually part of a classroom. Other than civics lessons, history, etc, I doubt that a teacher's political affiliation ever comes up.

[Argus]

but we allow 18-19 year old kids to enlist and be commissioned, so what does it matter if they're drafted or not? We trust them with extremely dangerous weapons and expensive equipment, but in your esteemed opinion they can't be trusted to vote.

Right...

No, we actually don't allow them to be commissioned. We do allow them to join the military as enlisted personnel, and enlisted personnel, especially junior ones, are always VERY well supervised. We don't let them join the police department at all, however.

[The_Squid]

If young people actually voted in any sort of numbers, the CPC would never attain power as younger voters tend to vote for the NDP or Liberals much more so than CPC.

[overthere]

If young people actually voted in any sort of numbers, the CPC would never attain power as younger voters tend to vote for the NDP or Liberals much more so than CPC.

Another tired old meme.

You actually have no idea how people that do not vote, would vote. The only way to know is to get them to vote, then count those votes.

The NDP in particular is guilty of dragging out this in a hyterical fit of whining and blubbering,when they get their asses handed to them again .

In one example I can think of- the last Alberta election- the voters came out in much higher numbers than the previous election. IIRC it went from 42% to 58% in voter turnout, which is a big increase and unprecedented in AB. And they voted for... the center...the PCs.

Predictably, the donkeys running the NDP and Libs thought that all the 40+% who did not vote at all would have unanimously voted NDP or Liberal.

[Wilber]

Lowering the age isn't the answer. The problem is getting younger people to vote at all. The fact is, a lower percentage of young people now vote than their parents and grand parents did at the same age.

[Moonbox]

No, we actually don't allow them to be commissioned. We do allow them to join the military as enlisted personnel, and enlisted personnel, especially junior ones, are always VERY well supervised. We don't let them join the police department at all, however.

Enlisted = Rank and File

Commissioned = Officer

Why are you talking about the police?

Your problems with the terminology aside, the main point is that you don't consider young adults fit to vote, event though they make up a large portion of our enlisted personnel and junior officer ranks in the military. Sure, we'll let you die for your country, but no, you're too dumb to vote. Impressive logic, as always.

[Moonbox]

We probably shouldn't allow that either. Teenage brains are not fully developed. They are impulsive and routinely make colossally bad decisions that go against their own best interests. I say no military and no voting until AT LEAST 21. Even that is probably too soon for some people.

The average 21 year old is not really any more bright than the average 18 year old. Regardless, the problem with this logic can be easily demonstrated with two points. First, there are a lot of 18-21 year olds who are far more intelligent and responsible than a lot of 40 and 50 year olds. Also, the same 18-21 year olds are probably a lot sharper and reasonable than the average 90+ year old, but we'd deny the former the right to vote while allowing barely-lucid 'invalids' to make decisions for the future they won't be a part of.

[Bryan]

The average 21 year old is not really any more bright than the average 18 year old. Regardless, the problem with this logic can be easily demonstrated with two points. First, there are a lot of 18-21 year olds who are far more intelligent and responsible than a lot of 40 and 50 year olds. Also, the same 18-21 year olds are probably a lot sharper and reasonable than the average 90+ year old, but we'd deny the former the right to vote while allowing barely-lucid 'invalids' to make decisions for the future they won't be a part of.

Those aren't necessarily mutually exclusive points.

[Moonbox]

Those aren't necessarily mutually exclusive points.

Maybe not, but they're both non-starters. Unless deemed medically incompetent, you can't deny an adult the vote. There's no reasonable basis for suggesting otherwise. The suggestion that they're too dumb/ignorant to vote is highly suspect as you could probably say the same about the electorate in general.

[Bryan]

Maybe not, but they're both non-starters. Unless deemed medically incompetent, you can't deny an adult the vote. There's no reasonable basis for suggesting otherwise. The suggestion that they're too dumb/ignorant to vote is highly suspect as you could probably say the same about the electorate in general.

You often can, that's why low voter turnout is not a bad thing. Let those who are engaged enough to make an informed decision do so, leave those who either can't or can't be bothered to do whatever else they deem important.