Higher, Lower Or Status Quo?

[ToraToraTora]

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-46737013
I think Higher.

[spathiphyllum]

Kval, TTT forgets he was once the young who abused and squandered who was looked own on by his elders for being young and (obviously) foolish with his vote / ideas for the world.

Blaming 18-25 year olds for brexit (or other political events) is.. well... absolutely hilarious.

[dannyk13]

Rockrose //How is what I said any different to other comments about education and such like//
Ageism?

[ToraToraTora]

danny 12:23: come on he has an important position in his village.

[dannyk13]

TTT, so he has . I had forgotten that. lol

[naomi24]

Rockrose, //How is what I said any different to other comments about education and such like//

It’s reasonable to assume that retired people have rather more experience of life than young people. Nevertheless you would like all of them written off.

[Rockrose]

Rubbish Danny no more than the comments about youngsters.
Naomi be quick your high horse is getting away!

[ummmm]

But saying we should have an A Level in economics before we can vote? Is that right thinking?

[naomi24]

No answer then, Rockrose. Okay.

[dannyk13]

Rockrose comments about youngsters is not an offence discrimination on the grounds of ageism is.

[naomi24]

ummmm, //saying we should have an A Level in economics before we can vote? Is that right thinking? //

No. It's nonsense.

[Rockrose]

When you can explain fully how my comments about those that are retired are any different about the comments made about the young then maybe I will respond to you.
But that’s not your style is it?

[spathiphyllum]

"life" for a retired person would be totally different to "life" of a person starting work and getting fully into the swing of the system.

Also, collectivly thinking about groups of people via age, is an issue. You class certian age of not being bale to vote, but a % of that age is actually more qualified to vote than a certain % of a higher age.

Times change. The up and coming generation is exactly that.

[Rockrose]

So report me Danny

[naomi24]

If you're talking to me, Rockrose, I've told you. See my post at 12:29.

[dannyk13]

Rockrose . I would if I thought for one moment that your suggestion was to be taken seriously.

[Rockrose]

Naomi they live in the past and see everything through rose tinted glasses, they refuse to look to the future but prefer to look back.
My own father is very dismissive of people his age too especially after the shambles recently

[Rockrose]

Go ahead Danny you would be laughed at.

[kvalidir]

There are pros and cons with both ends of the human age, that's obvious that's why it's necessary for as many people as possible to vote. 16 year olds granted will have much less life experience than someone who is 80 but equally they won't be likely to be suffering from dementia either. I'm not suggesting that anyone over 35 is a shambling wreck, but a reasonable proportion of pensioners have some cognitive impairment, dementia, Alzheimers etc ( 1 in 14 over 60 and 1 in 6 over 80). THAT is a huge number of people able to vote and by some people's reckoning on here more equipped to vote than someone of my age, and frankly that's crazy.

[jim360]

The voting age is entirely arbitrary anyway. There are no meaningful arguments against lowering it, because trying to link it to life experience makes a rather lazy assumption about how much experience even adults have. Likewise, there can be no argument for raising it that stands up to any scrutiny -- if the idea is that people at 18 aren't somehow experienced enough, why not? Why does this change at 21?

The only sensible thing to do, if you are to link voting to age at all, is to link it to the definition of legal adulthood. That is the age of 18 currently.

[dannyk13]

As far as I can see the only person deserving of being laughed at is you.