Those whacky Californians are at it again...

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Spencer278

Don't old people recive more goverment benifits then the 14-18 year olds? I think the voting age should be 16 because that is when laws tend to start effecting people more.

Those old people paid into the system their entire adult lives to receive those benefits (I assume you're talking about Social Security). Children under the age of 18 pay little to nothing into the system, and (except in rare cases of extremely violent crimes) can't even go to jail. Why should you be allowed to vote when you've paid nothing in, and suffer little to no consequences under the law?

And yes, quality >>> quantity. "Might does not make right." A million lemmings still jump into the sea together -- democracy at its finest example.

 

[Brutuskend]

Did no one see my post above?
Or do they just not have any thoughts on in?

 

[bradruth]

Originally posted by: Brutuskend
Did no one see my post above?
Or do they just not have any thoughts on in?

Draft = bad.

Happy?

 

[Brutuskend]

Originally posted by: bradruth

Originally posted by: Brutuskend
Did no one see my post above?
Or do they just not have any thoughts on in?

Draft = bad.

Happy?

Well, happier!

 

[bradruth]

Originally posted by: Brutuskend

Originally posted by: bradruth

Originally posted by: Brutuskend
Did no one see my post above?
Or do they just not have any thoughts on in?

Draft = bad.

Happy?

Well, happier!

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: SampSon
Seeing as how only about 40% of the population votes, I don't think making voting HARDER is what we need.

It could be argued that so few people exercise their franchise because it is so freely given to them.

 

[Spencer278]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Spencer278

Don't old people recive more goverment benifits then the 14-18 year olds? I think the voting age should be 16 because that is when laws tend to start effecting people more.

Those old people paid into the system their entire adult lives to receive those benefits (I assume you're talking about Social Security). Children under the age of 18 pay little to nothing into the system, and (except in rare cases of extremely violent crimes) can't even go to jail. Why should you be allowed to vote when you've paid nothing in, and suffer little to no consequences under the law?

And yes, quality >>> quantity. "Might does not make right." A million lemmings still jump into the sea together -- democracy at its finest example.

So how much does it cost to purchace the right to vote? Should old people not get to vote if they have paid less into SS then they have gotten back in benifits. How about house wives should they loss the right to vote because they haven't paid taxes? Anyone who is effected by the goverment should have the right to vote.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Spencer278

So how much does it cost to purchace the right to vote? Should old people not get to vote if they have paid less into SS then they have gotten back in benifits. How about house wives should they loss the right to vote because they haven't paid taxes? Anyone who is effected by the goverment should have the right to vote.

So should newborn babies be given the right to vote as well?

And do not try to confuse the issue by trying to say that I think the right to vote can/should be purchased. That is not what I am saying at all, and I resent your implied insult. I'm saying it should be earned.
What you want is the privileges of franchise without its consequences. You wanna vote at 14? Fine, then pay taxes, sign up for Selective Service (and expect to be drafted if it is ever brought back), and expect to be tried as an adult for any crime you might commit.
Otherwise, you have no right to a vote in the public government, where real decisions with real consequences are made.
Just like any brat kid... wants his cake and eat it too

the classic sign of immaturity. I rest my case.

 

[Spencer278]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Spencer278

So how much does it cost to purchace the right to vote? Should old people not get to vote if they have paid less into SS then they have gotten back in benifits. How about house wives should they loss the right to vote because they haven't paid taxes? Anyone who is effected by the goverment should have the right to vote.

So should newborn babies be given the right to vote as well?

And do not try to confuse the issue by trying to say that I think the right to vote can/should be purchased. That is not what I am saying at all, and I resent your implied insult. I'm saying it should be earned.
What you want is the privileges of franchise without its consequences. You wanna vote at 14? Fine, then pay taxes, sign up for Selective Service (and expect to be drafted if it is ever brought back), and expect to be tried as an adult for any crime you might commit.
Otherwise, you have no right to a vote in the public government, where real decisions with real consequences are made.
Just like any brat kid... wants his cake and eat it too

the classic sign of immaturity. I rest my case.

