Should the voting age be changed to 16+?

Originally posted by shaynebmxxx
how about this for a change.

the candidates are honest about EVERYTHING..hm wouldnt that be the day? then no one would be so confused on what to do

So you'd vote for a president who says something like "Let's raise taxes, get rid of civil rights, and invade a foreign country"?

It's coming to the point where people can't trust a damn thing candidates say, so when election day comes along, it doesn't really matter who anyone votes for. It seems like it's a risk no matter who becomes president and honestly, I'd be up for getting rid of the position of president altogether and just let the senate and House do everything

Political and governmental descisions should not be left in the hands of an uneducated and uninterested mass.

There are individuals who dedicate their lives to understanding how various parts of society work in empirical ways. These people should have the highest say with regards to certain aspects of our government. Who would make better economic descisions? The voting public, the vast majority of whom have no economic experience, or a group of the most accredited and accomplished economists in the nation?

Lol, not to just hijack this thread, but like, the conversation really just reminds me how much I think democracy is just a race to the bottom. Technocratic Meritocracy 😉 thats where its at

Originally posted by inimalist
Political and governmental descisions should not be left in the hands of an uneducated and uninterested mass.

There are individuals who dedicate their lives to understanding how various parts of society work in empirical ways. These people should have the highest say with regards to certain aspects of our government. Who would make better economic descisions? The voting public, the vast majority of whom have no economic experience, or a group of the most accredited and accomplished economists in the nation?

Lol, not to just hijack this thread, but like, the conversation really just reminds me how much I think democracy is just a race to the bottom. Technocratic Meritocracy 😉 thats where its at

Originally posted by Spearhead
So you'd vote for a president who says something like "Let's raise taxes, get rid of civil rights, and invade a foreign country"?

It's coming to the point where people can't trust a damn thing candidates say, so when election day comes along, it doesn't really matter who anyone votes for. It seems like it's a risk no matter who becomes president and honestly, I'd be up for getting rid of the position of president altogether and just let the senate and House do everything

no i wouldnt vote for that but id like to not be surprised 2 years into office and the new pres pulls something out of his ass noone ever talked about.

Originally posted by Bardock42
You'd exclude yourself just like that?

Noble.

Originally posted by Bardock42
You shouldn't be allowed to vote.

Your precious democracy fails you yet again.

Originally posted by Captain King
Maybe I shouldn't. But I can.

Your precious democracy fails you yet again.

I know. It's horrible.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Just that who decdes who is someone that understands it. You know there are extremely stupid people that dedicate their lives to something.

That is really important, as is maintaining some type of accountability to the people. I don't know, most fields, even with major disagreements within them, have fairly eminent individuals that everyone sort of looks to as "knowing" what they are talking about. It is really subject to celebrity worship, but to be fair, it is a celebrity eared by accomplishment. I do concede, it is very difficult to find a fair way to exclude certain people from the political process.

Originally posted by inimalist
That is really important, as is maintaining some type of accountability to the people. I don't know, most fields, even with major disagreements within them, have fairly eminent individuals that everyone sort of looks to as "knowing" what they are talking about. It is really subject to celebrity worship, but to be fair, it is a celebrity eared by accomplishment. I do concede, it is very difficult to find a fair way to exclude certain people from the political process.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Also, in fields like economics the eminent figures are still just as separated as politicians.

Of course 🙂 I think it is a good thing. I don't want a single dominant ideology, just those with the most "knowledge" about a topic having the most say in how we should handle it.

lol, I don't think I have anything approaching a workable system. I have more practical ideas, but its more fun to be extreme sometimes.

Originally posted by JKozzy
I think so, I follow politics enough to know what I'm doing. If someone doesn't follow and/or care, then they can just give up their voice. Age 10 is way too young, but 16 is a much better age than 18. We 16 year olds have voices and thoughts, too! ✅

**** no.

Look, all I can say is that when I was 16 I thought I knew everything and everyone else I knew at that time thought they knew everything. I now look back and realise how little I actually knew, as a matter of fact at 16 most people have next to zero clue about real life. Now no 16 year old will accept this fact, because the young are ignorant and arrogant by nature. My best argument is wait until you are older, at which point you will realise how stupid it would be to allow 16 year olds to vote.

Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
Look, all I can say is that when I was 16 I thought I knew everything and everyone else I knew at that time thought they knew everything. I now look back and realise how little I actually knew, as a matter of fact at 16 most people have next to zero clue about real life. Now no 16 year old will accept this fact, because the young are ignorant and arrogant by nature. My best argument is wait until you are older, at which point you will realise how stupid it would be to allow 16 year olds to vote.

When I was 16, I knew a hell of a lot of stuff, but I didn't know everything.

When is was 11, I knew a hell of a lot of stuff, but I didn't know everything.

At both of those ages, I knew more than my parents did. It may seem crazy, but my parents knew that I knew more than them. It pissed my father off but my mother loved it and relied on it.

(I want my children to learn from my mistakes and not make them either.)

Nothing has changed and I STILL know than my parents do. I was more mature at 11 than I am now, for the most part, so I could have made better voting choices then.

Originally posted by ((The_Anomaly))
Look, all I can say is that when I was 16 I thought I knew everything and everyone else I knew at that time thought they knew everything. I now look back and realise how little I actually knew, as a matter of fact at 16 most people have next to zero clue about real life. Now no 16 year old will accept this fact, because the young are ignorant and arrogant by nature. My best argument is wait until you are older, at which point you will realise how stupid it would be to allow 16 year olds to vote.

Funny, doesn't seem like you are that far away from thinking you suddenly know all (about real life), wonder how that'll work out for you in 4 years.

Originally posted by dadudemon
When I was 16, I knew a hell of a lot of stuff, but I didn't know everything.

When is was 11, I knew a hell of a lot of stuff, but I didn't know everything.

At both of those ages, I knew more than my parents did. It may seem crazy, but my parents knew that I knew more than them. It pissed my father off but my mother loved it and relied on it.

(I want my children to learn from my mistakes and not make them either.)

Nothing has changed and I STILL know than my parents do. I was more mature at 11 than I am now, for the most part, so I could have made better voting choices then.

Why are the people that say such things always the people that just can't back it up in a conversation.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Why are the people that say such things always the people that just can't back it up in a conversation.

I am obviously not one of those people. You fail at your insult.

Originally posted by dadudemon
I am obviously not one of those people. You fail at your insult.

Actually the insult was implying that you are one of those.

Also, you are.

I wasn't sure whether to go with the "you made it up" or the "your parents must have been retards then" bit at first, though. I am satisfied with the way I chose though.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Actually the insult was implying that you are one of those.

Also, you are.

I wasn't sure whether to go with the "you made it up" or the "your parents must have been retards then" bit at first, though. I am satisfied with the way I chose though.

I know it was...obviously your insult isn't applicable because I do more than my share of "backing it up in conversation".

Why the personal attacks all of a sudden?

Originally posted by dadudemon
I know it was...obviously your insult isn't applicable because I do more than my share of "backing it up in conversation".

Why the personal attacks all of a sudden?

Was funny, with that bit of truth.

Originally posted by Bardock42
Was funny, with that bit of truth.

To be honest, my parents are far from stupid. I was just a little nerd. I am sure you have seen children talk circles around their parents and manipulate them at a whim.

Originally posted by dadudemon
To be honest, my parents are far from stupid. I was just a little nerd. I am sure you have seen children talk circles around their parents and manipulate them at a whim.

Yes, though there is a very big step from claiming that you could manipulate your parents to claiming that you were more knowledgeable and "better" than them at the age of 11. And though you seem rather intelligent, you don't portray that kind of amazingness on here (imo), which made me come to the conclusion that you are either wrong about it (not willfully, you might just really think so) or your parents are not the cream of the crop.

No offense. (at least not too much)