About two years ago now, I was sitting on a bench in Central Park writing my initial thoughts on what I didn’t know then but would come to know as Youth Rights.
I don’t think I’ll ever remember why she did, but about halfway through the day Greta Thunberg came to mind, and I looked up the voting age in Sweden. And my blood boiled in a way I’ve never experienced in my entire life.
16 years old and one of the most famous and recognizable political activists in the world. 16 years old giving a confident, impassioned, admonishing speech to the fucking UN. 16 years old with no legal right to a voice in her country. No voice to vote for the policies she believed in or the people who might enact them.
My writing, already vitriolic to a fault, managed to become even moreso but with the topic abruptly switched to voting. For the first time in my life, I considered where I’d place the voting age if I could do so unilaterally. Not long into considering it I had a thought that I wrote down immediately, a question I’ve asked well over 100 times at this point with no substantial answer:
When is it reasonable to say to a person, ‘If you’re not at least this old, then I don’t give a fuck what you think’?
And from the moment I had that thought, I have been unable to place the voting age.
I think between 16 and 20 is acceptable, but I have one kid who turns 18 a week after the election. So will be almost 22 before they can vote in a presidential election. 19 or 20 before a local or state race.
So I think 16 makes more sense, because the national races being only every 4 years disenfranchises too many young people, everyone who is 15, 16, or 17 at this election won’t actually get to vote at 18.
Honestly I think everything should move to 20.
Alcohol purchase, consumption. Military conscription, draft, voluntary service Age of majority, marriageable age Voting with automatic voting registration Drug consumption including nicotine, caffeine, and cabinets Driving ( permits at a prior age with supervision )
We know people’s brains aren’t really formed enough even at 18 to consider people adults, this younger age is a hold over from even younger ages and doesn’t reflect reality.
People who are not fully developed shouldn’t be able to make decisions with the full weight of adulthood, to take any other position is barbaric.
We’re definitely not at the point that this brain development science should be affecting policy. Here’s an article from 2022 featuring commentary from several neuroscientists. And here are a couple important quotes:
“Some 8-year-old brains exhibited a greater ‘maturation index’ than some 25 year old brains,”
The interpretation of neuroimaging is the most difficult and contentious part; in a 2020 study, 70 different research teams analyzed the same data set and came away with wildly different conclusions.
And here is a different article written entirely by a neuroscientist and released earlier this year.
16
if you can get taxed as a worker at 16 you get to vote.
Aside from practical reasons like being able to read and write, I think the age to vote should be as low as possible.
People are concerned that parents will coerce their kids, but that would happen across the board. It would come out in the wash.
The most important thing is that folks are civically engaged as young as possible. They are invested in the outcome and exercise their rights early.
I would say a good starting point would be third grade. Right when you begin learning social studies.
People over 80 don’t have as much of a stake in the future. Maybe they should lose the vote?
https://www.childstats.gov/AMERICASCHILDREN/tables/pop1.asp
70-something million children. Let’s make them eligible to vote, and let parents vote on their behalf if they’re too young. As another poster said, the parents who abuse that on “both sides” would more or less come out in the wash. The parents who took it seriously would probably adjust both their vote and their child’s vote to benefit the child.
(One interesting thing is that would mean citizen children of non-citizen immigrants would get to vote.)
No. No one gets “extra votes” for kids.
En verdad no tengo problemas con la edad para votar actual.
Estoy convencido, como alguien ya adulto que pasó por la adolescencia, de que los adolescentes no tienen idea de que es lo que quieren en la vida, son muy volubles y manipulables y no es hasta que llegan a la adultez que pueden empezar crearse una idea de cuáles son sus ideales politicos. Vamos, incluso los adultos no lo tienen muy claro hasta que están más cerca de los 30 que de los 20, pero aumentar la edad de votación hasta las 30 o más sacaría a muchos de votantes de la ecuación, la mayoría de ellos gente con ideas progresistas.
Los 18 quizá no sea ideal, pero es aceptable. Hablas de Greta, por lo que he leído recientemente ella a sus dieciocho ha madurado aún más sus ideas, dándose cuenta de que los problemas son más sistemático, algo de lo que quizá no era consciente a sus 16. En lo personal, hay un montón de cosas que no consideraba a mis 16 que no fue hasta mis 22, cuando pude votar por primera vez, que me di cuenta de ellas.
I think rhe voting age should be the lower of the minimum age to labor or the age of potential conscription less the age of the longest-term official whoss job includes sending people to war.
In the USA, that would put the voting age all the way down to 12. And having both been 12 myself once and having close family who were recently 12, I’m entirely OK with that.
I live in a country where the voting age is 16. It used to be 18 and I don’t think this change has caused many concrete policy changes: young people aren’t big or unified enough a voting bloc to meaningfully affect the results.
