Argentina lowers voting age to 16

[garbon]

The point is to challenge/educate the brain in real life matters while it's developing rather than waiting until bad habits and thought patterns have crystallized in their mid-to-late twenties, which is the current problem.

I'm not sure that I agree that such is a current problem.

[Maximus]

But that's just saying they should get increase responsibilities not that we should force them into workforce or have them start voting.

Sure, I agree with that. FWIW I'm not enamoured of the idea of lowering the voting age. What I'm objecting to is the idea (not necessarily expressed here) that the increasing length of childhood is just fine.

[The Brain]

Who cares about the kids? It's not about the kid voters, it's about the people they will rule. Is it good for people to have kids making decisions about important stuff? No, kids are stupid.

It's not the making decisions part, it's the making decisions about other people part.

[Zanza]

Because childhood is lasting longer not getting shorter so this seems like a counter-intuitive move.

I wasn't aware that childhood is lasting longer. As there are several others concurring with that statement in the thread I wonder if that's a specific North American phenomenon or if I just don't associate the same with it that you do.

[Zanza]

It seems foolish to give young people a say in matters that don't affect them.  The essence of government is money, and 16-year olds don't have any.  As a matter of policy, they're supposed to be in school.

Voting right is neither tied to school attendance nor to taxation, but to age, so your criteria are not relevant. The age criterion seems fairly arbitrary though. I think with the same arguments brought forth here to support 18, you could also support a voting age of 20 or whatever.

Also, everyone under the age of 25 is stupid.

A lot of people above 25 are stupid too, but that's not the criterion for their voting rights.

[Zanza]

Except that we also know that many (most?) children don't have fully developed brains until they are in their 20s. Why would we want to force them faster into life-altering decisions if we don't have to?

A lot of other things that people below 20 can decide upon are actually life altering, unlike voting. They can marry, have children, pick a job, buy a house or car, commit a crime etc.

[garbon]

Except that we also know that many (most?) children don't have fully developed brains until they are in their 20s. Why would we want to force them faster into life-altering decisions if we don't have to?

A lot of other things that people below 20 can decide upon are actually life altering, unlike voting. They can marry, have children, pick a job, buy a house or car, commit a crime etc.

But most of those aren't happening till later these days.

[garbon]

Because childhood is lasting longer not getting shorter so this seems like a counter-intuitive move.

I wasn't aware that childhood is lasting longer. As there are several others concurring with that statement in the thread I wonder if that's a specific North American phenomenon or if I just don't associate the same with it that you do.

I think you need to re-read their posts. All of them seem to suggest that such is problematic not that it isn't happening.

[The Brain]

Discussing lowering the age of majority is reasonable (the idea is stupid but not unreasonable). Discussing lowering the voting age to below the age of majority however is completely retarded, since the idea is just full of total fail.

[Zanza]

Because childhood is lasting longer not getting shorter so this seems like a counter-intuitive move.

I wasn't aware that childhood is lasting longer. As there are several others concurring with that statement in the thread I wonder if that's a specific North American phenomenon or if I just don't associate the same with it that you do.

I think you need to re-read their posts. All of them seem to suggest that such is problematic not that it isn't happening.

That's what I meant. They concur with your statement, not with mine. I see how my sentence can be misunderstood though.

[CountDeMoney]

I have a friend who's really into education policy and is absolutely convinced we oppress children and we should abolish the voting age. Psuedo commies.  Makes for interesting discussions though

Yes, I attended one many moons ago, but couldn't think through Bill Ayers' body odor.  I think he was wearing the same jacket from 1976.

[Neil]

It seems foolish to give young people a say in matters that don't affect them.  The essence of government is money, and 16-year olds don't have any.  As a matter of policy, they're supposed to be in school.

Voting right is neither tied to school attendance nor to taxation, but to age, so your criteria are not relevant. The age criterion seems fairly arbitrary though. I think with the same arguments brought forth here to support 18, you could also support a voting age of 20 or whatever.

Of course it's relevant.  Just saying that something isn't relevant isn't enough to make it so.  The whole point of suffrage was to allow a significant group of people with an important stake in society to buy into the system.  Teenagers fit none of those criteria;  They're not significant, they're not people and they have no stake in the system.  I know a lot of people who are frustrated by the damaging effect that old people have on national politics, but is the answer to create an even stupider voting bloc to counteract them?

Also, everyone under the age of 25 is stupid.

A lot of people above 25 are stupid too, but that's not the criterion for their voting rights.

Maybe it should be.  Only people with an IQ of 150 or better should be able to vote.  How's that sound?

[garbon]

Because childhood is lasting longer not getting shorter so this seems like a counter-intuitive move.

I wasn't aware that childhood is lasting longer. As there are several others concurring with that statement in the thread I wonder if that's a specific North American phenomenon or if I just don't associate the same with it that you do.

I think you need to re-read their posts. All of them seem to suggest that such is problematic not that it isn't happening.

That's what I meant. They concur with your statement, not with mine. I see how my sentence can be misunderstood though.

Oh gotcha.

[Valmy]

I have a friend who's really into education policy and is absolutely convinced we oppress children and we should abolish the voting age. Psuedo commies.  Makes for interesting discussions though

Of course we oppress children.  Letting my toddler run around doing whatever he wants would result in his early death.

[MadImmortalMan]

Yes, and their leg muscles are not fully developed at age 10, so they should not run?

The point is to challenge/educate the brain in real life matters while it's developing rather than waiting until bad habits and thought patterns have crystallized in their mid-to-late twenties, which is the current problem.

It's a good thought, but voters' choices affect the rest of us. You might get Senator Justin Bieber on a write-in campaign. If we're cool with that, then ok.