Lower voting age to 16. Give your head a shake!

User avatar
fluffy
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 23950
Joined: Jun 1st, 2006, 5:42 pm

Re: Lower voting age to 16. Give your head a shake!

Post by fluffy »

It makes sense to me that finishing high school first would give us a more informed voter. Sixteen is a bit young in my opinion.
Never miss a good chance to shut up.
User avatar
Ken7
Guru
Posts: 8501
Joined: Sep 30th, 2007, 4:09 pm

Re: Lower voting age to 16. Give your head a shake!

Post by Ken7 »

GordonH wrote: Aug 17th, 2021, 3:36 pm Move everything up to 21 across Canada:
D/L
Voting
Drinking

Grandfather those already under 21, just that simple.
Like the new Federal Drug Act, let's just let each province decide what the FEDERAL Law will be. Never have I seen a law handled so poorly.

We have adults who are clueless and they vote. Maybe something needs to be changed!
User avatar
Bsuds
The Wagon Master
Posts: 51213
Joined: Apr 21st, 2005, 10:46 am

Re: Lower voting age to 16. Give your head a shake!

Post by Bsuds »

I think if someone is old enough to join the Military and fight/die for their Country then they are old enough to Vote and Drink.
All my passwords are protected by amnesia!
User avatar
oldtrucker
Guru
Posts: 7771
Joined: Nov 24th, 2013, 3:19 pm

Re: Lower voting age to 16. Give your head a shake!

Post by oldtrucker »

GordonH wrote: Aug 17th, 2021, 3:36 pm Move everything up to 21 across Canada:
D/L
Voting
Drinking

Grandfather those already under 21, just that simple.
I'd say for voting- 25 yrs old, maybe even 30.
For driving...14 is learner lic.age in AB. 15 in Sk.
You can get your private pilots lic. at 17. Commercial at 18...Okay to be Capt but no way should anyone be voting...Ha!
Ya I was more mature at 18 than some 30 year olds now. But that was another time....Now, we have university students who are supposed to be adults acting like grade 8 or 9 children out partying/wrecking things...- on the news recently. They may be in their 20's but they are not adults. My sister teaches at U of A and NAIT, and she tells me the 'adults' can't handle real life as the parents of the students still want to do the parent- teacher interview thing when things don't go right for little Johnny or little Suzy. What a joke. [icon_lol2.gif]
Some may view my politically incorrect opinions as harsh and may be offended by them. Some think political correctness will be our undoing.
User avatar
JLives
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 19021
Joined: Nov 27th, 2004, 10:53 am

Re: Lower voting age to 16. Give your head a shake!

Post by JLives »

fluffy wrote: Oct 2nd, 2021, 9:27 am It makes sense to me that finishing high school first would give us a more informed voter. Sixteen is a bit young in my opinion.
I left home and was self sufficient at 16. Why shouldn't I have had the right to vote in the society I was contributing to and living in?
"Every dollar you spend is a vote for what you believe in."
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good."
rustled
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 15867
Joined: Dec 26th, 2010, 12:47 pm

Re: Lower voting age to 16. Give your head a shake!

Post by rustled »

JLives wrote: Oct 3rd, 2021, 2:02 pm
fluffy wrote: Oct 2nd, 2021, 9:27 am It makes sense to me that finishing high school first would give us a more informed voter. Sixteen is a bit young in my opinion.
I left home and was self sufficient at 16. Why shouldn't I have had the right to vote in the society I was contributing to and living in?
IMO, those of us who were anomalies in terms of how young we took on adult responsibilities shouldn't be referenced as though we are the norm.

Speaking for myself, very few of the students I attended high school with were politically engaged. Those of us who were engaged were heavily into our "activist" phase, with too little experience (IMO) to understand how often the negative consequences of good intentions can outweigh the positive - the entire concept of "first, do no harm" and risk/benefit analysis is lost on the impetuous young, which is why we don't allow them to purchase their own cigarettes and alcohol.