I tend to be in favor of letting young people have more rights at a younger age in general (in part because I remember being young and not seeing any good reason why I shouldn’t), so I’m definitely not in favor of raising it to 18 again or further.
From an Australian perspective, my proposal is:
- Eligible to vote at 16.
- Compulsory voting at 18.
- A citizen’s vote has a weight of 100% until 20, then drops 5% at each birthday that ends with a 0.
The reason for the diminishing weight of a vote is to correlate with the diminished exposure political decisions will have on the citizen.
Strong agree with your first 2 points, stronger disagree with your last point. Do you seriously think a 40 year old doesn’t deserve a vote?
Using the formula as written, anyone aged 40-49 would have a vote weighted at 85%. You’d have to make it to 210 years old to reach 0%.
Compulsory voting at 18.
HAHAHAHAHA
A citizen’s vote has a weight of 100% until 20, then drops 5% at each birthday that ends with a 0.
Oh my god you really must think age has more power than capital. Jesus hahahaha
Why you gotta be like this?
They’re probably in a bad percentile
If I had to change it I’d increase it.
The average late teenager is not suitable to have a say. And half of them are below average in that sense.
I’d like to tie it to actually being a tax payer, you pay you get a say in how your hard earned money is spent. But that would throw people who can’t work under the bus.
My teenagers work and pay taxes.
Are you a citizen, bound by law, or pay taxes? Then you have a say in who makes them.
16 - 65
This is the age you should be able to: vote drink be liable as adult for everything join the military smoke (please don’t)
One age to do everything. 18 is ‘Adult’, that means no age restriction beyond that. At least until you get to retirement age.
What is that based on, though? Why a single age for everything, when it might make sense to have it more “targeted”. For example, wouldn’t it make sense to allow voting in local elections, where things are usually simpler and cause and effect clearer, at a younger age?
Similarly, why tie drinking regulations, which are based on physiology, to voting age, which has nothing to do with it? You may say it’s because if the person is mature enough to vote they can decide themselves, but there is a huge amount of things I’m not allowed to buy or consume even if I’m allowed to vote, so that argument doesn’t hold (unless you advocate 100% liberalization of everything).
Having just a single age limit just makes it all seem very arbitrary, which it shouldn’t be.
My point is, at a specified age, you are considered an Adult. If you are old enough to die in a war and vote for candidates, you are old enough to drink, own a gun and whatever else. I personally think that 19 or 20 would be a better age for adulthood.
you are old enough to drink, own a gun and whatever else
Does that include e.g. doing hard drugs? Are you also allowed to e.g sell hard drugs, or e.g. potentially harmful products, such as power tools without certain currently legally mandated safety features if the buyer is an adult? Are you allowed to sign away certain rights that you are currently not allowed to sign away, e.g. should an adult be allowed to sign themselves over to slavery without the possibility to undo it?
I feel like it was pretty obvious they meant you could do everything that’s legal once you reach that age. I don’t think anyone is arguing that laws applying to everyone should just disappear at a certain age.
But the point is that just because you are old enough to vote, doesn’t mean you are necessarily mature enough to make certain decisions.
One could well argue that if the reason we are not allowed to heroin is related to health, or crimes due to addiction, then an 18 yo should not be allowed to use it, but a 90 year old would. I would even argue that we might want to allow hard drugs to 80 year olds, who probably can take responsibility by then.
Join the military and ask yourself that question again
I’ve already served in the military. What question am I supposed to ask again? Or do I need to re-enlist first? I’m not sure they would accept me at my age anymore.
Removed by mod
It is all arbitrary though. There are some weak arguments about mental development but other than the generally accepted rule that human brains stop developing at around 25 years old, there isn’t any hard science between 16, 18, 21, or whatever. Individuals hit developmental milestones at different ages, whether they are physical or mental. Each age-restricted activity requires different types of development. A high schooler may be able to make an informed decision on who or what to vote for, but will be subject to peer pressure to drink alcohol to a dangerous level. You can now sign up to potentially get killed in an instant at 18, but you can’t intentionally give yourself cancer slowly. Kids have better reflexes than seniors, but are also more reckless (imo both ends of the age spectrum should require more frequent driver’s testing and restrictions).
So since it’s all arbitrary, either we make everything one age, and 18 is a common median of the age-restrictions, or we ditch the restrictions entirely and rely on more extensive and expensive regulations based on individual development.
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Removed by mod
Perhaps it should be decided by a cognitive test instead of age. This is a dangerous road though, because a lot of people with cognitive disabilities can and should be allowed to vote for themselves.
Maybe the test could be made to test if a person understands what an election is and them being able to form their own opinion.
The main issue isn’t age, but rather that a lot of people vote for something that they think others expect them to vote for without ever forming an opinion of their own.
However those people should also be allowed to represent themselves, so I think all elections ought to have the option of voting for “shit, I don’t know, I have no idea what’s this is about”, and if that vote came over a certain threshold, then the election should be void and postponed for a week.
