nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

Child Item

Should Old People Be Banned from Voting?

Rezident

Under 18’s can’t vote yet, which is fair enough. But once people have retired and sailed off into the sunset, or past the age of say, 70, are they still the best people to be deciding the future for everyone else? Previously, I would have thought they were, due to their experience and by virtue of the fact that they have paid their dues and contributed to society (most of them anyway) but I’m not so sure anymore.

While some are invaluable for their experience, many are disgruntled and out of touch with young and even middle aged people (the majority). The world has changed utterly over the last couple of decades, with so much uncertainty and volatility in the world these days (that is not going away, even the FT has reported that perhaps Volatility is simply here to stay now) and the rapid pace of change, are old people no longer the best at deciding the future? Older doesn’t necessarily seem to mean wiser anymore.

And I am not having a go at old people, as I am becoming one.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

Lt Dan

Rezident wrote: »

Under 18’s can’t vote yet, which is fair enough. But once people have retired and sailed off into the sunset, or past the age of say, 70, are they still the best people to be deciding the future for everyone else? Previously, I would have thought they were, due to their experience and by virtue of the fact that they have paid their dues and contributed to society (most of them anyway) but I’m not so sure anymore.

While some are invaluable for their experience, many are disgruntled and out of touch with young and even middle aged people (the majority). The world has changed utterly over the last couple of decades, with so much uncertainty and volatility in the world these days (that is not going away, even the FT has reported that perhaps Volatility is simply here to stay now) and the rapid pace of change, are old people no longer the best at deciding the future? Older doesn’t necessarily seem to mean wiser anymore.

And I am not having a go at old people, as I am becoming one.

No , just idiots , the poor:p and the sick and mentally unstable

Besides, the way the young snow flakes carry on today, they probably need safe spaces for themselves, god forbid being forced to make a hard decision

Experience, wisdom and knowledge beats youth. These people have gone through the worst of the stability and uncertainty , possible 2-4 times in their life. What have those clowns gone through?

What you are saying is, you think or suggest that it might be a good idea to get rid of the vote of a substantial proportion of the population to suit your agenda, whatever that might be (not you personally) .What happens when you reach that age?

So much for equality eh?

How many of ye , who think that this is a good idea , would be happy enough to leave yer young children with the 65-75 year old grand parent who still has their wits and mobility and health, while you work or go on holiday ?

zulutango

wakka12 wrote: »

So they should just not be allowed any further say, even an opinion, on how their lives should be run just because they'll die sooner than young people. Just seems like an extremely poor argument to me, you don't know when the old person will die, and I don't see how that should influence how valid their opinions and concerns are

Well, I agree. It's not a good argument, and I don't subscribe to it myself. But when you look at how these recent elections have been decided by mainly elderly people, then I can see why it's being raised.

A better solution would be to make voting mandatory (with the option of abstention). This would address the low turnout issue to a great degree, and the low turnout by young people is the real reason why elderly people have such political clout.

Lt Dan

Saipanne wrote: »

The reaction of the middle class/educated cohort of society to both Brexit and Trump has been sad to witness. In both cases, the typical responses have been:

"This is what happens when uneducated people are allowed to vote..."

"People who voted for Trump/Brexit are stupid..."

And so on. What this suggests to me is that middle class people came to assume that somehow democracy belonged to them. That they, and they alone get to decide the outcome of elections.

I guess this explains the reactions we have been observing, but it really should come as no surprise to allegedly educated people that the working class are capable of resisting and overthrowing the wishes of the establishment - especially when they feel let down by said establishment - and that wanting this outcome does not make them ignorant or stupid, even if their decision may seem misguided to you.

Ironically, the only people who look ignorant in this are the ones throwing such accusations around. Expect more such results across the Western World, and more middle class bewilderment and snobbery.

The Middle Class pay for everything, and are often in the front line of the banks, the public services, and middle to high up in private business. They know what is going on in the world through their dealing with others. They can smell BS a mile off.

What the hell does the spongers of the State (not the TD's or Senators) know ? They are utterly close to worthless when it comes to what they can or will do for the economy. Why on earth should they matter?

Chuchote

zulutango wrote: »

Well, I agree. It's not a good argument, and I don't subscribe to it myself. But when you look at how these recent elections have been decided by mainly elderly people, then I can see why it's being raised.

A better solution would be to make voting mandatory (with the option of abstention). This would address the low turnout issue to a great degree, and the low turnout by young people is the real reason why elderly people have such political clout.

Nope. These recent elections were largely decided by the people who sat at home and didn't care enough to go out and vote. That is to say, 66% of the young, in the case of the Brexit vote; 51% of the US population, in the case of the presidential vote.

