Should the voting age be raised?

Neville's Breakfast · Jun 11, 2017

Horses Arse said:
They were pretty clear about where it is coming from. What amazes me is that the government has demonstrated repeated incompetence and lies yet some people are still willing to give them their vote on the basis of scaremongering. Trust those that have lied and screwed up in fear that another government might do the same. Bizarre.

It's not scaremongering. I am debating economic policy with you. The drawback of austerity is its dampening of demand and it doesn't seem to make sense in a low interest rate environment. Labour proposed large increases in public spending but this puts those low interest rates at risk. Neither party debated this issue properly in the campaign because both sides and their supporters prefer to sling insults at each other and ignore the downsides of their preferred approaches. It is clear where the money for Labour spending is coming from but the consequences seem less understood by voters young and old.

cheshunt seagull · Jun 11, 2017

I'd reduce it to 16 simply because the young have longer to live with the consequences of decisions and 16 is the age at which some become economically active. Some massive generalisations on here as in my experience for every highly experienced and wise senior citizen you can find another with ideas frozen in time 50 years ago or mean spirited and resentful of changes they don't understand. Similarly with young people you may have some who are heavily influenced by social media but others who are well informed and keen to approach choices with an open mind.

For those who are angry about young people voting for Corbyn a more appropriate question to ask rather than that of raising the voting age is how the fxxk do you expect people to vote for a party which offers them absolutely no hope of anything ever getting better; in fact why would you even be in politics if you have no aspiration of offering hope to anyone?

Also why are manifesto promises that suit the already wealthy described as rewards and incentives but bribes when they are for anyone else?.

warmleyseagull · Jun 11, 2017

Mouldy Boots said:
I was gullible at 18 years old if someone promises you the earth, you believe it, you don't understand how they get the earth to you and probably don't care.

Sounds harsh..................but fair.

This is the nub of it. JC played a blinder, as you are entitled to do when you are unlikley to have to face the consequences of what you say. It is actually a bit Trump like, and we can all see the number of promises Trump made that in practice he can deliver...

If I was a student or recently graduated I would have voted JC. Why not? Take the money and run. Good job, and blow the consequences that I will have to pay for it sometime down the line. Bit of a bugger for those who have assiduously avoided drinking to excess, taken a part-time job, and lived in a shithole to prevent their debt climbing higher. But heyho, I had a great time not worrying about any of that and now good old JC is writing mine off big time.

heathgate · Jun 11, 2017

Neville's Breakfast said:
It's not scaremongering. I am debating economic policy with you. The drawback of austerity is its dampening of demand and it doesn't seem to make sense in a low interest rate environment. Labour proposed large increases in public spending but this puts those low interest rates at risk. Neither party debated this issue properly in the campaign because both sides and their supporters prefer to sling insults at each other and ignore the downsides of their preferred approaches. It is clear where the money for Labour spending is coming from but the consequences seem less understood by voters young and old.

It's not clear... Labour are assuming that a) the earnings of these 'corporations' will match their predicted associated tax take.... and b) the 80k plus earners will remain in country to be stripped of 50% or more of their income.... when they last over taxed the rich, many of them left the country resulting in less of a tax take, and a very shaky economic picture.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Horses Arse · Jun 11, 2017

Neville's Breakfast said:
It's not scaremongering. I am debating economic policy with you. The drawback of austerity is its dampening of demand and it doesn't seem to make sense in a low interest rate environment. Labour proposed large increases in public spending but this puts those low interest rates at risk. Neither party debated this issue properly in the campaign because both sides and their supporters prefer to sling insults at each other and ignore the downsides of their preferred approaches. It is clear where the money for Labour spending is coming from but the consequences seem less understood by voters young and old.

Wasnt accusing you of scaremongering. The press were and do. There's a huge leaning to the right with the press and to a lesser extent the media in general.

As i say no one knows what the future holds and how various parties may perform. What we do know is this current lot have been incompetent repeatedly and lied repeatedly and still seem to be trusted. Very odd and very concerning.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Bridcutt · Jun 11, 2017

It should be lowered to 16 not raised even more; if anything it should be 70 + that aren't allowed to vote

heathgate · Jun 11, 2017

Bridcutt said:
It should be lowered to 16 not raised even more; if anything it should be 70 + that aren't allowed to vote

Foolish...... how old are you?

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

Marshy · Jun 12, 2017

Should be lowered to 16

My son who is 14 comes home from school with some valid political points that they have been discussing in school and I suspect knew more about the political parties manifesto's than most of the population bothered to find out.

