8 comments

[ 2.3 ms ] story [ 23.7 ms ] thread
My instinct is to think that 16 year olds generally don't have the maturity to make these kinds of decisions.

At the same time I'm not sure their choices would be any less intelligent or mature compared to the current crop of voters.

It will be interesting to see how electioneering adjusts to encompass this now important demographic that has massively different priorities than even 18 years olds.

This seems like a good thing to me.

Thrilled Labour actually followed through on this. Especially as the population ages we need some balance to the hordes of retirees voting right so they can keep their oversized homes and ludicrous triple lock at the expense of young people.

Now where’s the age cap?

As I have gotten older, I have come to believe that the current voting age is already too young. I thought I was right about things when I was 18, but with more experience I realise how naive I was.
On the one hand, it’s their future. On the other hand, a fully developed prefrontal cortex is handy in order to make it a good future. On the third hand, that’s still no guarantee against people voting against their own self-interest.
I think only people that pay taxes should be able to vote.
You must be 18 in the UK for getting a tattoo, buying alcohol, watching porn, purchasing cigarettes, using a sunbed or being tried as an adult. Why would they lower the voting age to 16?

There was some talk a few years ago in the country where I live to lower the voting age. That talk was mostly driven by the parties that would benefit the most from a younger electorate. It had nothing to do with “democracy”.

If a senile granny with her demented husband can vote, why should be 16 years old barred from voting?