|
WampaLord posted:How about we make election days a national holiday? The discussion's about England son. That'd mean half the people voting past about 11am would be completely shitfaced and end up doing something mentally retarded like voting the leave the EU.
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 23:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 04:57 |
|
|
GargleBlaster posted:The discussion's about England son. That'd mean half the people voting past about 11am would be completely shitfaced and end up doing something mentally retarded like voting the leave the EU. Is Withnail & I a documentary?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 23:28
|
|
|
PT6A posted:The real problem is that seniors have more influence in democratic systems because they're reliable voters, and young people are not. If you want to fix that, the solution is for young people to get off their loving lazy asses and exercise their right to vote, not to take it away from other people. There aren't so many seniors that they would comprise a majority in pretty much any western society, it's just that they're the ones who're actually voting. Old people have social and political capital that young people have no way to access. That's what's missing from your little bootstrap calculus. They control the Overton window, they control the job market and they are unwilling to engage with any ideas beyond their increasingly narrow world view. That's what leads to voter depression among the young, and no amount of yelling about how "Voting MATTERS!" will change that. A Buttery Pastry posted:What we need to do is bring back weighted voting. Divide the population into age brackets like in the graphic in the OP, and then calculate a factor for each bracket to figure out how their vote is weighted. The oldest group is defined as having a weight of 1. In this case, you end up with: I like this proposal, but I also realize it's easy as gently caress to manipulate.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 23:37
|
|
|
SSNeoman posted:Old people have social and political capital that young people have no way to access. That's what's missing from your little bootstrap calculus. They control the Overton window, they control the job market and they are unwilling to engage with any ideas beyond their increasingly narrow world view. That's what leads to voter depression among the young, and no amount of yelling about how "Voting MATTERS!" will change that. How do the elderly control the Overton Window, if not by reliably voting?
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 23:40
|
|
|
No. Taking away peoples right to vote because they have opinions you don't like is fascist thought. You get mandatory voting and a voting holiday so the 18-24 bracket votes and any of these kinds of problems go away. Of course this will never pass in the United States of America because people might start voting for their interests rather than big business interests.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 23:40
|
|
|
Nelson Mandingo posted:No. Taking away peoples right to vote because they have opinions you don't like is fascist thought. For the Greater Good.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 23:42
|
|
|
boom boom boom posted:How do the elderly control the Overton Window, if not by reliably voting? They own media conglomerates, businesses and politicians tend to be either their age or a generation after, so they do their best to coincide their interests with the elderly voters. I bet the second their interests stop being represented they will stop voting reliably and become the new Bernie Bros
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 23:45
|
|
|
Twittering easy. Voting hard.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 23:45
|
|
|
Nelson Mandingo posted:No. Taking away peoples right to vote because they have opinions you don't like is fascist thought. We had this in America before but sadly the secret ballot was introduced and bosses were not able to manipulate results so they stomped their feet and prevented people from having a day off.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
SSNeoman posted:They own media conglomerates, businesses and politicians tend to be either their age or a generation after, so they do their best to coincide their interests with the elderly voters. I don't know about The elderly owning all that. I think some elderly own that stuff. Like how some Jews have a lot of power in Hollywood, but Jews don't run Hollywood
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 23:47
|
|
|
A thought comes to mind, if old people can't vote, does that cover old people? What about, like, old gays? They're pretty cool.
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 23:48
|
|
|
SSNeoman posted:They own media conglomerates, businesses and politicians tend to be either their age or a generation after, so they do their best to coincide their interests with the elderly voters. Removing the ability of seniors to vote would not have anything to do with the fact that the most powerful people are old (because they've accumulated power throughout their life -- no one starts out running a large company at 20). It would just mean the 99.9999% of old people that aren't CEOs are now even more hosed than young people. Of all the old people I've ever met, shockingly, not one of them has been the owner of a media conglomerate!
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 23:49
|
|
|
boom boom boom posted:I don't know about The elderly owning all that. I think some elderly own that stuff. Like how some Jews have a lot of power in Hollywood, but Jews don't run Hollywood O-L-D-S
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 23:51
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Is Withnail & I a documentary? >looks it up Yes, pretty much go3 posted:Twittering easy. #Remain #EUref16 #Brexit Woo I made a difference! *retweets "please RT this tweet in aid of cancer research, it'll make you look caring to your friends"*
|
|
#
?
Jun 30, 2016 23:59
|
|
|
A Buttery Pastry posted:Alternatively, to offset the structural differences which allow older citizens to vote more regularly, By structural differences you actually mean young kids are "too loving lazy" correct? Because trying to get the new high score in Asteroids! or whatever the gently caress kids are playing these days isn't a structural disadvantage. TomViolence posted:If you're welfare or pension dependent you have more "skin in the game" than anyone else. That's not what that phrase means. The exact opposite actually.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 14:17
|
|
|
TROIKA CURES GREEK posted:By structural differences you actually mean young kids are "too loving lazy" correct? Because trying to get the new high score in Asteroids! or whatever the gently caress kids are playing these days isn't a structural disadvantage.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 14:20
|
|
|
That might not be such a great idea considering millennials are now one of the highest-risk groups for scams and fraud: https://www.yahoo.com/news/studies-show-millennials-most-vulnerable-scams-173844748.html http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2016/03/09/millennials-canada-fraud-victims_n_9412918.html http://www.huffingtonpost.com/gobankingrates/5-ways-millennials-are-in_b_7673176.html If they're susceptible to financial fraudsters, they're likely also susceptible to political fraudsters. That aside, disenfranchising voters is bad. Republicans have been doing it for years with voter ID laws and increasing incarceration rates, and it's one of the few reasons they're still relevant. If you're considering disenfranchising voters to advance your politics, you need to either reevaluate your politics or your messaging, because it is a sure sign your political movement is done. Spoondick fucked around with this message at 14:51 on Jul 1, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 14:49
|
|
|
Should [group who doesn't happen to agree with me right now] lose the right to vote? Probably not.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 14:56
|
|
|
Revoke white suffrage instead imo
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 15:43
|
|
|
Peven Stan posted:Revoke white suffrage instead imo This is the right answer
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 20:59
|
|
|
Technogeek posted:Abolish elections, bring back the divine right of kings. Then I'll have a proper dictatorship to overthrow.
|
|
#
?
