Ms Ryan said that she planned to introduce another private member's bill during the upcoming term of federal parliament, after an initial bill in 2018 failed to pass.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] Aussieiuszko@aussie.zone 5 points 2 weeks ago (3 children)

Let's push for a voting age cap.

[–] hitmyspot@aussie.zone 13 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I disagree. Many older people are more conservative. However, they have a right to their views. We shouldn't disenfranchise anyone.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

The argument isn't that they shouldn't vote because they're conservative. It's that they shouldn't vote because they literally won't experience the long term consequences of their decisions.

My personal preference is to allow 16 year olds to vote without creating a maximum voting age, but if in some weird world the only way to allow 16 year olds to vote was to ban those over 80 from voting, I would support that in a heartbeat.

[–] hitmyspot@aussie.zone 6 points 2 weeks ago

How old do you think the cut off should be? What do you think the typical life expectancy is at that age? What is the typical term of government?

Tajing your example of age 80, in the USA, that would give a life expectancy of 9 years for women and 7 years for men. That's 2 elections minimum.

Of particular note for them to vote on - health care, pensions, right to end life, hospice care, inheritance, general issues that affect their family,.

[–] princessnorah@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Teenagers are quite literally disenfranchised.

[–] hitmyspot@aussie.zone 1 points 2 weeks ago

Yes, but not legally considered adults until later. This proposal is to change that.

[–] Tenderizer@aussie.zone 2 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Make it non-compulsory for over-65's.

Although that would 100% give license to the LNP to make it non-compulsory for everyone, and our compulsory voting system is what makes us immune to populist demagogues (that and our country not crumbling before our very eyes).

[–] nonentity@sh.itjust.works -4 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Eligible to vote at 16.
Mandatory at 18.

Votes are then weighted based on age:

Your vote is worth 100% until 20, then decreases 5% at every birthday ending in 0.

The older you get, the less you’re exposed to policy decisions made at the time.

There should also be strict term limits for, and mandatory exclusion and retirement from, elected positions. You can still hold advisory roles, but you shouldn’t be making decisions that affect a population when you’re in the upper 20% band of life expectancy.

[–] dellish@lemmy.world -1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I agree with weighted voting, but not based on age. I really think your vote should come with a questionnaire that covers current issues and policies. If your answers show you have no clue what's going on, your vote means less.

[–] nonentity@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Age and competency aren’t mutually exclusive for weighting. I think age should be a mandatory erosion, but it can be offset with achievements such as academic study or public service.

Over time it diminishes, but slower for those with proven social engagement.

[–] notgold@aussie.zone 1 points 2 weeks ago

You had me until you said public servant. The public service, specifically Victorian, is just assholes pushing other down for their own benefit; once you've been in the public service long enough you become institutionalised and it shows on many many people.