They have regular debating sessions in class arguing for and against various proposals.

Simster · Jun 12, 2017

This would be a far easier discussion to have if various laws had the same age limit. I don't see why the age of consent, marriage, drinking, driving, voting and being sent to war all have different age restrictions. Either you're an adult with the expectation of responsibility, or you're not.

The Fish · Jun 12, 2017

If you pay tax and NI, if you can go to jail, if you can serve in the military you should vote.

I would argue that the young have more invested in the future than the elderly. They're also less likely to have entrenched views based on outdated misperceptions.

Fwiw I think voting should be a legal requirement.

drew · Jun 12, 2017

peterward said:
It was 26p not long ago and we raised 6 billion less than we do at 19p, so what is this miracle formula?

That old chestnut! You need to factor in many things such as the fact that the economy has grown and companies profits have increased since 2008. Why should the rate that companies pay tax be less than what individuals have to pay? Personally think there should be a graduated tax system for companies the same as individuals. For example, you could have 20% for the first million profit and then above that a higher rate, We have the lowest corporation tax rate of all the G7. If we increased it to 25% it would still be lower than most.

Bridcutt · Jun 12, 2017

heathgate said:
Foolish...... how old are you?

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

I'm 20; people here are talking about how gullible/easily swayed 18 year olds are but generally it's the older aged who believed the "350m a week for the NHS" during the referendum and they're the ones who rely on the NHS more

heathgate · Jun 12, 2017

Bridcutt said:
I'm 20; people here are talking about how gullible/easily swayed 18 year olds are but generally it's the older aged who believed the "350m a week for the NHS" during the referendum and they're the ones who rely on the NHS more

Who told you that?.... Corbyn?... Abbott?..... nobody believed that.... we all knew that was the gross figure, it had been in the or essential for the previous year..... stop now will you.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

The_Viper · Jun 12, 2017

Lower it to 16 and as well as polling stations get an app going to vote through as well. Biggest voter turnout ever.

lawros left foot · Jun 12, 2017

Bridcutt said:
I'm 20; people here are talking about how gullible/easily swayed 18 year olds are but generally it's the older aged who believed the "350m a week for the NHS" during the referendum and they're the ones who rely on the NHS more

This, the patronising/ abuse of the youth vote is marvellous for Labour. The Cons haven't learned anything, still so arrogantly thinking that anyone who votes Labour is simple or just doesn't understand the economy. I don't know what %of young people go to Uni, but, a lot who aren't students must have voted as well, so, why did they go Red? Maybe, they agree with Corbyn that the 5th/6th richest country in the world, should provide a better lifestyle for the majority of their citizens.

lawros left foot · Jun 12, 2017

heathgate said:
Who told you that?.... Corbyn?... Abbott?..... nobody believed that.... we all knew that was the gross figure, it had been in the or essential for the previous year..... stop now will you.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

People did believe that, do you think it was painted on the side of that bus for a laugh? A lot of leavers have said, that was what persuaded them to vote leave.

You stop trying to re-write history to suit you myopic view.

heathgate · Jun 12, 2017

lawros left foot said:
People did believe that, do you think it was painted on the side of that bus for a laugh? A lot of leavers have said, that was what persuaded them to vote leave.

You stop trying to re-write history to suit you myopic view.

Crap....... stop quoting the Guardian.... it was so well publicised that only myopic lefties chose to twist it as remoan propoganda.... gross figure... always was.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

BensGrandad · Jun 12, 2017

To answer the original question yes it should to 40 by which time most students will have realised life isnt a bowl of cherries and you can only take out what you put in to it,.

lawros left foot · Jun 12, 2017

heathgate said:
Crap....... stop quoting the Guardian.... it was so well publicised that only myopic lefties chose to twist it as remoan propoganda.... gross figure... always was.

Sent from my SM-G920F using Tapatalk

You, Sir are talking ou t your arse, written on the side of the Bus £350 million a week to the NHS. No mention of gross , net , or anything else. Some believed it, and voted accordingly. Those are the facts, Sunshine.

JCL666 · Jun 12, 2017

Stumpy Tim said:
Let's ban thick people voting too as they don't have enough mental capacity to understand the issues.

Sounds harsh........ But fair

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

The thread should have ended with this post.

Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

Should the voting age be raised?

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

"the man's an arse"

Exiled Geordie

Drew

Well-known member

Well-known member

Well-known member

Glory hunting since 1969

Glory hunting since 1969

Well-known member

New member

Glory hunting since 1969

absurdism

Share this page