The BEST Guide to POLAND
Unanswered  |  Archives 
 
 
User: Guest

Home / News  % width posts: 58

Should 16-year-olds in Poland vote?


f stop 25 | 2,513
28 Feb 2010 #31
Hell, I don't know - when they get a job and start paying taxes? But don't ask me, I think we should be able to abort them up to the age of 18!
beelzebub - | 444
28 Feb 2010 #32
Beelzebub, please don't simplify criminality and mens rea to basic morality. It goes much deeper than that.

It is that simple. It is much easier to teach someone basic right and wrong then it is to have them understand global issues.

A child KNOWS it is not right to steal etc...but they cannot understand the greater impact of a "vote"..they do not have the capacity. Neither do 15yos
Seanus 15 | 19,706
28 Feb 2010 #33
So you are saying that a 15 y.o is not a child? Maybe you are 7 years old after that kind of comment.

Look, if you show children of 16 how to operate a voting machine in school as part of the national curriculum then they are more likely to vote. Yale University ran a study on it.

It can become part of the syllabi and increase awareness that way. So many adults are out of touch.
beelzebub - | 444
28 Feb 2010 #34
I really, REALLY hate people who try to put words in someone's mouth.

You either know exactly what I mean and don't agree (and rather than just saying that are trying to be clever sounding) or you are a moron.

I will not play semantics games with you.

People without life experience, and who haven't finished developing, should not vote. Simple.

People who are old enough to know right and wrong should be held accountable for it. Simple.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
1 Mar 2010 #35
So you are a hater? That's not nice! ;) ;)

Many people over 30 haven't finished developing. Why disenfranchise a work in progress? Do you expect a miracle transformation at 18?

If decisions affect them so much and they pay taxes then why not give them the vote?

There are already rights and responsibilities at 16 as it stands. They tend to be better informed and in touch. They learn about citizenship and democracy is Key Stage 4.

Harriet Harman believes it's a good idea to directly take what they have learned to the voting ballot box. Strike while the iron is hot so to speak.

This would allow politicians to visit schools to ascertain popular sentiments on issues that affect them, i.e lunches and uniforms. They are also part of politics, just look at Roman Giertych here.

Almost 2000 people of 16 served in the Armed Forces in 2007. Wanna exclude them too? Also, there are too many old people and young people are being forgotten about.

Get people interested early and the rest takes care of itself.
beelzebub - | 444
1 Mar 2010 #36
Fine make the voting age 35. I am fine with that. Maybe things would be better if naive, inexperienced people were not affecting the tides.

A 16yo should not have as much say in where politics go as a 35yo...no more than the new recruit would be commanding the army or running an airline. You need experience at the bottom before you can be at the top. Exuberance and ambition are not a substitute for wisdom...and wisdom only comes with age.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
1 Mar 2010 #37
Look, I made the point before that many voters (assuming they even know in the first place) may vote for PO on one issue and PiS on the next. The more you see, the harder the vote is. 16-year olds would vote for simple matters and go with the party that is more closely allied to those basic needs.

What I would be willing to concede is that Poles finish their education later. We finish secondary school at 17 in the UK (assuming you stay on) and Poles at 19. Those two years can make the difference. Still, they are a cluey bunch in the main. You can look at it in so many ways. I started uni at 17 and scored very highly in my first year. My political knowledge was already fairly advanced by then.
beelzebub - | 444
1 Mar 2010 #38
I am not willing to put my future in the hands of teenagers. It is bad enough with the adults running things and they have the benefit of experience. It would be worse with the Disney crowd at the helm.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
1 Mar 2010 #39
Just think about what you are saying. For starters, how many 16-18 year olds are there compared to 18-65 year olds? Second off, the turnouts from 18-25 tend to be low anyway. There are plenty of stats to show that. Thirdly, they vote for the party that best interests things that matter to them in, let's say, an educational sense. What's wrong with that? Fourthly, adults are more about money making and not the development of the state for the most part. Just look at how the Tories cleaned up in the 1980's.

In the hands of teenagers? You are merely giving them a voice, a sense of empowerment. They will not tip the balance in most cases.
Arien 3 | 721
1 Mar 2010 #40
and wisdom only comes with age.

I really think wisdom comes with experience. You should also keep in mind that some people have been through a lot on a very young age, so you shouldn't underestimate people simply because they're a few years younger.

Also, there are too many old people and young people are being forgotten about.

I agree.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
1 Mar 2010 #41
He paints it that they'd all vote for the Raving Monster Loony Party ;)
beelzebub - | 444
1 Mar 2010 #42
Yeah some people "age" quicker than others. But that doesn't mean the average 16yo is wise enough to make such decisions.

Most people really don't "get it" until they are out on their own and responsible for all facets of life. That means 25 or older for many people.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
1 Mar 2010 #43
So virtually all the states in the world are wrong? That's nice to know.
beelzebub - | 444
1 Mar 2010 #44
I believe so yes. I believe we would be better served by increase the legal age of everything from driving to voting.
convex 20 | 3,978
1 Mar 2010 #45
Most people really don't "get it" until they are out on their own and responsible for all facets of life. That means 25 or older for many people.

I was "out on my own" at 15, most of my friends were out taking care of themselves at 17-18. With all the kids growing up in single parent households, more kids are being forced into taking on burdens of adulthood at a younger age.

