starmer has an idea. LOL

If I had to choose I would much rather have 16 and 17 years olds voting than such ignorant old farts as yourself. They have far more years invested in the future than you do. They are far more likely to be in work than you are, even whilst attending uni. 16 is old enough to think rationally about the world around you, and to be affected by it. Parents no longer have a legal duty of care and can throw you out at that age if they choose. It is perfectly legal for any 16 year old who can afford to do so to live and work independently of his parents. And yes, they can legally make babies, probably the greatest responsibility of all.

But elderly ageist bigots love looking down their noses at young people, whilst themselves often so regularly disproving the fallacy that age is always accompanied by wisdom.

So if Labour get in and reduce the voting age to 16, then at least that is one thing I would wholeheartedly agree with them on. Too many elderly right wingers seem to equate not voting conservative as evidence of immaturity, when in fact the young have rarely been offered anything worth voting for by the Tories. They tend also to be better educated than many elderly tabloid readers, far more of them going on to higher education. Many ageing tabloid readers left school half educated at 15! lol.

I hope that's true, I just have my doubts about the source.

Because I think it is a great idea. After all, we give votes to expats who neither live here, work here, nor pay their taxes here, but millions of people who do live here, work here and pay their taxes here have no say? Why should someone living in the south of France paying no UK taxes have a voice in voting for how we are taxed whilst someone living here and paying taxes here does not?

It is about fairness. My best friend is a Latvian national who has been here for 14 years and granted right to remain. Throughout that time she has worked and never claimed benefits and has paid her taxes and still does. She is thus contributing far more to this country right now than so many of the whingeing pensioners on these pages, and all of it without ever having imposed on us the financial burden of her childhood and education. She was already 18 when she came here. Damned right she should have a vote. She has earned it.

I do accept that people should not be able to just turn up one week and vote the next, so a period of residence here before eligibility to vote is granted is reasonable. This would allow for time to demonstrate commitment to this country and to learn about it's society and culture by being immersed in it, and about its politics. But I would suggest five years residency here ought to suffice.

No one is trusting 16 year olds with leadership. Just the right to share in a say about who the leaders should be.

And is this a first? You disagreeing with Starmer's Labour? 

I'm sure that you do, young children that have been subject to a relentless diet of left wing wokery throughout their supposed education by leftie teachers are much more likely to vote labour that people who have worked for 50 years and actually have experience of working life.


Your comment adds no value to Sir Kiers proposal other than confirm how dangerous it is to be so blinkered to obvious common sense. Also being agest lets down your leftie credentials.  

Your rancid ageist contempt for young people shouts out of the page when you refer to 16 and 17 year olds as "young children". Most normal people wouldn't even call a 17 year old a child anymore since the very word has connotations of someone too young to not need parental care. Which is why you purposely use it to express your condescension.

The term usually used is minor. Because the word child is understood by most to refer to someone who is still very young and clearly just a kid.

Which is why the old fart merchants of condescension use the word whilst hiding behind a cloak of legitimacy. But it is their condescension that they are trying to express and it is contemptable.

And a 16 year old is no longer entitled to legally binding parental care, and if he can afford to and wants to can happily live away from home. When I was 17 I went to Germany for three weeks on my own. I did not feel the need to have mummy and daddy's hand to hold on to. I worked from the age of 16 and paid for the trip to Germany myself. I was already far more man than boy. To call my then self a child would have been ridiculous, and no one ever did unless they wanted to be condescending. And that only ever happened if you disagreed with them on something. Nothing changes there it seems.