City of Vancouver is foolish

[GordonH]

What 16 year old is going to be informed enough about City issues to make informed choice in an election.
https://www.castanet.net/news/BC/338275 ... -elections

This smells fishy, not sure why.


btw... this sounds like something jt would try to pull.

[Babba_not_Gump]

Look at those who have endorsed it. No surprise there. Not one of those groups has any concept of cash flow. Spend, spend, spend.

Want to vote? You should have to take, and pass, a course on economics.

And yes, this is right up JT's alley.

[MalaPropina]

So... just so I have this straight... at 16 you (just to name a few)

Cannot see an r-rated movie
Adopt a pet
Have a credit card
Get a drivers license without parental permission
Give blood
Run in an election
Gamble
Vote federal or provincial
Still protected from being responsible for a crime
Enter a binding contract

But they think at 16 you're responsible and informed enough to vote for officials who run their community.

Good luck with that.

[LANDM]

Another way of looking at it is to consider, just as a small sample, some of the viewpoints espoused on various threads on this forum. That these people have a vote scares me a *lot* more than a 16yr old voting.

[Even Steven]

But they think at 16 you're responsible and informed enough to vote for officials who run their community.

Yeah, but two years later they all magically become responsible and informed to run their community?

[GordonH]

impo both drinking and voting age in Canada should be raised to 21, from coast to coast to coast.

I am aware this isn’t going to be popular... just read my signature.

[bob vernon]

impo both drinking and voting age in Canada should be raised to 21, from coast to coast to coast.

I am aware this isn’t going to be popular... just read my signature.

This won't be popular either: when people reach age 65, most retire. They should also be retired from the voters list. It would prevent them from voting for things that want to take us back to the "good old days". We need a forward looking electorate, not one that looks back. No more of this "well, it was good enough for me so it should be good enough for you." The world has changed.

[Zoso]

Of course it is endorsed by the teachers its like sending out 30 morons to vote for you.

[BC Landlord]

When it comes to municipal elections, I would make it that only property owners are eligible to vote. It's not fair that people who have no skin in the game have a say on costly issues.

[bob vernon]

When it comes to municipal elections, I would make it that only property owners are eligible to vote. It's not fair that people who have no skin in the game have a say on costly issues.

Yes, we should make ownership of property the criteria for having many rights, like citizenship and voting rights. Maybe even expand it to include education and other rights like access to a higher standard of medical care. People who don't own property would be reduced to a servant class and spend their lives in service of the property owners. It would be a lot like the days in England before the lower and middle classes got uppity. A kind of Nirvana for the wealthy. It'd be great.

[MalaPropina]

But they think at 16 you're responsible and informed enough to vote for officials who run their community.

Yeah, but two years later they all magically become responsible and informed to run their community?

Two years might not make them 'magically' more informed and responsible but it does makes them legally responsible for their actions. By then most will be tax paying citizens with jobs or planning future education and how their tax dollars are spent directly affects how they live, work, learn and play. Hopefully that gives them more food for thought instead of parents, teachers and social media telling them who to vote for.

[Babba_not_Gump]

When it comes to municipal elections, I would make it that only property owners are eligible to vote. It's not fair that people who have no skin in the game have a say on costly issues.

Absolutely yes.

[Even Steven]

Two years might not make them 'magically' more informed and responsible but it does makes them legally responsible for their actions.

It won't. And there's no real difference between 16 and 18. Most 16-year-olds won't vote anyway, cause it's stupid and boring. But those informed about the issues and interested in civic politics might contribute to the overall results, and that's the idea.

By then most will be tax paying citizens with jobs or planning future education and how their tax dollars are spent directly affects how they live, work, learn and play.

There are plenty of 16-year-olds working and paying taxes already.

[BC Landlord]

When it comes to municipal elections, I would make it that only property owners are eligible to vote. It's not fair that people who have no skin in the game have a say on costly issues.

Absolutely yes.

I would go even further ...
For every property you own, you get one vote. On the top of that, business owners would get an extra vote for every $200k revenues reporting.
This is the only way to hold municipal nut-heads accountable.

[alanjh595]

Yes, we should make ownership of property the criteria for having many rights, like citizenship and voting rights. Maybe even expand it to include education and other rights like access to a higher standard of medical care. People who don't own property would be reduced to a servant class and spend their lives in service of the property owners. It would be a lot like the days in England before the lower and middle classes got uppity. A kind of Nirvana for the wealthy. It'd be great.

AND......is there something wrong with that system?.

Maybe,
Right to ownership.
Citizenship,
Voting,
Government employment,
Socialized Medical care.
Hunting,
Fishing,


........should all be reserved for 2nd/3rd generation of Canadian citizens

I am sure I can come up with a few more, but........ you get my drift.