• MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    3 months ago

    Well I’m not American, I’m talking about my own country when I say no taxation without representation. The rest of what I said stands in America though

    • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      3 months ago

      Well I’m not American, I’m talking about my own country when I say no taxation without representation.

      You understand this is a post about American politics?

      In any case,

      Where are you going to draw the line? Neonatals literally cannot do anything other than eat, sleep and look around at a blurry world. Do they get a vote?

      What about toddlers? Who might be able to buy something with their parent’s money?

      You’re going to have to set the line somewhere, and there’s going to be people disenfranchised. It’s that simple.

      The age of majority, whatever that is in your country is usually the simplest and least offensive way to do it.

      • MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        The minute a baby pops out of the womb, it has the right to vote. It will not be able to exercise that right until it can hold a pencil, but it theoretically has the right, and it can vote as soon as it’s decided it wants to participate in politics.

        • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          3 months ago

          When you say “hold a pencil”…. Do you mean simply holding it? Can some one help put it in their hand?

          Do they have to scribble be able to scribble something? Can some one help with that?

          What about the very old people who need some help with the pencil?

          And this is ignoring the fact that a baby obviously cannot understand the implications of voting.

          Same too with a toddler (most of whom can in fact “hold a pencil”

          Edit, this is also ignoring the simple fact that children are represented; they simply cannot choose that representation.

          • MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Utter nonsense. I already feel like I’m surrounded by children in this conversation.

            • FuglyDuck@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              3 months ago

              Utter nonsense. I already feel like I’m surrounded by children in this conversation.

              Naw. What’s ‘utter nonsense’ is that you’re unwilling to consider complications and criticism.

              Children voting poses a lot of problems. you (more or less) espoused 2 qualifications. the first being that they express a desire to vote. Children- especially very young children- are super easy to manipulate into wanting to do things. Tom Sawyer’s fence comes to mind. “gee isn’t painting this fence fun? Pay me 2 bucks and I’ll let you paint!”

              It’s why most religious circles will have children’s programs. children are way more easily manipulated into forming beliefs that are then assimilated into a world view without any conscious consent on the child’s part. They become so ingrained that as adults, childhood beliefs are incredibly hard to kick; even when you come to the belief that they were wrong. those beliefs are largely adopted from the parents.

              In terms of children voting, what that means is that the parents are vastly more likely to be the ones to decide who the child votes for.

              the second qualification, is an apparent ability to actually vote. taking your statement literally… it should be noted that infants have a grasping reflex that causes them to hold whatever is placed in their hand.

              It’s utterly nonsensical that you would expect strangers to be able to adequately assess whether a child has the capacity to understand the implications of their vote, as well as ascertaining whether an expressed desire to vote is genuinely from the child, or from undue influence from those around them. And pushing this point a bit further, to also ascertain whether or not that child is truly voting for how they see things- or if their parents are some how coercing that choice.

              All of this leads, then to questions about if that child is being coerced to vote outside their best interests by their parents or some other adult.

              Further, to your assertion that children don’t have representation. again: they do. and that representation is (presumably) elected. What they do not have is the ability to participate in the deciding who that representation will be. unless you live in some authoritarian hellhole, it’s unlikely that those representatives would refuse to hear the concerns of children (or indeed, teens), where they would not refuse an adult.

              Nice ad hominem, though.

      • MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 months ago

        I think children have the right to own things, and if children own the goods they buy, children are taxed. What you’re advocating is total parental control over children. That would harm so many kids! Especially queer kids. What if a trans boy spends his birthday money on a binder and hides it from his parents because he knows they’d throw him on the street if they saw it. Are you going to say the goods and services tax on the binder is a tax on the parents? No, that boy has his own property!

        • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 months ago

          You are steady stuck on taxation. The actual point is that a baby that has just dropped out it’s mothers womb screaming and crying and shitting on itself isn’t capable of helping make decisions for their country. A 25 year old is clearly a fully capable adult at the height of their health and brain development if not maturity.

          At some point between inception and 25 we pile increasing responsibility, rights, and privileges. A 3 minute old can’t drive, read or understand a voter pamphlet hold a job, decide where they would like to go today, decide what they would like to eat, or realistically anything whatsoever. They have no rights other than the right for their caregiver to perform their duties ably to protect the safety and health by making all decisions for them.

          So we have to choose a point between A and B when we think people are capable of taking on that added responsibility. Arguments can be made for different points or even appointing some users those privileges early based on capability. Some are wiser and smarter at 16 than others will be ever. That said the most ridiculous position is to provide that privilege at year zero. This is functionally identical to giving their parents extra votes.

          If you are going to argue for giving parents extra votes argue that position directly.

          • MindTraveller@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            3 months ago

            Parents should under absolutely no circumstances be allowed to vote on their children’s behalf. Voting should 100% be the kid’s choice without any coersion or nonsense.

            • michaelmrose@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 months ago

              neither babies nor young children have the faculties for this task. 16-18 is literally the only reasonable choice