Bloodstock Community

Ideally, I would raise it to 20. It's pretty scary to think that the UK could have been broken up by the decisions of 16 year olds in the Scotland referendum a few years ago.

16. If you're old enough to enter the employment market and pay tax and NI then you should get a say in voting for the people who will make decisions that directly affect the labour market and also how that tax & NI is spent

Raise it back to 21.

Most under 21s are still at school nowadays anyway and those that aren't are mostly NEETS. Virtually none of them have paid a bill in their lives as the vast majority who are working will be below the tax threshold. They aren't even worth paying the going rate of NMW when employed.

If they do lower it to 16 then they should charge them the full rate for everything. Bus and train travel, food in restaurants, cinema tickets, etc. Then see how popular the idea is with them.

Its controversial but I would say 25, with at least 2 years in full time work. You need an informed choice when you vote.

metaldinosaur wrote:Its controversial but I would say 25, with at least 2 years in full time work. You need an informed choice when you vote.

I don't see that the work requirement is essential but your 25 age minimum might be supported by science:
https://mentalhealthdaily.com/2015/02/1 ... developed/

"It is widely debated as to which age the brain is considered 'fully mature' or developed. In the past, many experts believed that the brain may have been done developing in the mid to late teens. Then along came some evidence to suggest that development may last until at least age 20. These days, a consensus of neuroscientists agree that brain development likely persists until at least the mid-20s – possibly until the 30s.

The fact that our brains aren’t developed until the mid 20s means that 'legal adults' (those age 18+) are allowed to make adult decisions, without fully mature brains. Someone who is 18 may make riskier decisions than someone in their mid-20s in part due to lack of experience, but primarily due to an underdeveloped brain. All behaviors and experiences you endure until the age of 25 have potential to impact your developing brain."

That's probably an even greater justification for raising the driving age too.

Metalchemyst wrote:

metaldinosaur wrote:Its controversial but I would say 25, with at least 2 years in full time work. You need an informed choice when you vote.

I don't see that the work requirement is essential but your 25 age minimum might be supported by science:
https://mentalhealthdaily.com/2015/02/1 ... developed/

"It is widely debated as to which age the brain is considered 'fully mature' or developed. In the past, many experts believed that the brain may have been done developing in the mid to late teens. Then along came some evidence to suggest that development may last until at least age 20. These days, a consensus of neuroscientists agree that brain development likely persists until at least the mid-20s – possibly until the 30s.

The fact that our brains aren’t developed until the mid 20s means that 'legal adults' (those age 18+) are allowed to make adult decisions, without fully mature brains. Someone who is 18 may make riskier decisions than someone in their mid-20s in part due to lack of experience, but primarily due to an underdeveloped brain. All behaviors and experiences you endure until the age of 25 have potential to impact your developing brain."

That's probably an even greater justification for raising the driving age too.

Th f/t work was to give voters a more rounded experience of been subjected by, and contributing to society.

That is interesting stuff. My opinion was just based on personal experience, my understanding of the world seemed to be far more well-rounded by my late 20's. That does seem to back that up.

i0th wrote:I'd stop people voting after they retire. They're no longer contributing to society just sucking money out, have freebies in bus passes and are too old and bigoted to make an informed decision.

I don't agree but it's an interesting way to turn Gandalf's ageist, "kids these days blah blah blah" stuff on its head

Only people aged 40 should be allowed to vote. And politicians should only be allowed to hold office for four years. And political parties should be banned.

i0th wrote:I'd stop people voting after they retire. They're no longer contributing to society just sucking money out, have freebies in bus passes and are too old and bigoted to make an informed decision.

Yeah, ground 'm down and make Soylent Green.

16.

If you're old enough to work, pay NI contributions, marry (albeit with parental consent) and have a family, then you are old enough to have a say in how the country is run.

Now, if someone were to propose upping the age for all those listed above, I'd consider the argument for voting not being at 16.

metaldinosaur wrote:Its controversial but I would say 25, with at least 2 years in full time work. You need an informed choice when you vote.

What happens if the country then develops high level of youth unemployment ala Spain? Or if predictions come true and the gig economy becomes the norm? Not knocking your idea just some issues that would need consideration.

Haldamir319 wrote:16.

If you're old enough to... have a family.

Don't even have to wait that long to have kids these days I knew quite a few people who I was at school with who started having them at 15

houston4044 wrote:

metaldinosaur wrote:Its controversial but I would say 25, with at least 2 years in full time work. You need an informed choice when you vote.

What happens if the country then develops high level of youth unemployment ala Spain? Or if predictions come true and the gig economy becomes the norm? Not knocking your idea just some issues that would need consideration

Ultimately, if such an idea was implemented, young adult workers, without the right to vote, would have to hold their water till they were old enough. They wouldn't be too neglected by the policy makers because people do vote for their kids too. (Remember, Blair's 'education education education' slogan?)

15-18 year olds, still in our education system, are very much at the mercy of the state, but don't get the right to a vote because they're not deemed ready for the responsibility. I'm just suggesting that people in their early 20's still aren't ready either. If the government treats them poorly enough, I'm sure they would remember, and my well vote accordingly when they are old enough.

Whether the voting age was lowered or not, I'd support having political studies taught as part of the national curriculum in high school so at least when those people do get to voting age they've got some basic understanding of the differences between the main parties and the ways in which government policy can affect your day-to-day life.

I imagine there's an alarming number of eligible voters out there now (and I'm including plenty of people over 30 and even over 40 in that as well) who haven't got the faintest idea what any of the main political parties stand for.

35. By this stage many will have a mortgage, hold a driving licence, switched bank accounts, be raising kids, written a strongly worded letter to their local MP/newspaper, applied for jobs, spoken condescendingly to enough younger folk... Basically they will have enough "life experience" to vote in such a manner that they'll understand which party actually represents their view. Just in time for their midlife crisis to make elections more interesting. They should then be assessed by an ill thought out, chaotically run government organisation to determine whether they've completed their crisis phase, at which point their right to vote shall be revoked.

16. There are some under 18 who do have the patience to read manifestos, follow politics and follow parties and party leaders that give them enough of an idea of how they want to vote. They deserve a say more than a 47 year old who has never voted in their life

I'd say somewhere around 21. You only have to look at some of the ill-informed political rantings of the young to see that, while there will obviously be exceptions, en masse I don't believe that people are sufficiently mature at that age to be having a say in the destiny of the country. And yes, that sucks for them. But it's better than the alternative IMHO.