Liberal Minority Government 2021 - ????

[OldSolduer]

Fair point.

We should also make the cut off for voting 70 years old.

Those old folks who won't be around in all likelihood in the next 20 years should not be making irreversible decisions for the rest of society.

Maybe you should check your privelege. You haven’t been around long enough to make those assertions.

 

[Altair]

Maybe you should check your privelege. You haven’t been around long enough to make those assertions.

If people can make sweeping generalizations about 16 and 17 year olds, why can I not make sweeping generalizations about those over 70?

 

[OldSolduer]

I never made any such assertions either. Your idea SMACKS of communism or some other tolitarian regime.
The Gauls - when Rome was kicking their butts - discarded the idea of getting rid of “useless mouths.

 

[Altair]

I never made any such assertions either. Your idea SMACKS of communism or some other tolitarian regime.
The Gauls - when Rome was kicking their butts - discarded the idea of getting rid of “useless mouths.

You didn't, others have. So if people want to limit younger people from voting, fine. But no one should be upset if we start putting limits on older people as well.

Fair is fair.

 

[Brad Sallows]

the obvious political reasons for why the LPC and NDP would want this.

...are exactly the reasons why the issue should be DRT. No measure which is manifestly partisan should be permitted to pollute elections.

Old people think long-term. They are acutely aware of mortality in a way that 16-year-olds are not, most of them have descendents, and most of them care about their descendants.

 

[Altair]

...are exactly the reasons why the issue should be DRT. No measure which is manifestly partisan should be permitted to pollute elections.

The reasons for not doing it are as blatantly partisan as the reasons for doing it. A wash.

Old people think long-term. They are acutely aware of mortality in a way that 16-year-olds are not, most of them have descendents, and most of them care about their descendants.

I so like how you counter a sweeping generalization of mine with a sweeping generalization of your own.

Both arguments are farcical and yet I think I am the only one who realized that this conversation is a joke.

 

[Brad Sallows]

The reasons for not doing it are the same as they've always been: people that age are not fully mature. Localities didn't set voting minimum ages long ago based on "Oh, this'll give the conservative party an advantage". But now the desire to change is primarily motivated partisanship.

My sweeping generalization is at least grounded in common sense on all 3 points.

 

[YZT580]

The reasons for not doing it are as blatantly partisan as the reasons for doing it. A wash.

I so like how you counter a sweeping generalization of mine with a sweeping generalization of your own.

Both arguments are farcical and yet I think I am the only one who realized that this conversation is a joke.

It's no joke if they are so power-drunk that they do it and ignore common sense. The simple fact that it has been voiced for consideration removes it from the comic section and moves it into the criminal.

 

[Altair]

The reasons for not doing it are the same as they've always been: people that age are not fully mature.

16 year olds can work.

16 year olds can pay income tax.

16 year olds can drive.

16 year olds can have sex with people of any age.

16 year olds can get married.

16 year olds can be charged as adults.

16 year olds can join the military (with Parental consent)

16 year olds can do all these things despite not being fully mature. So the question for me is, would I rather a 16 year old voice their opinion at the ballot box or drive around a 3 ton machine that could kill me? The answer to me is vote. But so long as they can do all the the above, they might as well be able to vote.

Localities didn't set voting minimum ages long ago based on "Oh, this'll give the conservative party an advantage". But now the desire to change is primarily motivated partisanship.

Ottawa teen part of court challenge to lower federal voting age

“As much as we protest and as much as get involved, none of us have any say when it comes to elections. That’s really concerning for me.”

ottawacitizen.com

An Ottawa teen is among more than a dozen young people — one just 12 years old — who have joined a court challenge aimed at lowering Canada’s federal voting age.

The challenge, filed in the Ontario Superior Court of Justice, argues the Canada Elections Act is unconstitutional since it unfairly discriminates based on age. The law says citizens under the age of 18 cannot vote in federal elections.

It can be seen as a response to this as opposed to any overt partisanship.

My sweeping generalization is at least grounded in common sense on all 3 points.

Oxymoron

 

[Altair]

It's no joke if they are so power-drunk that they do it and ignore common sense. The simple fact that it has been voiced for consideration removes it from the comic section and moves it into the criminal.

What common sense is that? 16 year olds are granted a whole bunch of life changing privileges already, despite their supposed maturity, why would voting be all that much different?

 

[Remius]

Localities didn't set voting minimum ages long ago based on "Oh, this'll give the conservative party an advantage". But now the desire to change is primarily motivated partisanship.

Robert Borden did exactly that long ago. Gave the vote to people he thought would give him an edge.

That isn't a new thing. And people that argued against lowering it to 18 made the same arguments you see today.

 

[mariomike]

That isn't a new thing.

Nothing new about it.

Liberals Want Voting Age Lowered to 16

Now, you've been asked questions. Answer them, C'mon guys, his lack of an answer IS the answer. He was part of a trade union so secret, and so powerful that it reaches the highest levels of society and carries out a secret agenda of national domination. He cant admit that hes a member or...

www.navy.ca

 

[Remius]

Another interesting take is the Demeny Voting system. Sort of a compromise that enfranchises people that are under the voting age. It, like anything else, has its pros and cons.

