An interesting question and one that has suddenly popped up as an opposition leader with a bad performance in the polls finds a new star to hitch his fortunes too

Bill Shorten calls for voting age to be lowered to 16 - ABC News (Australian Broadcasting Corporation) (http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-31/shorten-calls-for-voting-age-to-be-lowered-to-16/6901464)

But it is an interesting question within all democracies, at what point is a person considered responsible enough to enter into the political life of the nation? 18 seems to be the mean, however, there are a number of nations particularly in Europe where the age is 16 or where the question has been asked over the past decade.

There can be little doubt that physical maturity is arriving earlier, even if emotional maturity isn't. If we go way back a boy was considered a man at 13 in jewish circles long ago and in Islamic circles 15. Should we be aligning these ages of maturity with national responsibilities? What happens if a young person can vote at 16 but cannot buy alcohol or be allowed to do certain other things such as leave school

If you ask me... at least 30 and a gainfully employed tax paying citizen.

Would leave out most of the clueless and the non-producers. So you would have a more responsible group of voters on average than you have now.

But I don't get to make the rules.

Agree with Smoothy but I would add this. If the rules are to be changed to 16, I also think that the age to be held accountable,as an adult, for a crime should be lowered to 16 also. To damn many punks are getting away with very serious crimes due to age.

If you ask me... at least 30 and a gainfully employed tax paying citizen.

Would leave out most of the clueless and the non-producers. So you would have a more responsible group of voters on average than you have now.

But I don't get to make the rules.

There are some nations who agree that for a young person to vote they must be employed, perhaps it should be prerequisite for all voters but then that would disenfranchise many. I'm certainly not in favour of those attending school being able to vote as their political opinions may be easily influenced by their teachers, nor am I in favour of voting to be restricted to some form of elite as it once was, and the system you suggest creates an elite of the fortunate.

Back to the question, what should the qualifications to vote be, universal suffrage at a particular age, special qualifications, should voters be required to undertake a citizenship course so they fully understand the processes.

An interesting side question is who is advantaged by voting at an early age. Those who need access to a social security system? Those who want to influence the cost of education? Those who feel that young people gravitate to a particular political view

I also agree with Catonsville on that part he mentioned I left out. If the age to vote is lowered.. so should the age they are considered to be an adult for any and all crimes committed.

The very young to be blunt...are clues idiots brainwashed by their teachers (today more than ever). They also are not contributing members of society. It takes a number of years actually having a real full time job and being able to support themselves before they learn what the real world is actually like. And until they do they should NOT be allowed to vote because they lack the basic knowledge to be able to vote responsibly. (there are already enough clueless adults doing that now)

Agree with Smoothy but I would add this. If the rules are to be changed to 16, I also think that the age to be held accountable,as an adult, for a crime should be lowered to 16 also. To damn many punks are getting away with very serious crimes due to age.

Yes, I agree the age for juvanile protection should be aligned with the voting age, but we don't want juvaniles in the adult prison population so it is a very broad question as to how to deal with the emotionally immature. That they are punks is a failure of the education system and society generally. I think the Spartan system was good, one to one mentoring by an older responsible person

Para said:
" I'm certainly not in favour of those attending school being able to vote as their political opinions may be easily influenced by their teachers".

This can also be attributed to College where students can be any age from 18 up.

Smoothy I had a responsible job at 15 and it didn't take long to know what the real world was like. I acknowledge my political education and knowledge at that time was non existent other than the advice of my father to vote a particular way. For this reason, I possed the question what should the voting age be? I'm sure communications today means the youth are better informed if they can be bothered to get their heads out of a video game or Facebook.