So for my grand father to keep his right to vote not only does he pay taxes he has to sign up for the Selective Service?

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Spencer278
So for my grand father to keep his right to vote not only does he pay taxes he has to sign up for the Selective Service?

Sigh... what makes you think he didn't back when he was of draftable age?

 

[Spencer278]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Spencer278
So for my grand father to keep his right to vote not only does he pay taxes he has to sign up for the Selective Service?

Sigh... what makes you think he didn't back when he was of draftable age?

Yeah but the point is he isn't now. What makes you think that the 16 year old won't when he turns 18. Isn't their something wrong with requiring that people who have never had a chance to vote for their represitives is required to register to defend their country. Shouldn't the people going to war have a voice in who sends them?

 

[Mill]

Believe it or not, but people age 28-40 typically vote about as much as 18-25 year olds. I was reading a chart today in my book talking about that. Most likely to vote are the elderly, rich, or really anyone over 50. I haven't missed an election yet.

 

[Feldenak]

Originally posted by: Spencer278

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Spencer278
So for my grand father to keep his right to vote not only does he pay taxes he has to sign up for the Selective Service?

Sigh... what makes you think he didn't back when he was of draftable age?

Yeah but the point is he isn't now. What makes you think that the 16 year old won't when he turns 18. Isn't their something wrong with requiring that people who have never had a chance to vote for their represitives is required to register to defend their country. Shouldn't the people going to war have a voice in who sends them?

Your grandfather has paid and participated in the society throughout his life (taxes, draft/Selective Service, etc...) what have you done (at 14-16 I'm assuming) for society? In addition to your being a drain on the society's resources, you face no real consequences for your actions (Oh no! Anything but juvenile hall!!).

 

[ViRGE]

I actually read about this on another site, and I hit an argument I can't counter: taxation without representation of United States citizens. I don't want to agree with it, but I can't argue against it - teenagers are taxed without representation. Somone mind saving me from myself here?:Q

 

[Spencer278]

Originally posted by: Feldenak

Originally posted by: Spencer278

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Spencer278
So for my grand father to keep his right to vote not only does he pay taxes he has to sign up for the Selective Service?

Sigh... what makes you think he didn't back when he was of draftable age?

Yeah but the point is he isn't now. What makes you think that the 16 year old won't when he turns 18. Isn't their something wrong with requiring that people who have never had a chance to vote for their represitives is required to register to defend their country. Shouldn't the people going to war have a voice in who sends them?

Your grandfather has paid and participated in the society throughout his life (taxes, draft/Selective Service, etc...) what have you done (at 14-16 I'm assuming) for society? In addition to your being a drain on the society's resources, you face no real consequences for your actions (Oh no! Anything but juvenile hall!!).

Old people are more of a drain on society's resources and they will be never pay taxes or be drafted again. Why should they be able to vote them extra benifits but the young who will pay taxes and maybe drafted are not allowed to vote. If old people are irresposible with their vote it will never come back to bite them in the ass. That is not true with the young they will be stuck with the chooses they make.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: ViRGE
I actually read about this on another site, and I hit an argument I can't counter: taxation without representation of United States citizens. I don't want to agree with it, but I can't argue against it - teenagers are taxed without representation. Somone mind saving me from myself here?:Q

Teenagers under the age of 18 are still in the legal guardianship of their parents. Their parents have the right of franchise. Representation requirement fulfilled.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: ViRGE
I actually read about this on another site, and I hit an argument I can't counter: taxation without representation of United States citizens. I don't want to agree with it, but I can't argue against it - teenagers are taxed without representation. Somone mind saving me from myself here?:Q

Represented through their parents. Most teens don't work anyway.

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ViRGE
I actually read about this on another site, and I hit an argument I can't counter: taxation without representation of United States citizens. I don't want to agree with it, but I can't argue against it - teenagers are taxed without representation. Somone mind saving me from myself here?:Q

Teenagers under the age of 18 are still in the legal guardianship of their parents. Their parents have the right of franchise. Representation requirement fulfilled.

