Voting age to be lowered to 16 in UK by next general election
Voting age to be lowered to 16 in UK by next general election
www.theguardian.com
Voting age to be lowered to 16 across UK by next general election
You're viewing a single thread.
92 comments
-
That is beyond stupid. Hell our brains aren't fully developed at 18 , at 16?
-
Some people make it to their 70's without a fully developed brain.
-
Some people become president of the world's most heavily armed nation without one
-
Yep. To all of what you said.
Still. It's a bad idea. I think we all know it if we really think about
-
-
-
What are your thoughts on people with degenerative brain diseases being able to vote?
Should you have to take a test once you hit 70 to confirm you are still aware enough to vote in an informed way? (Should you be able to work in politics after 70?)
I admit I'm taking it to the extreme to make a point but if you can work and pay tax at 16, I think being able to vote makes sense.
-
the age limit is not about closing people out entirely, but limit it while they are more gullible. sure there's lots of fools beyond 18, but the concept is that hopefully most people as they ahe, become less so, and much of that process happens around age 18 and somewhat beyond.
now add that kids today are not only exposed to shit spreading on facebook but now tiktok too, and they don't know when they are being deceived. source: I didn't know with facebook when I was in that age.look, there were not too many elections yet on which I could have voted. but I think even 18 might be too early. I remember that I just missed an election by a few months, and today I'm ashamed of what would have been my choice. I almost voted for a party that looked ashamed of its corrupt past, just because they acknowledged it and promised it wouldn't happen again.
this is not a step forward.
-
If your main points are around misinformation, propaganda, fake new, ai generated content or anything that convinces people of something that is false, I would say this is a huge, but separate issue that affects everyone, not just 16-17 year olds.
Younger people consume different types of media and paying influencers to pick political sides doesn't seem to be as uncommon as I would like.
That being said, Cambridge analytica already showed us that the age groups that can vote are not immune to have their opinions manipulated via targeted misinformation.
They are just as fucked as we are, let them vote.
-
okay. but then just delete the age limit. lets have kindergarten aged kids vote. what could go wrong?
-
If we are taking things to extremes to make the point.
You plan would be to block anyone that may be gullible from voting.
The question is how? Forced iq tests or level of education achieved. Maybe some demographics are more susceptible? Age, race, gender? Maybe location. Are rural communities less likely to consume propaganda? Are they more likely?
It seems the original argument was that if at 16 you can join the army and fight in a war, should you get a voice on if we go to war?
I think yes.
-
You plan would be to block anyone that may be gullible from voting.
where did I say that? my suggestion is to not increase the proportion of gullible people, perhaps reduce it by slightly increasing the age limit (like to 20)
The question is how? Forced iq tests or level of education achieved. Maybe some demographics are more susceptible? Age, race, gender? Maybe location. Are rural communities less likely to consume propaganda? Are they more likely?
some kind of test would be ideal, but it sounds like Pandora's box. an assumed "good" administration starts doing it, but even if it's done fairly at the beginning, it's too easy to change it to be used discriminatively
It seems the original argument was that if at 16 you can join the army and fight in a war, should you get a voice on if we go to war?
I think yes.
I'm confident that 16 year olds should neither have voting rights, nor be allowed to go to war.
-
where did I say that? my suggestion is to not increase the proportion of gullible people, perhaps reduce it by slightly increasing the age limit (like to 20
You didn't, you took my point to the extreme when you said this:
but then just delete the age limit. lets have kindergarten aged kids vote. what could go wrong?
I was doing the same to your point to show how ridiculous it sounds when you exaggerate any of these ideas.
What I would add that got pointed out to me today is, that if we have a general election every 5 years, someone who turns 18 just after an election potentially may not be able to vote for the first time untill they almost 23.
Again, my opinion is that being able to vote for the first time between 16-20 sounds a lot better than voting for the first time between 18-22.
-
What I would add that got pointed out to me today is, that if we have a general election every 5 years, someone who turns 18 just after an election potentially may not be able to vote for the first time untill they almost 23.
I agree that's unfortunate, the first vote I was eligible for was at 21. It's not ideal. I think a better solution would be to have more (meaningful) votes (not necessarily with shorther terms)
Again, my opinion is that being able to vote for the first time between 16-20 sounds a lot better than voting for the first time between 18-22.
I'm not sure. I would rather just increase the age limit to 20, and implement a fix to have more times you can vote.
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Those are good questions
I do think that our voting public needs more education and we needed to have age appropriate, and yes , at times medical consitions may have to be looked at.
I feel that the last part I can speak to a bit( I am not a doctor or anything) as I grew up with a mother who was left with extreme tbi after an accident but could still function in society.
But she didn't vote. She didn't have any grasp of what was happening politically. She was never told not to, but I think somehow she knew.
Honestly there are ways to disseminate the voting information enough that those who can grasp the vote should.
I have no easy answers though. It's not an easy question
-
Definitely agree there are no easy answers.
At least this seems like a much better place to have a discussion on it that some other places online.
Edit: I did just saw you first comment got down voted. I think you have a valid point, I don't agree but I wouldn't down vote you for having it and I don't think you should have been.
-
Yeah, I'm not saying I have all the answers or that I'm not missing something, but the way it stands it's a bad idea. It needs thought, a process developed and guardrails in place.
-
-
-
I will say this. As well. I have a 17 year old extremely intelligent son. He works. He ain't ready to vote. He'll be the first to say it as well.
-
Ironically that's what makes him grounded enough to have a vote imo, with people out there being so susceptible to propaganda and proud of it too it's worth having more stoic views on it
-
You laugh but I said the same thing to him. Told him I'd kick his butt if he didn't vote next year. We need guys who actually inquire and argue with those in Authority. Even when that authority is his dad lol.
Hey sometimes I'm wrong and he's right. It happens
-
-
-
-
oh don't tell me you believe in that debunked your-brain-is-fully-developed-at-25 pseudoscience.
-
No you rude shit. I believe in the science involved in brain formation, maturity and it's response to nature and nurture
You?
-
-
92 comments