Our system detected that your browser is blocking advertisements on our site. Please help support FoxesTalk by disabling any kind of ad blocker while browsing this site. Thank you.
Jump to content
 Share
David Guiza

Would you give 16 and 17 year olds the vote?

By David Guiza, in General Chat

Would you give the vote to 16 and 17 year olds?  

132 members have voted

  1. 1. Would you give the vote to 16 and 17 year olds?

    • Yes
      45
    • No
      81
    • Yes with caveats - please explain if so.
      6

Recommended Posts

yorkie1999

yorkie1999

Posted
Posted
21 minutes ago, lgfualol said:

Yeah why not, some of them are genuinely interested as it affects their lives. 

It doesn't  though. If you're 16/17, your life hasn't been affected by how you've voted because you've been in education and almost institutionalized since you were 5. When you're 18, you've had a couple of years to work out if politics has affected you and whether or not it needs to change.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bmt

bmt

Posted
Posted
2 minutes ago, yorkie1999 said:

It doesn't  though. If you're 16/17, your life hasn't been affected by how you've voted because you've been in education and almost institutionalized since you were 5. When you're 18, you've had a couple of years to work out if politics has affected you and whether or not it needs to change.

Education isn't affected by who is in power? Really?!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
twoleftfeet

twoleftfeet

Posted
Posted

s

1 minute ago, bmt said:

Education isn't affected by who is in power? Really?!

Of course education is affected but and here is it the majority of parents have the best interests of their kids at heart and vote not just for the now but for the future and is may be that some vote tory because they want their children to live in a country with a strong economy and some vote labour for the social safety net. I personally realised this when I spent 3 weeks working in a job my mum spent 10 years in, It was mind numbingly boring and repetitive but she did it because she had to, and like many I do things for my kids because I want them to have a better life than me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest Fktf

Guest Fktf

Posted
Posted

I'd be for dropping it to 17, but less convinced by 16. At 17, people are deciding what they're going to do post-education, and that means government policy of one form or another is likely to have some influence on their life quite soon. Seems fair to give that person the chance to offer an opinion on the government, rather having them wait until they are 22 (in the seemingly unlikely event that the elected government lasts a full 5-year term)

Link to comment
Share on other sites
ScouseFox

ScouseFox

Posted
Posted (edited)

i'm amazed people think that lowering the voting age would help the left. 

 

the only 16 year olds who are going to be bothered voting are going to be them weird gimps who said "i want to be margaret thatcher" when they were asked what they want to be when they grew up, instead of wanting to be a lorry driver or a lion like all the other kids. and all of those gimps are obviously tories.

 

as for me, i don't think so. i turned 16 a couple of days after the 2010 election, and the only reason i even knew it was happening was because wayne brown used it as an excuse to show how ironic his name was and tell all our players he was a racist. 

Edited by ScouseFox
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Izzy

Izzy

Posted
Posted

Not sure I buy the argument about being able to vote at 16 if you’re in full time employment.

 

I started full time work at 16 but still lived at home and still reliant on parents (as I’m sure most 16 year olds are). I didn’t earn enough to pay much tax (if any) so it didn't really bother me whoever was in government back then as I was too interested in being a 16 year old idiot.

 

Even at 18, most of us are still idiots and haven’t really experienced the real world so 18 is well young enough to vote imo. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
fuchsntf

fuchsntf

Posted
Posted
32 minutes ago, Izzy said:

Not sure I buy the argument about being able to vote at 16 if you’re in full time employment.

 

I started full time work at 16 but still lived at home and still reliant on parents (as I’m sure most 16 year olds are). I didn’t earn enough to pay much tax (if any) so it didn't really bother me whoever was in government back then as I was too interested in being a 16 year old idiot.

 

Even at 18, most of us are still idiots and haven’t really experienced the real world so 18 is well young enough to vote imo. 

I was born old n  wise, und sexy to boot!!!  I have been 3 times 18 + 12, and pledgingly stayed an idiot all my life...

 

16-18 year old,cant muck / fcck this world up anymore than it already is...If I had the choice, I would vote my grandkids into power...not One is older than 6..

They understand already Housing problem could be solved by Duplo/Lego..

Backbenchers should be filled by dogs..they also only want to Sleep and gnaw on a bone,when they are awake...

The Cabinet und Shadow cabinet,should be cats, they come & go when they please,and ignore everybody in the house,

Except when they want something,then drop unwanted suprises,they Think are presents, on our doorsteps...

The PM is a right budgie,loves chirrping on,But still Shits in own cage,and Tells everbody what a pretty budgie he his,und only preens After looking in the mirror.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Bellend Sebastian

Bellend Sebastian

Posted
Posted
5 hours ago, MattP said:

No, I still think it should be given to adults and not children.I have no problem with them having the vote though if that changes, but it has to change across the board, it can't just change because a few political parties decide 16 year olds are more likely to vote for them so they'll allow it.

