Politiks

NightSnake · Sun Apr 29, 2007 11:32 am Two Potential Voters

So, let us look at two people:

A) an unemployed, illiterate high-school drop-out who is at the moment drunk and high
B) an honors student who volunteers with a local campaign for mayor and works at CVS, and who doesn't drink or do drugs ever

Which one gets to vote? Person A, yep, because person A has attained the enlightened age of 18 and no one at the polling station notices his drunkenness or highness. Person B is a high-school student, and only 17, so his opinion is worthless. Person A will vote for the person who appears to have the prettiest colored name, who will in turn decide what happens to the tax dollars Person B pays because he works.

This makes sense how exactly?

agentkgb · Sun Apr 29, 2007 1:18 pm

It doesn't make any sense. I got into a debate with someone on one of those mega-huge political forums (and used drunk illiterate high-school drop-outs as an example too), eventually he agreed the voting age should be lowered or else non-voters shouldn't pay taxes, but he actually said that drunk voters were capable voters.

Matt · Sun Apr 29, 2007 2:14 pm

There are extreme cases, but we need to have some limits in my opinion. A 5-year-old would vote for whoever his parents tell him to, a 10-year-old for whoever his friends are, etc. 18 seems good to me.

Ulyanov · Sun Apr 29, 2007 3:04 pm

Matt wrote: There are extreme cases, but we need to have some limits in my opinion. A 5-year-old would vote for whoever his parents tell him to, a 10-year-old for whoever his friends are, etc. 18 seems good to me.
Adults are of course immune to being swayed by such things like that. :roll:

agentkgb · Sun Apr 29, 2007 3:40 pm

Some Austrian states let 16-year-olds vote, but American adults are the ones that elected Schwarzenegger.

Matt · Sun Apr 29, 2007 5:52 pm

agentkgb wrote: Some Austrian states let 16-year-olds vote, but American adults are the ones that elected Schwarzenegger.
I'd consider lowering local election ages to 16, no farther.

Nevitec · Sun Apr 29, 2007 8:04 pm

I like it at 18. Anything like 15 or under seems like a bad idea.

Age 5- Votes whoever his parents tell him to
Age 10- Votes for who his friends are
Age 18- Votes responsibly
Age 169- Votes for whoever will help his retirement benefits.

Ulyanov · Sun Apr 29, 2007 8:29 pm

Nevitec wrote: I like it at 18. Anything like 15 or under seems like a bad idea.

Age 5- Votes whoever his parents tell him to
Age 10- Votes for who his friends are
Age 18- Votes responsibly
I was OK up until there. There are loads of 18-year-olds who don't vote responsibly. I think the requirements should be replaced with something like high school graduation or whether they pay taxes.

Nevitec wrote: Age 169- Votes for whoever will help his retirement benefits.
Unfortunately this seems to be true pretty often with the AARP and all.

Maximus Vigilus · Wed May 02, 2007 3:25 am

Unfortunately the general consensus among older people is that the younger you are, the less intelligent or relevant your thoughts are to a subject. I personally believe that the voting age should not be changed but rather some sort of testing or evaluation should be done before being able to vote.

agentkgb · Wed May 02, 2007 8:06 pm

Maximus Vigilus wrote: Unfortunately the general consensus among older people is that the younger you are, the less intelligent or relevant your thoughts are to a subject. I personally believe that the voting age should not be changed but rather some sort of testing or evaluation should be done before being able to vote.
A voting test would have far too much potential for abuse I think.

Maximus Vigilus · Wed May 02, 2007 9:54 pm

agentkgb wrote: Maximus Vigilus wrote: Unfortunately the general consensus among older people is that the younger you are, the less intelligent or relevant your thoughts are to a subject. I personally believe that the voting age should not be changed but rather some sort of testing or evaluation should be done before being able to vote.
A voting test would have far too much potential for abuse I think.

In an ideal society without corruption however such a thing would be possible. However I know what you mean, it could be similar to the times of literacy tests during Jim Crow times.

However my point remains clear, some people are far too stupid to be able to vote.

NightSnake · Wed May 02, 2007 10:22 pm

Maybe require something like high school graduation? But then you'd have the hs equivalent of "overnight degrees" for rich kids whose parents don't want them to wait.

Maximus Vigilus · Mon May 07, 2007 8:04 pm

Quote: Maybe require something like high school graduation?

Then again lots of stupid people get through High School with no problems. I still standby some sort of testing though, with certain requirements to prevent the system from being exploited.

Houndstooth · Mon May 07, 2007 8:36 pm

Anybody who works for CVS should be allowed to vote. CVS is making me good money on the stock market...

<_<

I like 18. Solutions to unqualified voters? I don't have any.

Roy's Our Boy · Tue May 08, 2007 1:51 am

Maximus Vigilus wrote: I still standby some sort of testing though, with certain requirements to prevent the system from being exploited.

I concur. Too many people do not know what is going on.