It seems to me the objectives of lowering voting ages (along with the next natural step of setting up polling booths at high schools) should be obvious: they are inexperienced, gullible, easily manipulated and subject to doing what's popular without much thought. Heaven knows we have enough adults with the same characteristics already voting.

Until we know our high schools are once again teaching the fundamental lessons of failed ideologies of the past, no good can come of lowering the voting age. If the objective is an engaged electorate, a thorough and unbiased grounding in history and political ideologies and their outcomes would be far more likely to convince people their vote does matter.
Ideology...gives evil-doing its long-sought justification and gives the evildoer the necessary steadfastness and determination...[it] is the social theory which helps to make his actions seem good instead of bad in his own and others' eyes...
-Solzhenitsyn
User avatar
JLives
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 19021
Joined: Nov 27th, 2004, 10:53 am

Re: Lower voting age to 16. Give your head a shake!

Post by JLives »

Ya that applies to adults too. Not a convincing argument.
"Every dollar you spend is a vote for what you believe in."
"My country is the world, and my religion is to do good."
rustled
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 15867
Joined: Dec 26th, 2010, 12:47 pm

Re: Lower voting age to 16. Give your head a shake!

Post by rustled »

JLives wrote: Oct 3rd, 2021, 2:47 pm Ya that applies to adults too. Not a convincing argument.
You've told me you only skim my posts, so it's likely you missed the part I've bolded:
It seems to me the objectives of lowering voting ages (along with the next natural step of setting up polling booths at high schools) should be obvious: they are inexperienced, gullible, easily manipulated and subject to doing what's popular without much thought. Heaven knows we have enough adults with the same characteristics already voting.
I realize some may think that if we already have a problem, it doesn't much matter if we make that problem bigger.

My thinking is that we already have a problem, no point making it bigger than it needs to be.
Ideology...gives evil-doing its long-sought justification and gives the evildoer the necessary steadfastness and determination...[it] is the social theory which helps to make his actions seem good instead of bad in his own and others' eyes...
-Solzhenitsyn
User avatar
d0nb
Übergod
Posts: 1831
Joined: Mar 22nd, 2009, 12:08 pm

Re: Lower voting age to 16. Give your head a shake!

Post by d0nb »

JLives wrote: Oct 3rd, 2021, 2:02 pm
fluffy wrote: Oct 2nd, 2021, 9:27 am It makes sense to me that finishing high school first would give us a more informed voter. Sixteen is a bit young in my opinion.
I left home and was self sufficient at 16. Why shouldn't I have had the right to vote in the society I was contributing to and living in?
You make an excellent point.

Voting age restrictions are just a clumsy attempt to improve the quality of election outcomes. Imagine how different things would be if elections were decided exclusively by those who financially contribute more to the country than they are given. Very few teenagers would make the cut, but as those few votes would likely be thoughtful and beneficial, there would be no obvious need for age restrictions.
The biggest problem of censorship is that it tends to be the last resort of the ideologically arrogant and intellectually lazy … A day spent in defense of freedom of speech is a day spent in the company of bigots and hate mongers. – Omid Malekan
Andrewski
Fledgling
Posts: 113
Joined: Mar 23rd, 2014, 9:03 pm

Re: Lower voting age to 16. Give your head a shake!

Post by Andrewski »

fluffy wrote: Oct 2nd, 2021, 9:27 am It makes sense to me that finishing high school first would give us a more informed voter. Sixteen is a bit young in my opinion.
So in your opinion everyone who votes needs to prove they graduated high-school? That would against our charter of rights, I'm sure.
Andrewski
Fledgling
Posts: 113
Joined: Mar 23rd, 2014, 9:03 pm

Re: Lower voting age to 16. Give your head a shake!

Post by Andrewski »

d0nb wrote: Oct 4th, 2021, 3:02 am
JLives wrote: Oct 3rd, 2021, 2:02 pm
I left home and was self sufficient at 16. Why shouldn't I have had the right to vote in the society I was contributing to and living in?
You make an excellent point.