I know a couple of 7 year olds that "get it" when compared to some elected officials (Michele Bachmann and Chuck Schumer come to mind).
beelzebub - | 444
1 Mar 2010 #46
MOST kids that age are not out on their own by then....a change in policy has to consider MOST kids.

You are selecting a few cases that do not speak for the greater population of teenagers.
convex 20 | 3,978
1 Mar 2010 #47
You are selecting a few cases that do not speak for the greater population of teenagers.

I'm just looking at what I grew up with. In the bottom half of the economic scale, kids are leaving the home much earlier. I could probably count the number of people that I know in the states in their 20s living with their parents on one hand.
sledz 23 | 2,250
1 Mar 2010 #48
In the US you have to be 21 to legally drink, yet its only 18 to join the Army or vote

If youre old enough to serve and die for your country, give the kid a beer already!!!
krysia 23 | 3,058
1 Mar 2010 #49
I was "out on my own" at 15,

Wow! I was on my own when I was 65!
convex 20 | 3,978
1 Mar 2010 #50
If you're old enough to serve and die for your country, give the kid a beer already!!!

It's disgusting. That rule was changed in the 90's I believe.
sledz 23 | 2,250
1 Mar 2010 #51
Wow! I was on my own when I was 65!

yeah ok,,you still live there and tell Babcia I want my globakis or nie ma chelba!!

That rule was changed in the 90's I believe.

For military personal, I not sure either?

The younger generation should become more involved in government and make the necessary changes as they see fit, instead of all the old old ways of the mummified politicians we have now.

Im not talking about Obamas changes either, hes just a pawn of the Illinois political machine
beelzebub - | 444
1 Mar 2010 #52
If someone can't wait 3 years to drink (18-21) they don't need to be drinking because they don't have the maturity (patience) for it. Getting wasted is not a right nor a necessity. If people were reasonable we wouldn't have to worry about it but people are not able to control themselves.
convex 20 | 3,978
1 Mar 2010 #53
For military personal

For military personnel. The state laws were changed to 21 when the Federal government threatened to remove highway money. I think Louisiana held out for quite some time.

If someone can't wait 3 years to drink (18-21) they don't need to be drinking because they don't have the maturity (patience) for it. Getting wasted is not a right nor a necessity. If people were reasonable we wouldn't have to worry about it but people are not able to control themselves.

We are talking soldiers here. For the general population, we're talking about people that can enter into contracts, pay taxes, can get married, well past the age of criminal responsibility, can operate a motor vehicle, can purchase a firearm, and of course, can be drafted into the military.

At 17, you are eligible for a security clearance in the US, up to TS. I know that all rangers have secret clearance, and with recent missions, quite a few are TS as well. Most rangers are in their early 20's with quite a few in the 18-21 bracket. We trust these people with national security issues, not to mention the lives of their comrades. However, they can't be trusted with alcohol.

The same goes for our police forces, firemen, and public servants.
Seanus 15 | 19,706
1 Mar 2010 #54
I think we need to narrow the parameters and remind ourselves that we are focussing on Poland where the demographic is different. They leave school when they are 19 and that is different from other countries like the UK. Beelzebub, you lived in Poland and likely experienced Polish teenagers. Were you a teacher? I can safely say that the average 16-year old here could understand if they had it explained to them through schooling and parenting. You talk about/of maturity and experience! OK, pick a professor, doctor or lawyer from any country in the world that speaks poor English. Let's say they are 50. Try and explain in English to sb who doesn't understand high-faluted or jargonistic language and see how far you get. You have to coin language and frame things in a way that they understand and is meaningful to them. It's the same with 16-year olds who haven't been through university but understand what was taught to them in Civic Studies or Modern Studies or whatever other curricula from around the world call it.

Beelzebub, what runs through your mind in the days and maybe weeks before casting your vote? Do you really labour on the issues so much? What do you do when you can't reconcile different positions on different issues? (PO is good on one point, PiS on another and SLD on yet another) What if, like me, you can see the merits in different policies in different areas, as with religion? Do you rigidly cling to your chosen label or do you attempt to see the sheer variety of options and make a decision thereof? 16-year olds don't play adult games like tactical voting. They go with what is good for them and perhaps with the party that doesn't spell danger like Bush did.
pawian 161 | 9,971
27 Aug 2019 #55
What do you think? Are average 16-year-olds politically sophisticated enough?

Of course not. Voting is the last thing on the priority list of 16 year olds.

And when they introduce internet voting, youngsters will vote the craziest types, just for fun.
delphiandomine 83 | 17,771
27 Aug 2019 #56
Of course not. Voting is the last thing on the priority list of 16 year olds.

On the contrary Pawian - in the Scottish independence referendum, there was a lot of activity from those aged 16-17. Internet voting also didn't lead to any strange surprises in Estonia, apart from liberal voters voting online and conservative ones preferring the ballot box.
pawian 161 | 9,971
28 Aug 2019 #57
in the Scottish independence referendum, there was a lot of activity from those aged 16-17.

I can assure you - if Poland was to vote for her independence, youngsters like that would also be active. :):)

But we were talking about common elections.
Dougpol1 33 | 3,244
28 Aug 2019 #58
Of course not.

Old enough for other things - old enough to vote. It's their future, so yes, absolutely!

Exactly as the old 70 is the new 60, so the old 18 is the new 16. That is the power of genetics, the new media age, and freedom of expression and living standards.


Home / News / Should 16-year-olds in Poland vote?
BoldItalic [quote]
 
To post as Guest, enter a temporary username or login and post as a member.