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 the voting age be reduced to 16 years old?

wretcheddomain

We've all seen today's headlines specifying how the government plan to hold a referendum on reducing the voting age to 16. So, what do folks here think, should it be reduced and if not, why not?

Personally, I think it should go ahead on multiple grounds.

First, the argument from maturity makes no sense. Most adults today (~30%) would re-install all the blessings of Fianna Fáil if a general election were to be held tomorrow. This doesn't appear very mature in my eyes. Moreover, given the disgraceful turnout of the amount of adults voting, why should they have a veto over 16 and 17 year old's who may want to actually vote? In addition, this argument fails as it doesn't make sense to say that on the stroke of 12 of their 18th birthday they suddenly become 'mature'. It's just a silly argument.

It may also instil a sense of interest among the younger populace in politics. If it were known to young people that they could have the vote at 16, it means politics is much more within their reach and it may mean more education and interest in the area. Of course, not all young people would be interested, and those against the motion point to young thugs, but that would be like pointing to adult thugs and saying adults don't have the right to vote. Again, the argument from criminality and thuggery makes no sense either.

So what are your views? As long as you agree with me then you've made the right choice.

Find more posts tagged with

Quick Links

Comments

ScumLord

The trouble I have with 16 year olds in general is they're easily lead. Look at the music they listen to, it's product pop and they can buy into the characters the record studios produce hook line and sinker.

I'd be afraid a politician could hire a Simon Cowell to do his PR and teenagers would buy into the hype.

But with the 20-30 somethings leaving the country in their droves, the new more liberal vote could be weakening against the old guard.

wretcheddomain

ScumLord wrote: »

The trouble I have with 16 year olds in general is they're easily lead. Look at the music they listen to, it's product pop and they can buy into the characters the record studios produce hook line and sinker.

I'd be afraid a politician could hire a Simon Cowell to do his PR and teenagers would buy into the hype.

But with the 20-30 somethings leaving the country in their droves, the new more liberal vote could be weakening against the old guard.

I understand that view and see where you're coming from. My problem is that arguments such as 'being easily led' also applies to impressionable adults. Indeed, many younger people are smarter than many adults in many different ways and are open to education as opposed to tradition which many voters stick to in the current electorate. We only have to look to the recoil back to Fianna Fáil by tradition voters to see the problem with trusting adult voters.

Gannicus

No I don't think so. But I do think that if you're on social welfare (excluding pensioners and disabled) and you don't vote when there is one on then you should be docked money off your dole the following week (just for one week).

I think it would be a great incentive to get people to vote if you are receiving job seekers/dole/income subsidy (working part time and claiming the other half on the scrathcer.)

Argentina and Australia enforce mandatory voting.

In peru & Greece, goods and services provided by public offices may be denied to those failing to vote. (So vote or no medical card or dole for you my friend basically)

In Brazil, a person who fails to vote in an election is barred from obtaining a passport until after they have voted in the two most recent elections.

In Turkey you can either vote or you pay to be pardoned from voting in that election.

Prodigious

When I was 16, I wanted to vote. Now that I can vote, and looking at today's 16 year olds, I think no, they should not be allowed to vote.

wretcheddomain

Prodigious wrote: »

When I was 16, I wanted to vote. Now that I can vote, and looking at today's 16 year olds, I think no, they should not be allowed to vote.

Is that not just being supremacist?

Amirani

Big Steve wrote: »

No I don't think so. But I do think that if you're on social welfare (excluding pensioners and disabled) and you don't vote when there is one on then you should be docked money off your dole the following week (just for one week).

I think it would be a great incentive to get people to vote if you are receiving job seekers/dole/income subsidy (working part time and claiming the other half on the scrathcer.)

Argentina and Australia enforce mandatory voting.

In peru & Greece, goods and services provided by public offices may be denied to those failing to vote. (So vote or no medical card or dole for you my friend basically)

In Brazil, a person who fails to vote in an election is barred from obtaining a passport until after they have voted in the two most recent elections.

In Turkey you can either vote or you pay to be pardoned from voting in that election.

Mandatory voting is a load of horse****. People should have every right to choose not to vote.

My name is URL

ScumLord wrote: »

The trouble I have with 16 year olds in general is they're easily lead.

