Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ
Perhaps much the same might be said about those who voted in all kinds of national things.
Clearly, intelligence does not necessarily begin at 18. We allow adults with legitimate mental issues/impairment the vote. Some 16 year olds are mature and rational-thinking. Some 43-year-olds are seriously immature and lack cognitive skills.
As has been said, if you pay taxes, then you ought to have a say in where you think those taxes go.
|
You raise a fair point and I completely agree that age doesn't automatically determine intelligence or capability. There are absolutely mature 16 year olds out there, just as there are adults who make consistently poor decisons. My argument isn't about excluding anyone based on intelligence, but about where we draw the baseline for civic (for want of a better word) readiness in a system that needs to be consistent, scalable, and protected from negative influence.
We already accept that certain adult rights (like buying alcohol or serving on a jury) have age restrictions because they require a degree of judgment, emotional regulation / intelligence, and responsibility that typically develops over time. The ability to vote in general elections, with all its long term national impact, seems to fall into that same category, does it not?
As for paying taxes, I get the logic. 'No taxation without representation' is a powerful principle. But I'd argue that a 16year old working part-time and paying a small amount in tax isn;t quite the same as managing a household, paying national insurance, or running a business. If we were to lower the voting age based on tax contribution alone, we'd also need to define what level of contribution grants that right, which opens up a different kind of inequality.
I’m definitely open to the idea of change if it’s paired with comprehensive civic education and a clearer alignment of legal responsibilities across the board. But until then, I still think 18 strikes the best current balance between inclusion and long-term national consequence. If we could get away with it, I'd almost suggest increasing that age. We know the brain and it's cognitive functions are not fully formed until the mid 20s, whcih gives that train of thought a fair arguement, I think.
---------- Post added at 16:42 ---------- Previous post was at 16:40 ----------
Quote:
Originally Posted by Russ
If you pay tax on your earnings you ought to be able to have a say on how you think it should be spent.
It’s as easy as that.
|
I just don't agree it is that simple. There are so many complexities involved that it cannot be that black and white.