OldNotWIse

zulutango wrote: »

Well, I agree. It's not a good argument, and I don't subscribe to it myself. But when you look at how these recent elections have been decided by mainly elderly people, then I can see why it's being raised.

A better solution would be to make voting mandatory (with the option of abstention). This would address the low turnout issue to a great degree, and the low turnout by young people is the real reason why elderly people have such political clout.

If young people cant be bothered getting out and voting they have no right to complain about issues being decided by the elderly who DO go to the trouble.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

zulutango wrote: »

Well, I agree. It's not a good argument, and I don't subscribe to it myself. But when you look at how these recent elections have been decided by mainly elderly people, then I can see why it's being raised..

I'd love to know how you know which demographics decided, or voted, which way. As the over 65s make up only 20% of the electorate one must therefore assume 100% of them voted all the same way and less than half of the remaining eligible voters turned out voting in a contrary manner, for an over 65s majority to emerge.

zulutango

Marie Substantial Louse wrote: »

I'd love to know how you know which demographics decided, or voted, which way. As the over 65s make up only 20% of the electorate one must therefore assume 100% of them voted all the same way and less than half of the remaining eligible voters turned out voting in a contrary manner, for an over 65s majority to emerge.

There's a hell of a lot of exit polls which show that elderly people overwhelmingly voted for Brexit and Trump.

zulutango

OldNotWIse wrote: »

If young people cant be bothered getting out and voting they have no right to complain about issues being decided by the elderly who DO go to the trouble.

Would you agree with making voting mandatory, as it is in other countries?

Bear in mind that there are plenty of obstacles to young people voting, so it's not simply a case of them not being bothered.

OldNotWIse

zulutango wrote: »

Would you agree with making voting mandatory, as it is in other countries?

Bear in mind that there are plenty of obstacles to young people voting, so it's not simply a case of them not being bothered.

What obstacles do they face that older people don't?

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

zulutango wrote: »

There's a hell of a lot of exit polls which show that elderly people overwhelmingly voted for Brexit and Trump.

Perhaps so, but they all didn't and many others must have voted likewise for it to have been passed.

Edups

zulutango wrote: »

There's a hell of a lot of exit polls which show that elderly people overwhelmingly voted for Brexit and Trump.

Firstly I'm not American or a trump supporter, but we simply can't at this point in time decide trump is going to be a liability. If the American government see this as the case he'll be forced to resign. President doesn't translate to untouchable.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

zulutango wrote: »

Would you agree with making voting mandatory, as it is in other countries?

Bear in mind that there are plenty of obstacles to young people voting, so it's not simply a case of them not being bothered.

I would like to see, but doubt I ever will, mandatory voting. As for obstacles, I have never failed to make time to vote, even when I was younger and had no private transport and a very slow and poor public transport system. Polling stations are open much longer now than they ever where. "Obstacles" is just an excuse.

Chuchote

zulutango wrote: »

Bear in mind that there are plenty of obstacles to young people voting, so it's not simply a case of them not being bothered.

What about the young people vote to change the voting day to Sunday, so everyone could always vote? :cool: (Another upside: we wouldn't have to close schools on a schoolday and pay teachers not to teach for the day.)

zulutango

If there was a way to make voting online and secure, then that would obviously be better. As we saw with the electronic voting fiasco though, that isn't so easy.

JupiterKid

A Little Pony wrote: »

This is a nonsense. Old people are still living life and have every right to vote for what they think is in their interests. What is the big problem with that? Young people will grow up one day.

There are plenty of young people who are very grown up and more mature than people a generation or two older than them. Being older does not make some people wiser.

The big problem is getting more young people to vote.

Das Reich

Depends, my grandmother was illiterate and the day before election she looked at the pictures and chose who was the best looking man (in Brazil is the only democracy where people are obbligated to vote).

zulutango

Edups wrote: »

Firstly I'm not American or a trump supporter, but we simply can't at this point in time decide trump is going to be a liability. If the American government see this as the case he'll be forced to resign. President doesn't translate to untouchable.

Trump is a likely long-term liability (or catastrophe really, if you look at the inevitable environmental impact of some of his plans) rather than a short term one. The Senate and Congress and Supreme Court, given their political hue, are unlikely to reign him in.

New research shows that humanity could become extinct within our lifetimes due to climate change if immediate, drastic action is not taken now. Will Trump and hos government take that seriously. I hope so.

Maximus Alexander

zulutango wrote: »

New research shows that humanity could become extinct within our lifetimes due to climate change if immediate, drastic action is not taken now. Will Trump and hos government take that seriously. I hope so.

It definitely couldn't. That is a logical impossibility.

zulutango

Maximus Alexander wrote: »

It definitely couldn't. That is a logical impossibility.