Ok, shot down(stupid teenagers). What if they disagree with their parents views, and do work; then what?

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: ViRGE

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ViRGE
I actually read about this on another site, and I hit an argument I can't counter: taxation without representation of United States citizens. I don't want to agree with it, but I can't argue against it - teenagers are taxed without representation. Somone mind saving me from myself here?:Q

Teenagers under the age of 18 are still in the legal guardianship of their parents. Their parents have the right of franchise. Representation requirement fulfilled.

Ok, shot down(stupid teenagers). What if they disagree with their parents views, and do work; then what?

But, they aren't adults period. Legally they are represented by their parents. So, they only have about 4 years until they can vote. Assuming they start working at 14.

 

[Spencer278]

Originally posted by: Mill

Originally posted by: ViRGE

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ViRGE
I actually read about this on another site, and I hit an argument I can't counter: taxation without representation of United States citizens. I don't want to agree with it, but I can't argue against it - teenagers are taxed without representation. Somone mind saving me from myself here?:Q

Teenagers under the age of 18 are still in the legal guardianship of their parents. Their parents have the right of franchise. Representation requirement fulfilled.

Ok, shot down(stupid teenagers). What if they disagree with their parents views, and do work; then what?

But, they aren't adults period. Legally they are represented by their parents. So, they only have about 4 years until they can vote. Assuming they start working at 14.

Great logic. Why not change it so they can vote at 14?

 

[SweetSweetLeroyBrown]

Voting should be limited to Real Property Owners.

All you cretins and serfs living in apartments are just subjects to us landowners.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: Mill
Believe it or not, but people age 28-40 typically vote about as much as 18-25 year olds. I was reading a chart today in my book talking about that. Most likely to vote are the elderly, rich, or really anyone over 50. I haven't missed an election yet.

You're not over 50, not elderly....you must be rich!

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: Spencer278

Originally posted by: Feldenak

Originally posted by: Spencer278

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Spencer278
So for my grand father to keep his right to vote not only does he pay taxes he has to sign up for the Selective Service?

Sigh... what makes you think he didn't back when he was of draftable age?

Yeah but the point is he isn't now. What makes you think that the 16 year old won't when he turns 18. Isn't their something wrong with requiring that people who have never had a chance to vote for their represitives is required to register to defend their country. Shouldn't the people going to war have a voice in who sends them?

Your grandfather has paid and participated in the society throughout his life (taxes, draft/Selective Service, etc...) what have you done (at 14-16 I'm assuming) for society? In addition to your being a drain on the society's resources, you face no real consequences for your actions (Oh no! Anything but juvenile hall!!).

Old people are more of a drain on society's resources and they will be never pay taxes or be drafted again. Why should they be able to vote them extra benifits but the young who will pay taxes and maybe drafted are not allowed to vote. If old people are irresposible with their vote it will never come back to bite them in the ass. That is not true with the young they will be stuck with the chooses they make.

You're making a good argument to get rid of social programs/entitlements, which I agree with.

 

[CPA]

Originally posted by: ViRGE

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ViRGE
I actually read about this on another site, and I hit an argument I can't counter: taxation without representation of United States citizens. I don't want to agree with it, but I can't argue against it - teenagers are taxed without representation. Somone mind saving me from myself here?:Q

Teenagers under the age of 18 are still in the legal guardianship of their parents. Their parents have the right of franchise. Representation requirement fulfilled.

Ok, shot down(stupid teenagers). What if they disagree with their parents views, and do work; then what?

now that's a loaded question, because no teenager EVER agrees with their parents.

 

[Mill]

Originally posted by: CPA

Originally posted by: Mill
Believe it or not, but people age 28-40 typically vote about as much as 18-25 year olds. I was reading a chart today in my book talking about that. Most likely to vote are the elderly, rich, or really anyone over 50. I haven't missed an election yet.

You're not over 50, not elderly....you must be rich!

I wish. I vote because I think it is a necessary and proper thing. I also vote because I want to have some control over my government.