We cannot eliminate ignorance (cluelessness) because there is no excuse for it, there is no excuse for citizens not to be politically aware, politically astute is something else but ifyou give citizen responsibilities to youth at what point do you induct them into the military, all them to drink alcohol, make important decisions, marry. It seems to me there can be no distinctions

Yes, I agree the age for juvanile protection should be aligned with the voting age, but we don't want juvaniles in the adult prison population so it is a very broad question as to how to deal with the emotionally immature. That they are punks is a failure of the education system and society generally. I think the Spartan system was good, one to one mentoring by an older responsible person

Agree with not putting juvenile in with hardened criminals. We seem to have money to waste on government ideas so why not set up separate prisons for them until they reach 18 or 21 and then they finish their time. Don't like that when they are 18 we "spring them". Do the crime, do the time. We are not living in Spartan times and these kid are smart, far smarter than you and I at 14-16.

Smoothy I had a responsible job at 15 and it didn't take long to know what the real world was like. I acknowledge my political education and knowledge at that time was non existent other than the advice of my father to vote a particular way. For this reason, I possed the question what should the voting age be? I'm sure communications today means the youth are better informed if they can be bothered to get their heads out of a video game or Facebook.

We cannot eliminate ignorance (cluelessness) because there is no excuse for it, there is no excuse for citizens not to be politically aware, politically astute is something else but ifyou give citizen responsibilities to youth at what point do you induct them into the military, all them to drink alcohol, make important decisions, marry. It seems to me there can be no distinctions

I would disagree... I've seen enough arguments on enough different forums (including this one) by high school age youth that have demonstrated a complete lack of knowledge... meaning they are far from informed.

You and I both grew up in a time where teachers believed their jobs were actually to teach students with what they need to know. These days that has taken a distant second to indoctrinating them into a particular political parties dogma that happen to control the current education system. (At least in the USA that is true).

That is far from informed... and actually the opposite of it because they are taught to ignore facts and reality and blindly follow what they are told to believe.

And informed person has to be capable of listening to everything without bias and forming their own decisions.

In High school and College today if you don't follow precisely that of the teachers (nearly always near socialist in leaning) you will suffer lower grades... be ridiculed publicly and even failed. Been too many examples and actual recordings and video taped of teachers ranting politics instead of doing what they were paid to do.

You should be at least 21, be able to read and write, and pass a simple government knowledge test.

Well smoothy there should be an inspectorate that seeks out political bias and ensures it is not part of the education system. It seems we cannot keep certain sorts of bias out of the education system and to do that you have to start with the types of people who are attracted to the system

Well smoothy there should be an inspectorate that seeks out political bias and ensures it is not part of the education system. It seems we cannot keep certain sorts of bias out of the education system and to do that you have to start with the types of people who are attracted to the system
I completely agree. Like most of the media as well... you get a few people in at high enough levels and they all but make certain anybody that doesn't think as they do will neither get hired, and if they do, they never get Tenure. (Something else that should be done away with).

The problem is systemic and has gotten so bad the quality of education has suffered dramatically.

leave it to the libs ! They recruit voters from the grave .Now they want voters fresh out of diapers.

Here in the US the voting group with the lowest turnout is the youth vote. The only time they vote in significant numbers is when they are jacked up by a populist demagogue . Local and midterm elections they virtually disappear.

The move to 18 was questionable ,and illogically based on the age of being eligible to serve in the military. We also once had an eligibility to drink at 18 . But that has been moved up to 21 where the populations thinks people are more responsible . What you want from a soldier is unquestioned obedience. That is exactly the opposite from what you want from a voter . What you want from a voter is informed and reasoned decision making . I think lowering the voting age to 16 would be a disaster for the nation.

Hello P:

I don't mean to interrupt your right wing love fest, but I have a few FACTS to interject.

First off, we DO send children to ADULT PRISON. Many are there for LIFE without parole.. Who doesn't KNOW that??

Secondly, your talk of being responsible, and knowing stuff before you can vote, reminds me of poll taxes and literacy tests. Those ideas are RACIST, RACIST, and even more RACIST than that.. Who doesn't know THAT??

Third, I'm fine with leaving the voting age at 18.

excon

PS> On second thought. If you had to know stuff BEFORE you vote, it would eliminate most Republicans. That doesn't sound half bad to me..

