Snp Want Votes For 16 +17 Year Olds Aneu Citizens In Ge

[webbo3]

http://news.sky.com/story/snp-want-16-and-17-year-olds-to-have-vote-in-christmas-election-11848129

Are they desperate for votes, we can't vote in EU elections only the local ones and children fresh out of school will listen to their parents.

[Mozz71]

//Mozz apologies you may have further observations here but I'm answering as I would had I suggested the net contributor idea.//

No apologies needed TTT, I thought things like an age limit were an obvious given, but I should've known better. Let me put it this way: if you have left full time education, and have gone into the workplace, you can vote. If you have been in the workplace previously, and find yourself currently on benefits or retired, you can vote. If you are a homemaker you can vote. If you are registered disabled or unfit for work, you can vote.

If you are in full time education and have never worked, or are sat on the dole since leaving education, no vote for you. Nor do you get a vote if you're voluntarily living outside of the UK.

I'm sure there are tweaks that can be made for different scenarios, but that is what I consider contributing to the country.

[ToraToraTora]

I agree it's not a pension in the private sector sense but for the purposes of this discussion I am saying that the income someone gets having paid their dues should not be considered a "benefit" when calculating what is a net contributor.

[ToraToraTora]

mozz: "No apologies needed TTT, I thought things like an age limit were an obvious given" - not to the professional contrarians on here!
"I'm sure there are tweaks that can be made for different scenarios, but that is what I consider contributing to the country. " - that won't stop TROB ignoring the general principle.

[pixie374]

It makes no sense to assume that, ttt, as many retirees are well under the age of average life expectancy.
I agree, mozz, people who have moved outside the country shouldn't be able to vote. However, the age of compulsory full-time education is different in Scotland and England, so that would not be a fair way to do it.

[ToraToraTora]

pixie, I'm not trying to dot every I and cross every T here, just putting forward the principle. The details would be worked out prior to implementation.

[pixie374]

Ok x

[davebro]

"a person's State Pension is not funded solely by that person's NI contributions, is it? My contributions and taxes are helping to pay for it too."

If the contributions had been invested instead of being subsumed into general taxation the OAP would be much more generous.

[New Judge]

//I'm going massively off-topic here...but until as such time as the state pension is linked to the amount you put in, rather than solely the number of years you put in, it's not actually a pension is it?//

Indeed, dd. A topic I have been banging on about on here and elsewhere for donkeys’ years. The State Pension scheme is an absolute farce. At present, someone earning £10k a year pays £164 in NI contributions. A person earning £100k pays £5,967 – 36 times as much. Yet for each of them the contribution amounts to the same – one contributing year – and each of them will receive the same State Pension.

There is no relationship between contributions made and payments to be received. Add to this the fact that many people who receive a State “Pension” receive nothing of the sort. They receive retirement age welfare benefits. Many of them have not paid sufficient contributions to fund their payments and the burden to make up the difference falls on current taxpayers. The State Pension scheme is not a pension scheme at all. It is a glorified – and massive – Ponzi scheme underwritten by taxpayers. Any City wide boys running such a scheme would soon find themselves up before The Beak.

[davebro]

NJ - surely "National Insurance" isn't hypothecated purely for pensions?
Wasn't it originally designed to fund the NHS too? It's a total farce, should be done away with and incorporated into general taxation.

[roopower]

Perhaps we shouldn't give the vote to anyone not old enough to be named when they commit a crime.

[dannyk13]

It was voted on yesterday and turned down.

[THECORBYLOON]

DANNY, the amendment wasn't accepted for debate so there was no vote on lowering the voting age.

[dannyk13]

Sorry, should have been clearer, the amendment was turned down.

[New Judge]

//NJ - surely "National Insurance" isn't hypothecated purely for pensions?//

No it isn't, Dave. It simply goes into the general "pot". But NI contributions ARE used to calculate State Pension entitlement, but only in the way I described. This is part of the total farce you rightly say the State Pension scheme is. There should be no such scheme at all and certainly not one where there is such a disconnect between contributions made and benefits received.

The scheme has outlived its usefulness. It was a good idea when it was introduced as few people were able to contribute to a scheme which would give them a decent income in retirement. But that's not the case now. It's quite true that many people do not make provisions for their retirement. Some cannot and so should receive State assistance. But many can but don't and they should be at the back of the queue when the retirement handouts are considered. And money paid to them should certainly not be included in the "State Pension" total which, we're told, is such a drain on the economy..