We already have age limits at the lower end. Why are people so against age limits at the upper end?

  • BorgDrone@lemmy.one
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    We should move to a system where votes are weighted based on age. Up to, say, 40 years of age your vote has a weight of 1.0. Above 40 the weight should reduce linearly each year until it reaches 0.1 at the age that equals the current life expectancy. Basically: the closer you are to death the shorter you are affected by the consequences of your votes, so you should have less influence. Older people are probe to short term thinking as they won’t live to see the long term effects anyway.

    • StringTheory@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      Ah, Dred Scott vs Sanford raises its ugly head again.

      When you get old enough to be worth 0.6, shall we call it “3/5” just for old times’ sake? As a compromise?