Same could be said about all age groups when it comes to politics tbh. Look at how many people vote for particular parties / people just because their families have traditionally done so.

In my view, anyone who pays taxes should have a say in how the country is governed.

ScumLord

wretcheddomain wrote: »

I understand that view and see where you're coming from. My problem is that arguments such as 'being easily led' also applies to impressionable adults.

It is but most adults have been duped at least once if not many times in their lives. We have experience with political media tricks and even if we're not smart enough to see it coming once you learn something the hard way it sticks with you.

Indeed, many younger people are smarter than many adults in many different ways and are open to education as opposed to tradition which many voters stick to in the current electorate.

I don't think the education system is up to much so I think people need some time in the real world to get some idea of how things run and what needs changing.

Conmaicne Mara

Absolutely not.

Gannicus

NiallSparky wrote: »

Mandatory voting is a load of horse****. People should have every right to choose not to vote.

The make it like Turkey you vote or you pay a fee to opt out. if they do neither then the money is taken from their social welfare.

I work a 45-55 hour week (not the longest week in the world but still time consuming) and I always get down to vote, so people, especially who don't have a full time job p!ss!ng and moaning about the government cutting their dole or water charges etc, but then say they "forgot to vote" or they "didn't have time" or some other bull crap is ridiculous.

mathie

NiallSparky wrote: »

Mandatory voting is a load of horse****. People should have every right to choose not to vote.

“The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in times of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality.”

― Dante Alighieri, Inferno

Amirani

Big Steve wrote: »

The make it like Turkey you vote or you pay a fee to opt out. if they do neither then the money is taken from their social welfare.

I work a 45-55 hour week (not the longest week in the world but still time consuming) and I always get down to vote, so people, especially who don't have a full time job p!ss!ng and moaning about the government cutting their dole or water charges etc, but then say they "forgot to vote" or they "didn't have time" or some other bull crap is ridiculous.

Having to pay a fee if you choose not to vote is bonkers. Just because you decide to exercise your right to vote doesn't mean others have to. Some people might be on the fence/not care/be too busy. It makes **** all difference to me or you whether other people decide not to vote.

OpenYourEyes

I don't trust most adults with a vote, nevermind 16 year olds! While there will always be a small percentage of people that young who are actually interested or at least have some idea whats going on in politics, I don't think its worthwhile dropping the voting age. Also, a lot of elections/referendums etc tend to be on weekdays which can be quite awkward for uiversity students (posibly on purpose...), so i think we should be making it easier for that age bracket to vote before we start including another one.

The thing David Norris brought up to the same committe about people being allowed to have a say in election candidates, rather than just oireachtas members and county councils does make sense though - it definitely works against people with no party ties or political allies, but the current system was deemed democratic by the committee....shocking.....

Amirani

mathie wrote: »

“The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in times of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality.”

― Dante Alighieri, Inferno

The nation of Ireland I guess is ****ed so for its position on World War II.

Dáil elections don't constitute a 'great moral crisis'.

mathie

NiallSparky wrote: »

The nation of Ireland I guess is ****ed so for its position on World War II.

Dáil elections don't constitute a 'great moral crisis'.

Not all quotes are to be taken literally.

biko

I was a pretty stupid 16yo but of course thought I had everything sussed.

Looking at today's 16yo they're just the same so no I don't think it's a good idea. 18 is fine, 21 better.

Peregrine

Yes with measures to make sure that politicians don't try to mislead younger people who don't normally vote or know anything about politics.

There are 16 and 17 year olds who wants to vote and then there are ones that when you look at them, you just get a sense of the bleak future they will bring to our world.

Do you really think the latter will go and vote simply because they're eligible? Out of the around 110,000 16/17 year olds in the country, how many do you think will actually bother to vote just because they're eligible?

The ones that care enough to keep up politics and have their own opinions will vote, the ones that don't won't.

I feel like I'm talking to ****ing brick wall and I don't see why that has to be the case. Because there are idiots in my age group? Half the ****in country are idiots and don't deny it, they get a vote. Why do I even have to pay 23% VAT on every single thing I buy when I don't even get a bloody vote?

Amirani

mathie wrote: »

Not all quotes are to be taken literally.

It's a pretty irrelevant quote when applied to voting in parliamentary elections.

T-Maxx

I'm with Biko on this one.

