Legal Voting Age

[Si-Amber]

^ Political apathy is a big problem here in the UK. There are probably as many 16 year old's who are interested in politics as there are 26 year old's. Most of my friends moan about politicians and the government, but few of them bother to vote. If a 16 year old does care and wants to vote, let them. We need as many voters as we can get.

Also at A-Level stage (16-18) there are more people in the UK studying Politics than at any other age, so it's quite ironic that they don't have the vote.

[SlayerOfLight]

Does anyone here think that the only reason why Britain is "considering" this is that a political party that knows that teens like it wants to gain power over the others, and not necessarily because anyone thinks it's actually a good idea?

That's why voting should be for adults only. But no diplomademocracy for the sake of every intelligent adult whitout a high education.

[UncoordinatedPisces]

Does anyone here think that the only reason why Britain is "considering" this is that a political party that knows that teens like it wants to gain power over the others, and not necessarily because anyone thinks it's actually a good idea?

To be fair, the Liberal Democrats are supporting this idea and they need all the help they can get. I did find this website: http://debatewise.org/debates/418-the-v ... elections/

[Si-Amber]

Today, in democracies leaders are chosen with an election in which everyone older than 18 can vote. Since the jobs in politics are extremely important this is a weird system. No other 'social group' in human society organizes this way. Would you hire an electrician to do you plumbing? No. But why should we 'hire' the uneducated to do our politics?

In that case, shouldn't only people with a degree in Politics get to vote? After all, why is someone with a degree in Arts. Literature or even Medicine going to have knowledge about politics?

I'd probably be classed as "uneducated", yet I own a book on UK Politics, which I've read. That's more than most of my "educated" friends have. Not all learning is done in the classroom.

[Si-Amber]

You can read all the books you want. That is no proof of knowledge, to nobody. I want people who can vote on worldchanging decision to have a piece of paper that says ''Yes, I have proven myself to posses both the capacity and the mentality to make intelligent and educated decisions''. If you can do that, but didn't take the education (in the educationproviding state!), then well... you should have taken it.

In that case, I'm glad I don't run in a country run by you! A degree (unless it is related to politics) does not mean somebody will be any good at making political choices.

I contribute money to my country and I exercise my right to vote. No vote and I'd give up work and become part of the problem!

[Si-Amber]

^ Yes, EVERY person with a degree is a rational person. *rolls eyes*.

Any way, it's fortunately never going to be that way here, not in my lifetime. I have the right to my "uneducated" vote and I'm not likely to lose it.

[Si-Amber]

^ So only academic people are intelligent? OK.

Seems an education is no barrier to ignorance.

[Tsuki]

Not all learning is done in the classroom.

Where's my Clap icon? I totally agree with this. Heck I've done education for 16-17 years and I've never picked up a book on poltics. I have two degrees but in my opinion, that doesn't mean I have more rights to vote than a guy who's worked hard for 10 years, paid taxes and doesn't have a degree. He is earning a living while I'm looking for work despite having a degree. Does that still mean I have a more right to vote than he doesn't?

To be honest, I've found some of the things said here appauling.

[UncoordinatedPisces]

I didn't do great at school and I dropped out of college. Quite interesting that some people think that even as a taxpayer, I shouldn't have the right to vote, to influence who gets to spend my taxes, because I might be too "ignorant". Just because someone doesn't have a degree, doesn't mean they don't have an understanding of what goes on in their country. You don't have to be academic to be intelligent. I have friends with degrees who don't even watch the news. That's a pretty elitist view you guys have.

As for 16 year olds getting the vote, I say yes. Most teens in this country wouldn't bother to vote anyway, so it would mostly be the few who have an interest in politics / the country. So yeah, let them have their say.

I can't say how much I agree with this. As a 15 year old who is interested, I'd love to vote at 16.

Not all learning is done in the classroom.

Where's my Clap icon? I totally agree with this. Heck I've done education for 16-17 years and I've never picked up a book on poltics. I have two degrees but in my opinion, that doesn't mean I have more rights to vote than a guy who's worked hard for 10 years, paid taxes and doesn't have a degree. He is earning a living while I'm looking for work despite having a degree. Does that still mean I have a more right to vote than he doesn't?

To be honest, I've found some of the things said here appauling.

This is so true. Like I said back in my first argument, you learn more about life as you live it.

This is the sad truth. You either give people the change to get a decent education, and if they don't bother they don't get a say. And I don't see why anyone would not take a free college or university course besides mentality.

Like I said earlier, the right to vote is not there for fun. One needs to prove one is worthy of a vote. I can't say much more than that it's just my opinion. You probably value equality over quality. I don't. People are not equal.

...some people want to go into work straight away, even when offered a course. If you have a chance to do an apprenticeship, then why not? When I come out of university (because I'm intending to go) I know I might not have a chance of getting a job. Jobs are hard to come by, and going to University to come out and be jobless is not an option for some.

The right to vote isn't there for fun, and I don't think anybody thinks that here anyway. I don't think you have to 'prove' yourself to vote. That's ridiculous. If you have an opinion on who you want to run our country then you have that opinion.

[Regulus]

It's as simple as this: if you are offered a free education, but you deny it, you must either be lazy, incapable, or happy with your ignorance. Regardless, as such, you have no business running a country.

It's nothing personal. Woeler gets it.

Education won't make someone smarter, but you have to be both moderately intelligent and diligent to obtain an extensive amount of it, if it is provided free of charge.

Some intelligent people don't have an education because they're ahead of the game, but those are rare cases. It's pretty easy to tell who those people are, and they are the exception. They are the people who literally change the world.

But for the 99.9% of us, it's not like that. Generally speaking, the people with degrees are the one who need to be making decisions. They're the ones who have proven themselves able and willing to analyze problems and make rational decisions. Meanwhile, the men who are ignorant enough to think that they don't need an education are the ones who need it most.

It's not discrimination. It's not racism, sexism, or anything like that. This is about giving everyone a chance to better themselves, and filtering out the ones who don't accept it.

Everyone is entitled to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but not everyone is entitled to meddle around in global, political issues. If you think you have what it takes to run a country, a few years of college isn't too much to ask, especially if it's free.