How so?

edit: ok, I get you, but you know what I mean!!

Chuchote

Not really impossible. 'Extinct' could be used to mean when the last two or three of us live, without possibility of leaving children behind us.

Lt Dan

JupiterKid wrote: »

There are plenty of young people who are very grown up and more mature than people a generation or two older than them. Being older does not make some people wiser.

The big problem is getting more young people to vote.

Who says that? Their mammies?

This is a generation who did not have to be forced to leave home/country to get a job at 17 (or earlier) and could go to college even if from a less well off background due to State Grants

Not everyone is a Simon Harris

Ave Sodalis

wakka12 wrote:

It is most certainly mostly left wing who propose banning the elderly from voting, their justification being that elderly people are on average more racist/sexist/homophobic due to the period they grew up in and so they shouldn't have the right to impose this mindset on our modern forward thinking society

Would you say that the right wing would have said something very similar, or along the same lines if Trump lost ir Brexit didn't happen? I mean, Trump and his supporters were calling the election a fix and other such things before the voting even started. I don't think it's a purely leftie thing to do, so to call it out as a neo-liberal reaction is pretty far fetched, imo. People are always gonna fire the blame at something.

Maximus Alexander

Chuchote wrote: »

Not really impossible. 'Extinct' could be used to mean when the last two or three of us live, without possibility of leaving children behind us.

I suppose it could be used to mean that. 'Aardvark' could also be used to mean when you go for a wee, and even though you're really careful it sort of sprays a bit as it comes out and leaves a few little drops on the seat, so then you have to clean the seat because you're a considerate sort, but you don't notice that a couple of drops also went onto one of your shoes.

Chuchote

'Sarcasm' could even be used to mean childishly dimwitted?

Widdershins

f old people were banned from voting because they might die in 10-20 years, young people should be banned from voting because there's statistically a good chance they'll emigrate and never come back. If they might emigrate then what happens in this country won't affect them.

Commotion Ocean

Marie Substantial Louse wrote: »

I would like to see, but doubt I ever will, mandatory voting. As for obstacles, I have never failed to make time to vote, even when I was younger and had no private transport and a very slow and poor public transport system. Polling stations are open much longer now than they ever where. "Obstacles" is just an excuse.

If voting were mandatory, how would it be enforced?

To a certain extent, I agree with you, but does the right to vote not also come with the right NOT to vote too?

What if someone had a holiday planned during the voting times? Or had to attend a wedding abroad?

For that to happen, you'd have to allow voting by proxy or by post in embassies (but only for Irish citizens who are ordinarily resident in Ireland). Not 3569529 generation Americans who claim Irish passports.

Maximus Alexander

dfeo wrote: »

If voting were mandatory, how would it be enforced?

We could just ask the Australians. The punishment for failing to vote is fairly innocuous. It's hardly insurmountable to implement.

Of course that doesn't answer the question as to whether it's justifiable, nor whether it even works.

osarusan

I wouldn't be a fan of mandatory voting.

If there are people who simply have no interest in voting and have not informed themselves about the election, candidates, etc, then I'd rather they just stayed away.

Sam Kade

Rezident wrote: »

Under 18’s can’t vote yet, which is fair enough. But once people have retired and sailed off into the sunset, or past the age of say, 70, are they still the best people to be deciding the future for everyone else? Previously, I would have thought they were, due to their experience and by virtue of the fact that they have paid their dues and contributed to society (most of them anyway) but I’m not so sure anymore.

While some are invaluable for their experience, many are disgruntled and out of touch with young and even middle aged people (the majority). The world has changed utterly over the last couple of decades, with so much uncertainty and volatility in the world these days (that is not going away, even the FT has reported that perhaps Volatility is simply here to stay now) and the rapid pace of change, are old people no longer the best at deciding the future? Older doesn’t necessarily seem to mean wiser anymore.

And I am not having a go at old people, as I am becoming one.

Did you use small font on purpose so the pensioners would have trouble reading it?

Chuchote

dfeo wrote: »

If voting were mandatory, how would it be enforced?

To a certain extent, I agree with you, but does the right to vote not also come with the right NOT to vote too?

What if someone had a holiday planned during the voting times? Or had to attend a wedding abroad?

For that to happen, you'd have to allow voting by proxy or by post in embassies (but only for Irish citizens who are ordinarily resident in Ireland). Not 3569529 generation Americans who claim Irish passports.

Voting is mandatory in lots of countries. You must go and vote; however, there's no penalty in any (afaik) for that vote being an abstention. I don't know what they do about holidays and weddings you "have to" attend (can't imagine one, unless you're the bride!)