What??? You didn't know we send kids to PRISON, and have been for YEARS!!

What percentage of minors are ever tried as adults for any crime they commit? It's a pretty low percentage. The ones that are and are in jail for life ,deserve to be there. Most of them should have gotten the death penalty and probably would have if they committed their murders at 18 or more. In fact it had to be a pretty bad crime before they could be.

Its not automatic... and that's a key fact you omitted.

Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) - Juvenile defendants (http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=tp&tid=236)

The people that think children should vote are also the same people that are against any form of ID being required at the polls who also think Illegals have a right to vote as well as dead people and people in nursing homes unable to even feed themselves or recognize family members. And think they have the right to vote as many times in an election as they can find time to pull off. As a number of Democrat party officials have been caught doing in recent years.

Back to the question without the BS mumbo jumbo. If the law deems you are of age to defend your country, then you deserve a beer and a vote. It's 18 in the US. Doubt if it goes lower than that!

I think the age should be 21. The only exception for that would be 18 if participating in the military. In todays day and age with the coddeling of youth going on they have no concept of reality. At 18 they are still at the point of being under their parents wing rather then being on their own. Without a reality check they cant possibly think in a critical manner enough to be involved in the voting process. Atleast if they are on their own for alittle 18-21 they can see what it is like to be responsible and what it is like in the real world away from the parents shelter.

Hello again,

Don't stupid people deserve representation? If you want it to be the smartest, the left will RULE... Who doesn't know that?

excon

Back to the question without the BS mumbo jumbo. If the law deems you are of age to defend your country, then you deserve a beer and a vote. It's 18 in the US. Doubt if it goes lower than that!

most state have the legal drinking age at 21 ,not that I agree with that . Most 16 years olds don't bother to vote in their school student council elections ,and the students that win it are the ones that promise the most bs and are most popular .....it's like voting for Bernie Sanders ,or the businessman from NY .

Hello again,

Don't stupid people deserve representation? If you want it to be the smartest, the left will RULE... Who doesn't know that?

excon

We see how well the left have done everyplace else... Detroit is their crowing achievement. Product of the decades of Democrat "Leadership".

Total failures everyplace with horrible economies. The best employers flee liberal areas because liberals hate businesses. And those jobs leave with them.

They suck as educators as well. Education isn't brainwashing with propaganda, and propaganda is all the left has to go on.

Technology and cheap labor runs the factories out of the country, along with emerging global markets... and cheap labor. Beer is as easy to get in America as a gun, and any dope you can imagine by young and old legal and illegal, despite the right wing holler machine. Youngsters don't make policy or practice, old duffs do, and Detroit is hardly the only place with problem, righties just say it is. None of which has anything to do with the topic as usual.

The kids didn't screw up the world... we did. Simple truth own it.

Technology and cheap labor runs the factories out of the country, along with emerging global markets... and cheap labor. Beer is as easy to get in America as a gun, and any dope you can imagine by young and old legal and illegal, despite the right wing holler machine. Youngsters don't make policy or practice, old duffs do, and Detroit is hardly the only place with problem, righties just say it is. None of which has anything to do with the topic as usual.

The kids didn't screw up the world... we did. Simple truth own it.

Maybe you did. I don't own it.

Technology and cheap labor runs the factories out of the country, along with emerging global markets... and cheap labor. Beer is as easy to get in America as a gun, and any dope you can imagine by young and old legal and illegal, despite the right wing holler machine. Youngsters don't make policy or practice, old duffs do, and Detroit is hardly the only place with problem, righties just say it is. None of which has anything to do with the topic as usual.

The kids didn't screw up the world... we did. Simple truth own it. No it's the people that believe Businesses and the rich can pay the bills for the free stuff the rest gets that ran the businesses out of the country. Don't say WE did it when it's the left and all the rest that expect something for nothing that did it.

No business can compete in that environment. There is no level of productivity that can overcome the cost associated with all those imposed upon them. It used to be enough up to that certain breaking point when it forced them to close or move offshore.

