An Excellent Proposal From The...
ChatterBank0 min ago
Children Till 24?
101 Answers
http://
So should we raise the voting age to 25 then? The last thing I want is self obsessed twitface junkies effecting who's in the government.
So should we raise the voting age to 25 then? The last thing I want is self obsessed twitface junkies effecting who's in the government.
Answers
yes, why not restrict the vote to landowners the way it was in the 18th century.
11:06 Fri 19th Jan 2018
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
“This thread is simply ageist.”
Indeed it is:
“Again, how do people over the age of retirement contribute to society apart from give their very educated, stern opinions? And how does this contribute more than someone from the age of 16, who works and pays tax?”
“…because they would have to live with the results and consequences for a lot longer(.
Your premise is nonsense. So, somebody of eighteen gets a vote worth, say, five votes (because they have to live with the consequences longest). Reducing to say, four at the age of thirty, three at the age of forty, etc.. What utter drivel. All voters have to live with the consequences of their choices. An older person may suffer the consequences for a shorter period but the effects may be more profound. Who can tell?
“You can start work at the age of 16…”
Get your facts straight. You can only begin work at 16 if you start an apprenticeship or a traineeship. Otherwise you must remain in full time education or work or volunteer no more than 20 hours a week whilst remaining in part time education.
“Also this day and age, i highly doubt anyone under the age of 16 makes more than 11.5 K a year anyhow!”
Check up again on the age at which you are allowed to work. (In particular check on how much work you are allowed to do when aged under 16).
“Private or state pension?”
Makes no difference. The State Pension is taxable.
Anything else I can put you straight on?
Indeed it is:
“Again, how do people over the age of retirement contribute to society apart from give their very educated, stern opinions? And how does this contribute more than someone from the age of 16, who works and pays tax?”
“…because they would have to live with the results and consequences for a lot longer(.
Your premise is nonsense. So, somebody of eighteen gets a vote worth, say, five votes (because they have to live with the consequences longest). Reducing to say, four at the age of thirty, three at the age of forty, etc.. What utter drivel. All voters have to live with the consequences of their choices. An older person may suffer the consequences for a shorter period but the effects may be more profound. Who can tell?
“You can start work at the age of 16…”
Get your facts straight. You can only begin work at 16 if you start an apprenticeship or a traineeship. Otherwise you must remain in full time education or work or volunteer no more than 20 hours a week whilst remaining in part time education.
“Also this day and age, i highly doubt anyone under the age of 16 makes more than 11.5 K a year anyhow!”
Check up again on the age at which you are allowed to work. (In particular check on how much work you are allowed to do when aged under 16).
“Private or state pension?”
Makes no difference. The State Pension is taxable.
Anything else I can put you straight on?
-- answer removed --
-- answer removed --
“Also its fine to pull all my comments about the older age,…”
Well that’s your fault. The question was about whether the voting age should be raised. But it was you who introduced the idea that older people should be disenfranchised:
“i think the voting age should be capped…”
And:
“I'm simply highlighting how people as young as 16 have the right to vote... And i feel people over a certain age actually don't. As you've said, they've contributed, they've had their say, now time to relax and leave the voting to those who it'll effect.”
But finally, when it is highlighted that your argument is (to be kind) a little mercurial, we get this:
I'm not denying the old to vote,…”
So what’s it to be????
Well that’s your fault. The question was about whether the voting age should be raised. But it was you who introduced the idea that older people should be disenfranchised:
“i think the voting age should be capped…”
And:
“I'm simply highlighting how people as young as 16 have the right to vote... And i feel people over a certain age actually don't. As you've said, they've contributed, they've had their say, now time to relax and leave the voting to those who it'll effect.”
But finally, when it is highlighted that your argument is (to be kind) a little mercurial, we get this:
I'm not denying the old to vote,…”
So what’s it to be????
spathiphyllum
//No, i think you should be able to vote as soon as you are able to work. If you pay tax, you should be able to vote.//
I was doing a paper round at 10, can I vote.?
Dave.
sorry i missed the word "TAX", ok so what about prisoners, the elderly, students, low paid workers.
none of which will be paying tax
//No, i think you should be able to vote as soon as you are able to work. If you pay tax, you should be able to vote.//
I was doing a paper round at 10, can I vote.?
Dave.
sorry i missed the word "TAX", ok so what about prisoners, the elderly, students, low paid workers.
none of which will be paying tax
//Makes no difference. The State Pension is taxable. //
excuse me the difference is about £10,000 ! ter daaah
http://
I think that AB is proof positive that childhood can last way beyond 65....[ and that this is not new ]
excuse me the difference is about £10,000 ! ter daaah
http://
I think that AB is proof positive that childhood can last way beyond 65....[ and that this is not new ]