Demeny voting - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

 

[YZT580]

Voting is both a privilege and a responsibility and should be approached with the gravity that choosing a leader deserves. Perhaps then, Ottawa wouldn't be populated with such a collection of "yes men". Yes Altair, teens have a significant burden of responsibility already but most only affect them and their immediate friends and family: they don't influence society as a whole whereas voting has the potential to cause irreconcilable harm as those who voted for Adolf in the 1920's discovered. While it is our civic duty to vote, that duty goes hand in hand with the civic duty to evaluate the issues for which we are voting. The Swiss method of taking serious issues to plebiscite instead of leaving it in the hands of the councils has a lot of merit. It is clumsy and slow but it makes every voter think a little bit. We desperately need voters who think and understand the issues for which they are voting. Many teens get it but there are too many who have not reached the level of maturity.

 

[Remius]

Maybe you should check your privelege. You haven’t been around long enough to make those assertions.

Aside from Altair trying to make a point. Gerontocracy is actually a thing and seen in some circles as a problem. And with an gang population it may become more of a discussion. We actually see it in the US as the average age of a US senator is quite high right now.

 

[Altair]

Voting is both a privilege and a responsibility and should be approached with the gravity that choosing a leader deserves. Perhaps then, Ottawa wouldn't be populated with such a collection of "yes men". Yes Altair, teens have a significant burden of responsibility already but most only affect them and their immediate friends and family: they don't influence society as a whole

Because they are not allowed to. Same could be said of women before they were allowed to vote. They had a bunch of responsibilities but it only effected them, their friends and family, not society as a whole.

whereas voting has the potential to cause irreconcilable harm as those who voted for Adolf in the 1920's discovered.

Ironically, the voting age for Germany in 1933 was 20. It can be argued that more young voters prevent Hitler.

While it is our civic duty to vote, that duty goes hand in hand with the civic duty to evaluate the issues for which we are voting. The Swiss method of taking serious issues to plebiscite instead of leaving it in the hands of the councils has a lot of merit. It is clumsy and slow but it makes every voter think a little bit. We desperately need voters who think and understand the issues for which they are voting. Many teens get it but there are too many who have not reached the level of maturity.

Unless those plebiscites include 16 years olds it really doesn't address this issue.

 

[Altair]

Aside from Altair trying to make a point. Gerontocracy is actually a thing and seen in some circles as a problem. And with an gang population it may become more of a discussion. We actually see it in the US as the average age of a US senator is quite high right now.

Senator, President, Supreme Court Justice.

All old, all clinging on to power, all refusing to let the next generation play a part.

Makes me happy to live in Canada with age limits. Age limit for senators, age limits for judges, and it can be argued that age limits for voting should follow suit.

I anecdotally know many old people who have voted the same way for generations and will never change their voting pattern, sounds like a trend and we shouldn't allow voting on trends, according to those who don't want 16 and 17 year olds to vote.

 

[Remius]

Voting is both a privilege and a responsibility and should be approached with the gravity that choosing a leader deserves. Perhaps then, Ottawa wouldn't be populated with such a collection of "yes men". Yes Altair, teens have a significant burden of responsibility already but most only affect them and their immediate friends and family: they don't influence society as a whole whereas voting has the potential to cause irreconcilable harm as those who voted for Adolf in the 1920's discovered. While it is our civic duty to vote, that duty goes hand in hand with the civic duty to evaluate the issues for which we are voting. The Swiss method of taking serious issues to plebiscite instead of leaving it in the hands of the councils has a lot of merit. It is clumsy and slow but it makes every voter think a little bit. We desperately need voters who think and understand the issues for which they are voting. Many teens get it but there are too many who have not reached the level of maturity.

Let’s avoid the Hitler comparisons…

Thinking and understanding the issues is not a qualifier or a pre requisite to vote here. Only that you be a citizen. That’s in our constitution. The Elections Act furthers that by adding what is required.

If the qualifier is what you state then eliminate age and just make it a civics test to qualify. That won’t happen though. You don’t even have to be sober to vote by the way.

I could replace everything you said about teens and replace it with “seniors” many get it but a lot don’t. I’m in no way advocating the removal of voting rights for seniors but the logic is the same.

Scotland and Austria both have a voting age of 16. As far as I can see they aren’t going to hell and hand basket in some apocalyptic irreversible path.

I’m curious about what people mean when the say irreversible or irreconcilable harm? What harm exactly would 16 year olds bring to the system and how would they be solely responsible for that?

 

[OldSolduer]

You didn't, others have. So if people want to limit younger people from voting, fine. But no one should be upset if we start putting limits on older people as well.

Fair is fair.

OK then at the age of 70 I should stop paying exorbitant taxes. If I can't vote and have a say why should I pay taxes?

An entire nation was formed under the "no taxation without representation" premise.

 

[Altair]

OK then at the age of 70 I should stop paying exorbitant taxes. If I can't vote and have a say why should I pay taxes?

Sure, are we prepared to let young people skip out on taxes as well? Because they cannot vote and are subjected to taxes.

An entire nation was formed under the "no taxation without representation" premise.

Not Canada so I DGAF.