What is so great about it? Not trying to offend anyone, but give me one reason why I should pay attention to politics. It just seems like sides are constantly arguing over a subject.
Essentially, who gets the job, and if they're so qualified to make those kinds of decisions, couldn't their talents be better spent on a more useful job - after all, voter participation in those over 18 isn't great, why bother setting up a system to let in a trickle of youngsters mature enough to cast their own single votes?
Additionally, what would the test be? Who writes the test? Who pays the people to write the tests - and there will have to be more then one; otherwise you could just cheat.
*Shrugs* Not to destroy my argument in one post but honestly that's not my job. Then again the test could simply be an A.C.T. or S.A.T add on for extra money. Also if the test was used like this very few people would have to be involved in it's creation.
Only 40%-20% of the averages persons taxes aren't based on income, and with the offset fact that the government pays them welfare so the money just cycles back well you know.
Shrugs* Not to destroy my argument in one post but honestly that's not my job. Then again the test could simply be an A.C.T. or S.A.T add on for extra money. Also if the test was used like this very few people would have to be involved in it's creation.
It kind of does though. In spite of 'very few people' it still needs to be graded & new tests need to be formed and they could be putting that time and effort into something more valuable.
It kind of does though. In spite of 'very few people' it still needs to be graded & new tests need to be formed and they could be putting that time and effort into something more valuable.
Scantron , besides what do you consider "more valuable"
Scantron , besides what do you consider "more valuable"
More valuable? Anything else =P
I don't see the value in letting kids vote, even if they're educated. There would be a lot of effort to change the system, and realistically, we wouldn't get much out of it as a society. Waste of time & money.
There would be a lot of effort to change the system, and realistically, we wouldn't get much out of it as a society
where would the effort for the system be??? just let minors vote.
i do not know how you get to the concept, that there are cirteria like paying taxes or being educated to vote. every citizen over a certain age(depends on the country) has the right and duty to vote. in my opinon the age was set up randomly close to the age where you graduate from school and therefore can take a full time job if you di not decide to educate yourself more.
where would the effort for the system be??? just let minors vote. i do not know how you get to the concept, that there are cirteria like paying taxes or being educated to vote. every citizen over a certain age(depends on the country) has the right and duty to vote. in my opinon the age was set up randomly close to the age where you graduate from school and therefore can take a full time job if you di not decide to educate yourself more.
... it was set up randomly... at the age where you graduate from school and can take a full time job or further schooling? That's not really randomly.
18 is commonly regarded as the coming of age to being an 'adult' and not a child. That's pretty much it with the distinction. And it's government bureacracy - they can barely get anything done as is. I wouldn't be interested in dumping more on their plate to legalize minors the right to vote or take part in court precedings. It's not as though the system is broken and doesn't work, so why bother putting *any* effort into fixing something that isn't busted?
The one thing that will make our democratic system fail is indifference. If the people don't care about what's going on in Washington, the politicians will do as they please, and not get seconded by anyone. And that's dangerous. The voting age issue is just a subset of that larger problem - young people these days(on average) just don't care about politics anymore.
18 is commonly regarded as the coming of age to being an 'adult' and not a child. That's pretty much it with the distinction
. it was set up randomly... at the age where you graduate from school and can take a full time job or further schooling? That's not really randomly.
yeah youre right. setting the age was not completly random. but there would be no problem, not to mention an effort, if you would like to change this age to lets say 14. the only problem is the bureaucracy you have to face doing it and the democratic process you have to finish first. so all problems you face are systemrelated and not problems by itself.
offtopic: for i use english as a foreign language, and have realized, that spelling and grammar seems to be quite important in this forum, it would be nice if you guys could give me some feedback on my english, according understanding of the message, grammar and spelling. any corrections(rather pointing out grammar construction mistakes, than typing mistakes) are welcome.
the only taxes, that come without having a job, is the value added tax, or other taxes that occur if you consume some goods. therefore because illegal immigrants spend money in the USA, they also pay this taxes and should be able to vote, if paying taxes is the criterium for voting
Let's examine the typical unemployed British citizen, living solely on benefits, to demonstrate my point. In Britain, the unemployement benefit, disregarding child benefits, is £50 a week. That £50 is not tax free. For example, the money you get on the dole has already been taxed by the government. Living on a council estate is not free. The dole money you get is the cash left over, after the government has taxed and deducted a sum of money for the rent of the council housing. I believe the actual sum spent per person, per week is £150, but £100 is taxed, albeit to keep enabling them to stay out of a job.
if you say that unemployment money is taxed, it does not make any sense, because the people get money from the governement. saying, that they got 100pound more and that this are taxes is the same as saying, they got 50pounds without paying taxes.
if you say that unemployment money is taxed, it does not make any sense, because the people get money from the governement. saying, that they got 100pound more and that this are taxes is the same as saying, they got 50pounds without paying taxes.
That's like saying I earn £30k a year after tax, but £50k a year before tax. They are the same nominal amount, but it does not change the fact that they have indeed been taxed at some point.
yeah it is called rent not taxes.
It's a different system when you live on property owned by the state. I explained it all in my previous post anyway.
]That's like saying I earn ã30k a year after tax, but ã50k a year before tax. They are the same nominal amount, but it does not change the fact that they have indeed been taxed at some point.[/quote]
youre money before taxes does not come from the state. so you would get it if there were no taxes. if you get it from the state, it is just a redistribution and another name. you have not earned it, and the state decides how much you get and how much taxes you pay. so it is the same as saying you get what is left over and say it is without taxation.
hope you can get my point. i am not sure whether i wrote it really clear