Voting age restrictions are just a clumsy attempt to improve the quality of election outcomes. Imagine how different things would be if elections were decided exclusively by those who financially contribute more to the country than they are given. Very few teenagers would make the cut, but as those few votes would likely be thoughtful and beneficial, there would be no obvious need for age restrictions.
You're suggesting a person's wealth decides how much of an impact their vote has? Yeah I don't see that becoming an authoritarian regime within months (I do). Could you be any more anti-democratic? Your opinion is borderline sedition.
bob vernon
Lord of the Board
Posts: 3952
Joined: Oct 27th, 2008, 10:37 am

Re: Lower voting age to 16. Give your head a shake!

Post by bob vernon »

We need to get this down to 16 as soon as we can. Before the next provincial and federal elections. Municipal too. And we need to have polling centres located in the high school gyms so that it will be easy for the 16 to 18 year olds to vote. They tend to be socialists or Green voters and we need more of them. Darn kids, anyhow!
Andrewski
Fledgling
Posts: 113
Joined: Mar 23rd, 2014, 9:03 pm

Re: Lower voting age to 16. Give your head a shake!

Post by Andrewski »

bob vernon wrote: Oct 4th, 2021, 5:47 pm We need to get this down to 16 as soon as we can. Before the next provincial and federal elections. Municipal too. And we need to have polling centres located in the high school gyms so that it will be easy for the 16 to 18 year olds to vote. They tend to be socialists or Green voters and we need more of them. Darn kids, anyhow!
If you think anyone anywhere in Canada is a socialist because they have left wing views than the value of your opinion and insight is zero, because you cleary don't understand fundamental types of government and economy. And you're allowed to vote? I know a17 year old with a better understanding but you gracefully proved my point that anyone's opinion could be worthless.
User avatar
fluffy
Buddha of the Board
Posts: 23950
Joined: Jun 1st, 2006, 5:42 pm

Re: Lower voting age to 16. Give your head a shake!

Post by fluffy »

Andrewski wrote: Oct 4th, 2021, 5:37 pm So in your opinion everyone who votes needs to prove they graduated high-school? That would against our charter of rights, I'm sure.
Did I say that ? I'm saying that I'm just fine with the voting age at eighteen, as at that age most will have completed a high school education and thus just may have a better understanding of political issues, at least better than they did at sixteen. The law says you need to be sixteen , and it's not really a big enough issue for me to advocate for a voting age lower than that. It's neither here nor there really, as has been said a few times there are people well on in years who don't have clue one about political issues, at least with a high school education I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt.
Never miss a good chance to shut up.
User avatar
d0nb
Übergod
Posts: 1831
Joined: Mar 22nd, 2009, 12:08 pm

Re: Lower voting age to 16. Give your head a shake!

Post by d0nb »

Andrewski wrote: Oct 4th, 2021, 5:38 pm You're suggesting a person's wealth decides how much of an impact their vote has?

The question had to do with whether “self sufficient” sixteen year olds should be enfranchised. IMO, many Canadians would view that sympathetically. The very wealthy already control the government, they don’t need extra votes.
Andrewski wrote: Oct 4th, 2021, 5:38 pmYeah I don't see that becoming an authoritarian regime within months (I do). Could you be any more anti-democratic?

Congratulations, not many can see beyond common sense with the kind of acumen it takes to see that responsible, gainfully employed Canadians are naturally disposed to electing authoritarian regimes. No doubt it would be wiser and safer to limit the franchise to those who can’t or won’t hold a job. :135:
Andrewski wrote: Oct 4th, 2021, 5:38 pm Your opinion is borderline sedition.
Good thinking Socrates, excesses in shielding the state from authoritarian libertarians is no vice. :up: Should I be held in solitary confinement without bail until appropriate punishments for my thought crimes can be invented?
The biggest problem of censorship is that it tends to be the last resort of the ideologically arrogant and intellectually lazy … A day spent in defense of freedom of speech is a day spent in the company of bigots and hate mongers. – Omid Malekan

Return to “North Okanagan”