Nothing is free....the people that expect free stuff are the least willing to work for free themselves to pay for it. And coincidentally its the young who think they are entitled to everything without working for it or paying their dues to earn it that are the most guilty.

Our grandparents, our parents and even those of us that are over 50 have not had everything handed to us. (except for certain minorities but that's for another discussion).

If you wanted something you worked hard enough to pay for it or you did without it.

gotta love it . The lefties create the scenario where businesses have to flee a locality ,or a nation ;and then rail against the business that take that option . IE the US has the highest corporate tax rate in the free world . Then when a business exits to a nation with less taxes the lefties and the Trumpsters threaten tariffs .

I need a score card, I have a hard time figuring out who is on first, what inning is it and what is the score? Who is pitching, is he a lefty or a righty. Most of you guys who have done a lot of cheering have been in the stands for a long time and as a newbie, I am out in right field. Whatever!!

I think you will find more right leaning than left here, some are actually sitting on the fence. So you better understand the lead question here originated because a leftist leader suggested a change and cynically that is because the young who have little experience of living under radical leftist policies think they will be advantaged where the government will give them something to keep them sweet, that might be more welfare, cheap access to higher education and training and even jobs

Most of the people in college aren't even smart enough to be there in the first place. Or waste huge amounts of money on fields of study that won't or at best are highly unlikely to land them a job. Then whine about having to pay it back.

Nobody had a gun to their heads when they enrolled and picked those majors. They did it on their own. If they were half as smart as they think they are, they would have picked courses of study that actually have jobs...and not Liberal arts or Ancient Greek Mythology, or Philosophy. That last one is a good one...I wonder if they ever sat down to ponder where exactly the jobs for people that study that are? Apparently not.


And people like this vote.....scary..isn't it.

No people like that find their way into government and politics that's scary

Sad but true.

The problem is those who are inexperienced are attracted by handouts and hate change

The problem is those who are inexperienced are attracted by handouts and hate change

Yeah, where is my "Obama Phone", as a small example.

Ever try to get a job without a phone? Plus the program started under Ronald Reagan, and every president since has continued it. That's scary that you don't know the FACTS and call others DUMB, and shouldn't be allowed to vote for it!

Obviously you are not a part of the INFORMED electorate, despite your claims of vast experience!

You are ENTITLED to your opinion, as fact less as that may be!

They had Obama phones under Regan?

This was a cell phone in 1987. Doctors and rich people had them. Nobody else could afford them.

~

They’re Reagan phones, not Obama phones | MonroeNews.com (http://www.monroenews.com/news/2013/jan/15/theyre-reagan-phones-not-obama-phones/)


But did you know the history of this program dates to two previous presidents? And the service isn't funded by taxpayer dollars. The discounted, sometimes free, wireless services that started to become available to low income households in 2005, under George W. Bush's administration, is an expanded and updated version of the Lifeline telephone service program that launched in 1985, under Ronald Reagan's administration.

A landline is a necessity... but a cell phone is a luxury when you don't have money because of the differences in cost. And certainly everyone in the house doesn't "NEED" their own personal cell phone either. Unless they can afford to pay for it themselves.

Maybe the poor need an Armani, and a Coach subsidy so they can afford luxury clothing too.

Ever try to get a job without a phone? Plus the program started under Ronald Reagan, and every president since has continued it. That's scary that you don't know the FACTS and call others DUMB, and shouldn't be allowed to vote for it!

Obviously you are not a part of the INFORMED electorate, despite your claims of vast experience!

You are ENTITLED to your opinion, as fact less as that may be!

Hey Bubba or Bubbaette, I did not call others DUMB, lift the tail of a Donkey and kiss.

Do you ever do your own research before you post? These are luxury items?

Top 50 Safelink Phones - UpTo 70% Off Safelink Phones, New Models - Compare Safelink Phones Cheaper prices - compare99.com (http://www.compare99.com/s/Safelink-Phones.html?)