Jul 1, 2016 21:04
|
|
|
No, this is as stupid as the poo poo stains who say you should have to be 35 to vote or say you should have to own property.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2016 04:00
|
|
|
Can't we just keep not coming to Thanksgiving? I feel like eventually they will get the message.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2016 04:36
|
|
|
mobby_6kl posted:But they do have a conflict of interest, and therefore should be excluded. So does anyone who pays taxes...?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2016 05:15
|
|
|
PT6A posted:Oh you mean like being more likely to be poor and in ill health? Yeah, those olds sure have it made! Generally when a whole demographic (determined by something out of a person's control, like age, sex, race, etc) differs significantly in behavior from another whole demographic, the reason has nothing to do with "this demographic is just lazy or otherwise inferior." When looking at large groups, people generally do things for a reason, and there is probably some reason young people are less likely to vote other than them just being inherently lazier than older people. edit: If you absolutely must talk about ways to limit voting, doing it based upon age is really dumb. The only way I could think of that has even a remote chance of accomplishing anything positive is to ask people questions that clearly indicate whether they're a racist rear end in a top hat (or hate the poor or some other "obviously bad" thing). Like, it's hard to feel bad for limiting the voting rights of someone who agrees with the statement "Black people are not as intelligent as white people." Even then, you're likely to run into a bunch of problems with wording the questions in a fair way that everyone can understand, so it's better to just not limit voting at all. Spoondick posted:That might not be such a great idea considering millennials are now one of the highest-risk groups for scams and fraud: There's an element of truth here, though in the end very young voters (18-25) still obviously vote much better than the elderly. I would say that they probably don't have better political views than "still young but have fully developed brains" people (maybe age 25-40 or so), though. I don't know a single person who actually had very good reasons for and a deep understanding of their political beliefs during college, even if they may have ended up with views I currently agree with. College-aged people are generally very easily persuaded (or at least moreso than people a few years older). Ytlaya fucked around with this message at 05:33 on Jul 2, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2016 05:24
|
|
|
Ytlaya posted:Generally when a whole demographic (determined by something out of a person's control, like age, sex, race, etc) differs significantly in behavior from another whole demographic, the reason has nothing to do with "this demographic is just lazy or otherwise inferior."
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 02:32
|
|
|
Limiting the franchise, for whatever reason, undermines the entire point of democratic political engagement - you have to justify your choices to yourself and others - and undermines the political legitimacy of the system. Both factors heavily outweigh whatever advantage you can theoretically get from stopping the 'wrong' people voting. So even absent questions of morality and human rights, it's actually pragmatically a bad decision. Sometimes, the process is more important than the actual outcome.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 03:31
|
|
|
If we can set a minimum age we could certainly set a maximum. Probably a bad idea until we find a better solution than democracy though.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 06:12
|
|
|
no next thread
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 06:25
|
|
|
We're better off fighting disenfranchisement at all levels and giving youth voters reason to care about not just federal elections but state and local ones too. This idea is only going to lead back to literacy tests one way or another.
|
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 06:48
|
|
|
Have all decisions made by a computer powered by the anguished and terrified brains of a thousand orphaned teenagers. Even the inevitable "kill 90% of humanity" decisions.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2016 20:04
|
|
|
Chokes McGee posted:no yes next thread.
|
|
#
?
Jul 4, 2016 03:09
|
|
|
Captain Monkey posted:yes motion tabled, to be revisited later
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 04:36
|
|
|
Chokes McGee posted:motion tabled, to be revisited later No second within the timeframe. Motion stands, no olds can vote. vv yes, this vv Yngwie Mangosteen fucked around with this message at 05:57 on Jul 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 04:46
|
|
|
just drop all pretenses and murder everyone to the right of a social democrat
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 05:40
|
|
|
my dad posted:I think old people have an unfortunate statistical tendency towards being complete idiots in general, but no, OP, taking away people's right to vote because you don't agree with them is not a good thing. I saw "people" and "complete idiots in general" and I agree, "taking away people's right to vote" is "a good thing"
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 06:08
|
|
|
this sounds awfully complicated when i could just send my parents away to the nursing home and replace their ballots with word searches while they weren't looking
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 06:41
|
|
|
gently caress the olds winter is coming and I hope to god the Tories slash the fuel allowance
|
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 07:01
|
|
|
To be fair leave voters were also on average significantly poorer and less educated, so if you want to be fair you probably are going to have to strip the franchise from anyone who isn't at least middle class and/or has a 4 year degree as well. https://next.ft.com/content/1ce1a720-ce94-3c32-a689-8d2356388a1f Ardennes fucked around with this message at 07:10 on Jul 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 07:07
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 04:57 |
|
|
just because they're working class doesn't make them not racist morons tbh I don't support disenfranchising people but I'm not about to absolve them of their responsibility for their democratic decisisions, they chose to vote leave largely because of "concerns about immigration" and I will reserve my sympathy in the trying times ahead for people who didn't vote for them to happen eg working class remain voters, eu immigrants potentially about to be forced from their homes, young people who are probably about to see their second recession in a decade etc XMNN fucked around with this message at 07:24 on Jul 5, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jul 5, 2016 07:22
|
|