 

So if we want to allow 16 year olds to drink, get married, go to war, drive etc then I'm absolutely for it, treat them as adults completely across the board. Level of intelligence should also never be a factor in this, otherrwise you are on a very slippy slope on who you allow to vote and you don't.

 

Why 16 as well? I mean why not 14? Why not 10? Didn't Jacob Rees-Mogg join the Consevratives at eight years old? Why shouldn't he be allowed to vote for them if he could explain his reasons and was intelligent enough?

Forgive me if this has already been mentioned, but I read yesterday (and I stress that I don't know if this is true) that there is no minimum age for Conservative Party members to vote in leadership elections. Could apply to all parties for all I know, so although as a child you cannot vote in a general election, there are circumstances where you can have a say in who runs the country.

 

As an aside, my Gran is 99 and my daughter is 4, and I think the latter would be much better able to digest multiple sources of information and consider different arguments before arriving at a decision I don't agree with and consider to be wrong

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Carl the Llama

Carl the Llama

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Dahnsouff said:

How old do you need to be to make informed decisions on issues that effect peoples everyday lives?

Old enough to be a functional contributing member of society I would guess

Which you can be (but probably won't be) at 16 yet may well no longer be for the last few elections that you participate in, depending on how long you get to live for.

 

Honestly I doubt when push came to shove that it would have any impact on election outcomes, call me a cynic but I'm pretty certain that most 16/17 year olds engaged enough to bother to vote would probably just tick whoever their parents raised them to vote for.  Don't get me wrong, teens like to 'rebel', but it's not until they leave home and spend significantly more time away from the family echo chamber that people who end up straying significantly from the politics they learned at home start to do so.  Then again maybe it's different for the 16 year olds of today, after all it's a very different global and digital landscape now: I would readily believe that a 16 year old brought through their formative years in the clusterfvck of a targeted social-media landscape we have now is significantly more politically informed/brainwashed (either way feeling ready to engage at the ballot box) than a 16 year old Llama with his MSN messenger and ad-less (as far as I recall) Bebo page.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bmt

bmt

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, twoleftfeet said:

Of course education is affected but and here is it the majority of parents have the best interests of their kids at heart and vote not just for the now but for the future and is may be that some vote tory because they want their children to live in a country with a strong economy and some vote labour for the social safety net. I personally realised this when I spent 3 weeks working in a job my mum spent 10 years in, It was mind numbingly boring and repetitive but she did it because she had to, and like many I do things for my kids because I want them to have a better life than me.

There are issues which have a higher impact on younger (and indeed future) generations that people have ignored when choosing who to vote (eg. the climate) so although I think people do want the best for their children, it isn't the same as those same children getting a voice. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Charl91

Charl91

Posted
Posted (edited)

I would learn more towards "no", but I'm undecided.

 

My gut reaction is that they're not informed enough. But then I think about the huge amount of people who vote who are also not informed, or by people whose critical thinking extends to whatever the front page of their chosen newspaper tells them, and suddenly that argument doesn't hold quite so much weight. 

 

So yeah, I can see the merits of both sides in this, to be honest. I also agree that it shouldn't be changed just because It would benefit one political party over another - as much as I would prefer Labour or Lib Dem over the current Tories, it's a dangerous precedent to set. But that being said, I certainly can see the more of a merit in it for referendums, as they tend to be things with more long-lasting effects.

 

Edit: Though this also just reminded me about Tuition fees. Governments certainly would have been less willing to implement them if they knew that the people on the receiving end of them had a vote. I always thought it sucked that generally the people who it most effected never got a democratic say in the matter. I think that does sway me more to the 16+ should be allowed to vote argument.

 

 

Edited by Charl91
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nalis

Nalis

Posted
Posted
7 hours ago, MattP said:

No, I still think it should be given to adults and not children.I have no problem with them having the vote though if that changes, but it has to change across the board, it can't just change because a few political parties decide 16 year olds are more likely to vote for them so they'll allow it.

 

So if we want to allow 16 year olds to drink, get married, go to war, drive etc then I'm absolutely for it, treat them as adults completely across the board. Level of intelligence should also never be a factor in this, otherrwise you are on a very slippy slope on who you allow to vote and you don't.

 

Why 16 as well? I mean why not 14? Why not 10? Didn't Jacob Rees-Mogg join the Consevratives at eight years old? Why shouldn't he be allowed to vote for them if he could explain his reasons and was intelligent enough?

Agree with a lot of this as I'm torn on it for the current rights vs maturity.

 

Let's face it, most of us were immature as hell at 16 bit its likely that those who are interested in politics will vote, the vast majority of 16/17 who dont care enough will simply not vote.

 

Leaning towards Yes though for the last paragraph.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...