Net10 even offers free (reconditioned) cell phones. Their minutes plan is very reasonable. (Yes, I have one of their phones, an ancient one.)

So this allows the electioneers to keep the message going but youth has to do more than receive a message to vote, how advanced are they towards an app which will allow SMS or other vote? Social media is the way to go to get youth more engaged in voting

So this allows the electioneers to keep the message going but youth has to do more than receive a message to vote, how advanced are they towards an app which will allow SMS or other vote? Social media is the way to go to get youth more engaged in voting

Great way to bankrupt a country... by getting MORE people to vote for more free stuff they expect other people to pay for.

Meaning people that have no concept of the value of a dollar... that were brought up to believe they are entitled to everything they want and never have to work hard to pay for it themselves. Maybe your school systems are better than ours are today... here all they do is teach the evil rich people owe you everything. And never both teaching all you are entitled to is what you can afford to pay for yourself.

Undoubted our school system is better, discipline is enforced, but some are there too long as is undoubtedly the case in yours, there is no point in educating a child to university level if they cannot afford to take up the opportunity. This is the problem with our schools everyone is educated to that level, so they could, theoretically, commence an advanced degree, but we have no ethos of sending the kids off to "college". Those who want to enter university find a way, those that don't, well they don't find a job easily.

Yes you have found many ways to bankrupt your country and the debt must be a tremendous burden. Some free stuff is important, like medical care when necessary and looking after people, but sometimes you can have too many public servants, too many public institutions. You have 50 states, we have 6 in the same area, we have about 1000 local government areas, couldn't imagine how many you have, but those sort of costs can be a huge burden, our schools are administered at state level, yours at local level, again costs upon costs. You see our basic thinking is different and I think that is so for the people who expect something for nothing

Undoubted our school system is better, discipline is enforced, but some are there too long as is undoubtedly the case in yours, there is no point in educating a child to university level if they cannot afford to take up the opportunity. This is the problem with our schools everyone is educated to that level, so they could, theoretically, commence an advanced degree, but we have no ethos of sending the kids off to "college". Those who want to enter university find a way, those that don't, well they don't find a job easily.

Yes you have found many ways to bankrupt your country and the debt must be a tremendous burden. Some free stuff is important, like medical care when necessary and looking after people, but sometimes you can have too many public servants, too many public institutions. You have 50 states, we have 6 in the same area, we have about 1000 local government areas, couldn't imagine how many you have, but those sort of costs can be a huge burden, our schools are administered at state level, yours at local level, again costs upon costs. You see our basic thinking is different and I think that is so for the people who expect something for nothing


What makes it different is population densities. We have a significantly larger population. And well, as is the case everywhere... the more money a handful of people have control over.. the more greed and personal gain become the name of the game.

If we consolidated more then that temptation is even higher.

The county I live has a $2.5 BILLION dollar SCHOOL budget for this year. And for that kind of money you would think education would have a priority over indocrination...but you would be wrong. Though our schools are better than some of the surrounding counties....they are nowhere near what was accomplished 30-40 years ago at a fraction of the money (even factoring in for inflation)

Fairfax County Public Schools - FY 2015 Budget (http://www.fcps.edu/news/fy2015.shtml)

Yes a great deal of detail and yes population densities have impact on many things, however we are also highly urbanised with all the problems that that brings and with a multicultural complexity thrown in in some places. I think the difference lies in the willingness to centralise, our governments at state and federal level have worked hard to drive out duplication and there is a great deal of pressure on how funding is applied, A couple of years ago under a leftist government an ambitious funding revue was implemented which saw funding increased significantly but that brings with it the attendant strings like national cirriculum and teacher performance revue. I heard recently that large number of teachers were leaving the system which could produce some interesting results in future

Apparently you might spend a slightly higher percentage of GDP on education than we do but that isn't broken down between sectors and it is hard to get recent numbers, I would expect your tertiary sector would be a big number.