The voting age should be increased to 21.

mathie

NiallSparky wrote: »

It's a pretty irrelevant quote when applied to voting in parliamentary elections.

How is it irrelevant?

shane9689

mathie wrote: »

“The hottest places in hell are reserved for those who, in times of great moral crisis, maintain their neutrality.”

― Dante Alighieri, Inferno

so ireland during the 1940's then? or Switzerland? haha everyone there is fcucked

Amirani

mathie wrote: »

How is it irrelevant?

Because there's generally no moral crisis at play whatsoever when voting in a general election. It may be valid to an extent when talking about certain referenda, but not in general elections.

I also think you're misinterpreting Dante's use of neutrality in this instance. Abstaining from voting isn't always a neutral position to take.

ScumLord

Nimrod 7 wrote: »

Do you really think the latter will go and vote simply because they're eligible? Out of the around 110,000 16/17 year olds in the country, how many do you think will actually bother to vote just because they're eligible?

My fear would be If someone from the likes of boyzone or whatever the current equivalent is decided to run you'd have the majority of teenage girls voting for them regardless of their politics. That politician could just be the figurehead for the record industry influencing Irish law.

I realise that's a bit dismissive of 16 year olds but I was 16 once and I was a different more naive person back then. Kids of that age are capable of great things but they just live in a idealistic fantasy world and lack the experience to make thoughtful decisions.

mathie

NiallSparky wrote: »

Because there's generally no moral crisis at play whatsoever when voting in a general election. It may be valid to an extent when talking about certain referenda, but not in general elections.

Well you could argue that all decisions are moral decisions.

NiallSparky wrote: »

I also think you're misinterpreting Dante's use of neutrality in this instance. Abstaining from voting isn't always a neutral position to take.

In "Yes/No" votes then it's about as neutral as you can get.

shane9689

ScumLord wrote: »

My fear would be If someone from the likes of boyzone or whatever the current equivalent is decided to run you'd have the majority of teenage girls voting for them regardless of their politics. That politician could just be the figurehead for the record industry influencing Irish law.

I realise that's a bit dismissive of 16 year olds but I was 16 once and I was a different more naive person back then. Kids of that age are capable of great things but they just live in a idealistic fantasy world and lack the experience to make thoughtful decisions.

exactly what he said....we'd end up like California having the terminator in charge

i thought when i was 16 i should vote too, but in reality, you see the world for what it is when you get older.... i think it should be 21 if anything...and im 19 btw

Amirani

mathie wrote: »

In "Yes/No" votes then it's about as neutral as you can get.

Not necessarily. There's certain Yes/No votes where people may abstain/spoil their vote because they're not really in agreement with either option.

mckenzie84

Not a hope this referendum will pass

mathie

NiallSparky wrote: »

Not necessarily. There's certain Yes/No votes where people may abstain/spoil their vote because they're not really in agreement with either option.

Certainly some yes but the majority would be people who just don't give a rashers

jester77

There should be some sort of pre-requisite questionnaire before someone is allowed to vote, regardless of age. Too many muppets have no understanding of what it is they are voting for.

Peregrine

ScumLord wrote: »

My fear would be If someone from the likes of boyzone or whatever the current equivalent is decided to run you'd have the majority of teenage girls voting for them regardless of their politics. That politician could just be the figurehead for the record industry influencing Irish law.

Same goes with adults

Not all adults obviously, most are mature but some will still vote for people without thinking.

If by some miracle, someone from a boy band was a candidate in the general election. Out of the 54,000 females aged 16 and 17 in this country(haven't even broken it down to constituencies), how many will vote for them? If anyone did, how many of the 3.2 million other voters will vote for them? Like I said, measures have to be put in place to make sure candidates don't target the underaged specifically with unrealistic promises but I wouldn't worry about the effect a boy band member will have on the ballot. It's a smaller problem than the effect of some ill-informed views held by a huge percentage of the electorate.

The number of 16 and 17 years who will vote is a trivial enough figure but it empowers the youth with a voice.

ScumLord wrote: »

I realise that's a bit dismissive of 16 year olds but I was 16 once and I was a different more naive person back then. Kids of that age are capable of great things but they just live in a idealistic fantasy world and lack the experience to make thoughtful decisions.

I know many do but I like to think that I myself and a lot of others don't live in an idealistic fantasy world..