54
A private bill to give 16-year olds the vote is back in Parliament (piefed.ca)
submitted 1 year ago by to c/canadapolitics@lemmy.ca
37 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

https://www.parl.ca/documentviewer/en/44-1/bill/C-210/first-reading

Elections Canada research shows most adult voters oppose the measure: "Seven in ten respondents, 72 percent, disagreed."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 23 points 1 year ago (10 children)

if you are legal enough to be allowed to work and it not considered child labor, and paying taxes on that income, then vote often!

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Hm, if I understand you right, you're saying that there's there's a sort of threshold of governance (eg you mention legally being allowed to work, and being required to pay taxes) that, once met, requires that those under such governance must have representation in the government. So, by that logic, would you then be okay with children not being allowed to vote if, say, they weren't allowed to work, and didn't have to pay taxes?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    If a child is still legally the responsibility of its parents or guardians then the guardians would be responsible for making sure they vote in the best interests of the child. See also what’s happening in America (my country of residence) - a lot of fascists are voting in ways that will directly harm their lives. I could make an argument those decisions harm the children as well.

    I feel like the line of questioning is a trying to head down a reductio ad absurdum path..

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 1 year ago

    If a child is still legally the responsibility of its parents or guardians then the guardians would be responsible for making sure they vote in the best interests of the child. […]

    I agree with this, but, for clarity, the parents aren't the only ones that could vote for the best interests of the child: For example, a stranger, unrelated to the child, could vote in the best interests of the child.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    Should child actors be allowed to vote?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    are they legally responsible for managing income? or are they emancipated?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    So only legally emancipated children that also have jobs should be allowed to vote? That is a small and unusual subset of children.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    well it was asked. also no not “that also” it was “or”.

    and it wasn’t “that have jobs” it was “and are responsible for their own finances.” A manager who manages a child actor is, provably also an adult.

    this is about two things:

    a person’s relationship to capital and wage; a person’s relationship to the source of a state’s income. (taxes)

    if a state can take taxes it can provide suffrage.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    Lots and lots of people- from tourists to 10 year old kids to illegal immigrants- pay taxes and do not receive suffrage. I don't know if you are actually arguing that everyone who pays taxes should be able to vote or just playing devils advocate.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago*

    I am 100%* arguing that if someone pays tax they should be allowed to vote. Unironically. Completely. Does this mean that if tourists need to be excluded, ok. One can do so by many means: citizenship requirements or even simpler, a process in which taxes are not charged to tourists similar to that duty free concept.

    On the subject of illegal immigrants - Citizenship should be a 15 minute process, if we’re going to assume nations should exist at all. If nations “must” exist and therefore “must” tax, the moment an immigrant pays is the moment they become a citizen.

    *: (you’re talking with an anarchist here; if nations must exist and must extract taxes… Then the replies hold to that mindset. I personally do not think they should exist. But they do [except israel]. So that’s the scope of these replies.)

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent