Does anyone else think the voting age should increase?

Take the scottish independence referendum. 16 year olds dont even know what taxes are. Yet they had the chance to make ENORMOUS constitutional changes without knowing what the fuck they were doing

Increase the voting to 23.

I still don't get why they lowered the voting age in Austria to 16. That's just plain stupid

Yes the nations with 16 year old voters have the exact kind of results I would expect.

I have no doubt that commies are the ones that pushed for that age.

why 23?

>16 years vote rights


My sides

The age does not really matter, much like everything else we already have the proper answer but no one want it because of feelings.

The answer is that only land owners should be able to vote, minus jews obviously.

To get more people to vote for green party of course

amen brother

>only men

Wtf I love Saudi Arabia now!

If you're not legally an adult you shouldn't have the right to vote. At the very least the voting age should be 18, making it any lower is stupid because 16 is a completely arbitrary age and you have to draw the line somewhere.

Saudi Arabia being the only redpilled one.

It should be 25. By then most people have been out of Uni and living in the real world for a couple of years. Less chance of having their political opinion completely controlled by Leftist educators and pop culture

Macri won thanks to the young vote

Should be 23-25

Increase it to 55 and require voters to be grandparents.

Yes, it's a fucking joke. Don't you cumskins ever try to pull that or you'll have SJWs voting en masse for SJW candidates.

Saudis are pretty based and most reject Islam despite using it to keep up appearances.

>implying people deserve the franchise based on their age

Same as with the AoC thing.

Fucking no.

You should deny or give people rights based on something that doesn't accurately correlate with the basis for that right.
You should give or deny people rights based on whether they have the legal basis for that right.

>Voting:
Can you read? Are you able to get accurate information about what the candidates actually want? Do you know the issues being voted on?
Are you psychologically able to make decisions?
>Consenting:
Do you know the risks of having sex? Do you know the mechanisms? Do you know protection?
Are you psychologically able to make decisions?
>Drug use:
Do you know the risks associated with drugs? Do you know the signs of something being wrong? Do you know how to use the drugs responsibly?
Are you psychologically able to make decisions?
>Driving:
Do you know how to drive a car? Do you know how to behave in traffic?
Are you psychologically able to make decisions?
Are you physically capable of driving a car?
>Military.
Do you know the risks of signing up in the military? Do you have a legitimate reason for doing so?
Are you psychologically able to make decisions? Are you not a psychopath? Do you value human life?

etc

Rationally this is the only good answer.
It can work (drivers licenses, SATs, baccalaureats, Aiturs, A-levels, mandatory psychological evaluations, physician check ups, vaccination history etc)
This is the ONLY possible way to offer protection to the people and the society around them who are too dumb for this kinda shit. If you don't protect them they would most likely harm themselves or others.
This is the ONLY possible way to offer freedom to everyone who doesn't need the protection any more.
There can be systems in place to prevent corruption.
Just like the SATs and scientific journals mostly on average manage to be unbiased, peer review would be the key here as well.
Not by the government, but by doctors.

And yes doctors already have the capability to deny people the right to the things mentioned above. Except right now they only use it is extreme cases.
And right now they don't have the right to GIVE you the right to those things above. This would change.

And if you fail, you'd get to try again next time. Or with a different psychologist.

>You should deny or give people rights based on something that doesn't accurately correlate with the basis for that right.
SHOULDN'T

Only decent income tax payers of greater than a certain amount should be able to vote.

That should eliminate most women, nogs, and other persons of colour.

25 or 30

Voting should be restricted to people who contribute $20,000 in taxes or more per year.