Children Till 24?

[ToraToraTora]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-42732442
So should we raise the voting age to 25 then? The last thing I want is self obsessed twitface junkies effecting who's in the government.

[Islay]

No

[diddlydo]

I think you mean "affecting" not "effecting".

[mikey4444]

I read this article earlier this morning. Leaving aside the voting issue, I am not sure it makes much sense.

Records from Cathedral Choirs show that puberty for boys used to start much later than it does now....it wasn't unusual for boys to still be singing as trebles until they were 16 or even 17. Not so nowadays.

The full health consequences of kids starting puberty at an early age may not be known until they are much older....maybe my age. Those diseases of our later life may be affected by hormones appearing at such an early age.

Food for thought.

[douglas9401]

Scientists eh?

[ToraToraTora]

they are mainly talking about the delay in any sort of stake in society or taking on any responsibility. That's great I'm delighted they have more fun till they settle down but that means they look at the world with rose coloured specs for longer. Funded by the state and the bank of mum and dad they have no clue about real life and thus they should not have the vote till they get a stake in society.

[mikey4444]

TTT....."stake in society"

What is that...how do you define that ?

[ToraToraTora]

one word mikey, probably an alien concept to you and your socialist principles but here it is for what it's worth: "contributing"

[ToraToraTora]

have a day off, pensioners have contributed already and have experience to vote.

[Old_Geezer]

It did occur to me that one moment some are supporting votes for kids, and the next we hear we ought to recognise that the mind and body continue to change into late twenties so folk shouldn't be considered until adults then.

The fact of the matter is that there has to be a sensible balance so society selects a sensible one (18 is fine) and operates to that no matter what differences there are in each individual. Adolescence can be officially considered to stop when one becomes an adult in 18.

[youngmafbog]

//now time to relax and leave the voting to those who it'll effect.//

So Governments wont change pensions rules, wont change interest rates, wont change the economy to affect investments then?

It's a point worth considering TTT, personally I think 21 (as it was) is about right. By then most people have been contributing and are getting a grip on the hard realities of life.

[Old_Geezer]

Just to add that folk continue to develop until their late twenties is nothing new. Been known for ages. Don't see why someone is making a fuss now.

[Old_Geezer]

Shows how confusing I find it, I thought that the junkies were effecting whist the government was affected. Think I'm giving up on that one.

[New Judge]

“If you pay tax, you should be able to vote.”

So conversely, if you don’t pay tax, you should not be able to vote? So that rules out the unemployed and those living on low pay.

“Again, how do people over the age of retirement contribute to society apart from give their very educated, stern opinions? And how does this contribute more than someone from the age of 16, who works and pays tax?”

People over retirement age very often undertake voluntary work. They also very often have retirement incomes far in excess of those of younger people and so pay far more in taxes (so your earlier point makes them eligible to vote).

“…they've had their say, now time to relax and leave the voting to those who it'll effect.”

So government does not affect older people? The tax they pay and the services they use? And when do you make the cut-off date for voting? State pension age (when, on average, people will live for getting on for another fifteen to twenty years - about a quarter of their lives)?

I believe you need to re-think your strategy, spathi.

[dannyk13]

How?