|
|||||||
| Notices |
| View Poll Results: Should the voting age be lowered? | |||
| Yes, you should be able to vote at any age |
   
|
2 | 12.50% |
| Yes, you should be able to vote at 16 |
  
|
3 | 18.75% |
| Yes, you should be able to vote at 17 |
  
|
0 | 0% |
| No, keep it at 18 |
  
|
7 | 43.75% |
| No, raise it to 19 or 20 |
  
|
0 | 0% |
| No, raise it to 21 |
  
|
4 | 25.00% |
| Voters: 16. You may not vote on this poll | |||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#21
19th July 2008, 08:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Quote:
__________________
Unacceptable political content censored by Dave and Goddesscon - Keeping Everyone Ignorant For A Better Tomorrow He is always the severest censor of the merit of others who has the least worth of his own. - Elias Lyman Maggon September 12th 
|
|
#22
21st July 2008, 08:09 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
I believe that, as in Australia, it should be 18 and compulsary.
People jump up and down at that dirty word however, if people were forced to chose who was to govern them, perhaps they may even think a little about it and vote accordingly. Better than to sit back, let others chose the government and then bitch to high heaven because you do not like what the government is doing in your name (and to you). If you vote you bear some responsibility.
__________________
|
|
#23
25th July 2008, 05:51 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Eighteen is fine for voting age, what we really need is some tweaking of the system to get more qualified candidates.
|
|
#24
26th July 2008, 07:09 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
If you serve (certain community, state or federal orgs or the military), then your voting age is 18 on. If not, minimum age should be 30.
__________________
"We have seen our share of hard times. The American story has never been about things coming easy, it's been about rising to the moment when the moment is hard; about rejecting panicked division for purposeful unity; about seeing a mountaintop from the deepest valley. That's why we remember that some of the most famous words ever spoken by an American came from a President who took office in a time of turmoil. 'The only thing we have to fear is fear itself'." - Barack Obama
|
|
#25
26th July 2008, 07:20 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
I get the point of the first part - That's Starship Troopers/Heinlein's solution but not the second part - Will people become less selfish and more considerate with age??
__________________
Life's a bitch ; then you die
|
|
#26
26th July 2008, 10:12 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Post of the month Quote:
|
|
#27
26th July 2008, 10:40 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
Life's a bitch ; then you die
|
|
#28
26th July 2008, 08:07 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
She votes at 18?
__________________
Post of the month Quote:
|
|
#30
26th July 2008, 10:44 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
2. The fact that everyone wouldn't know how to solve them is sort of the point. We're selecting for people with the smarts to handle algebra, and the motivation to get through the class. I favor everyone having algebra available in high school, as an elective, and I don't think there's any doubt that it would be, if this system we adopted. On the other hand, I think current moves to make algebra a requirement for any student to receive a high school diploma are wrong-headed, and will tend to cement people who can't handle algebra into the underclass. 3. The $1000 deposit is mainly to weed out potential electors who don't really take the obligation seriously. But it also weeds out those who may be expected to vote themselves bread and circuses from the public treasury. 4. Not 'ancient oligarchy'--that you got into by privilege of birth. Electorship in this system is not guaranteed to well-born wastrels, and available to achievers of any class.
__________________
First, we kill all the abstractions....
|
|
#31
27th July 2008, 03:02 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
On your formula people of my age (with almost three quarters of a century of living in the real world) with a lifelong experience of the human condition and who have lived through history and brought up families to adulthood would be defranchised while 14 year old students (well qualified in working out quadratic equations, can borrow $ 1,000 from their frugal parents but with little knowledge of life) would be able to vote on who runs the country. Most armies recognise this in that they ensure that they are run by highly experienced warrant officers - with long and efficient service - and not by young snotty nosed second lieutenants just out of military academies.
__________________
|
|
#32
27th July 2008, 11:47 AM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Oh I think you should be able to vote under any proper system, Sarmajor. I wouldn't view this as an actual developed suggestion, it's just one of several ideas on the subject Heinlein spun-off from time to time. The common thread is to drop back from universal suffrage to something that gets some of the irresponsible and/or most easily manipulated people out of the mix.
Heinlein presented each of his ideas as a stand-alone, but I'm sort of thinking a set of qualifications, any one of which would be sufficient, is more the right idea. We're looking for tests for brains and/or responsible attitude, based on clear and objective criteria. The hope, understand, is to get people with brains and responsible attitudes into office. One might observe that the second factor would seem to be the biggest problem. Anyway, there are three Heinlein ideas for qualifications on the table: 1. Solve a simple quadratic while being willing to risk $1000 for a shot.* 2. Be a war veteran. 3. Be a female with one or more children. * BTW, it just occurred to me that for persons who aren't actually rich, this is also a test for cool thinking when there's a lot at stake.
__________________
First, we kill all the abstractions.... Last edited by donquixote99; 27th July 2008 at 12:46 PM.
|
|
#33
27th July 2008, 03:34 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
What I would like to see to seek good governance would be:
Abolish the party system which pedals influence and compels candidates to vote along party lines - even though it may go against their conscience Outlaw donations to candidate's election funds - one of the biggest sources of financial and moral corruption. Fund candidate's election expenses from the public purse (in compensation for the above) but set a limit on how much each candidate may spend - even the wealthy ones from their own pockets. The enormous sums that each candidate wastes (especially in Presidential elections) is obscene and is also a source of corruption with big donors expecting a return on their investment. Make voting compulsory so that the general population is forced to take some interest in the election. Take control of the electoral process completely out of the hands of politicians by the courts appointing a permanent professional and independent body to oversee all aspects of the electoral process. Endure that there is an available paper trail which can, in need, be audited by that independent body. It may be slower than a completely electronic system but is not it worth that to try to ensure that the system is not corrupted or manipulated by party hacks? And that is just for starters.
__________________
|
|
#34
27th July 2008, 10:09 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Quote:
__________________
Post of the month Quote:
|
|
#35
28th July 2008, 06:08 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
__________________
Life's a bitch ; then you die
|
|
#36
1st August 2008, 12:42 PM
|
||||
|
||||
|
Sociobiology would suggest that women bond with men mainly to secure advantages for their offspring, and are likewise keen to maximize the advantages.
__________________
First, we kill all the abstractions....
|
|
#37
1st August 2008, 12:44 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Well, that's better expressed than myself but yep
__________________
Life's a bitch ; then you die
|
|
#38
2nd August 2008, 01:45 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
That is internally contradictory. Furthermore, it remains none of your business to be "selecting" for anyone. You have to deal with the population as it is, not as you would wish it to be. I don;t care what method you propose, any such system will serve to destroy universal suffrage and constitute a return to an elitist model of politics. Quote:
__________________
Unacceptable political content censored by Dave and Goddesscon - Keeping Everyone Ignorant For A Better Tomorrow He is always the severest censor of the merit of others who has the least worth of his own. - Elias Lyman Maggon September 12th
|
|
#39
2nd August 2008, 02:13 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
Quote:
__________________
Life's a bitch ; then you die
|
|
#40
2nd August 2008, 02:49 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Quote:
I don't accept the validity on any restrictions of suffrage to anyone considered #sufficiently competent to be responsible for their own behaviour. We can dicker over the age of majority for example, but I will not accept a restriction placed on people who have passed it merely because they fail to meet some presumed "standard". Quote:
|