Voting at 16?

The voting age should be increased if anything.

Hi,
Could I ask why you think this? It might help me see the argument from a better perspective

Whilst it may be possible to in theory to have a 16 year old who is an exception to the above , this is highly likely to not be the case

Hi,
So I'm writing my speech for my GCSE English spoken language and I'm doing it on the topic of voting and lowering the voting age in the UK to 16. My argument is centred on the idea that at 16 young people already have a lot of responsibility (can get married, work, be taxed, join the army etc.) but can't vote and then when young people can vote (18+), they often don't because they feel underrepresented in campaigns.

Regardless whether you agree with the statement or not, it would be great if people who knew a little more about voting could share some statistics or points I could include because I am really struggling to find statistics and although I am allowed to lie slightly, I want to be as accurate as possible!

Thanks in advance.

Hi,
Could I ask why you think this? It might help me see the argument from a better perspective

If anything, I’d advocate to increase the voting age, along with increasing political education within schools so that when it does come to voting, the younger generation will know how the system works. Often now it’s merely used as a form of tokenism, people can scream and shout ‘I voted’, as they do but they know very little about what they’re voting for and little clue as to how the system works either. If people are going to truly make an impact and vote, they need to know about the political system they’re participating in first.

I’d add into that some basic economics alongside the political education.

Just get emotional.

I've done this debate to death over many years, and that's the way you win on the 16 side.

You can't win by logically demonstrating its a good idea, because for anyone who actually looks at the arguments - its not. The arguments for voting at 16 are very easy to counter, as they generally fall into misconceptions about what you are/aren't allowed to do (as you made in your OP) or they have the issue that they can be repeated for 14, 12, 10 year olds etc.

Those who support voting at 16 in the real world are those who have something to gain from it. E.g. left-leaning parties who will increase their vote share by doing it. To convince others that it's a good idea they use emotion.. "its the fair thing to do.. think of the children, they are our future, how can you deny them a say in their future, they suffer under rules they can't change, etc. etc." They aren't logically sound arguments, but they are simple appeals to emotion that resonate with a lot of people who are good natured at heart, and don't want children to be disadvantaged.

That route is the way to win the argument - even if it is logically dishonest.

The only logical argument for lowering the age of voting to 16 is to either lower the age of adulthood to 16, or justify why voting should be divorced from adulthood and placed arbitrary at 16, without using any arguments that could also be used for 14 year olds (e.g. 'they have longer to live under those rules' is an argument used for voting at 16, that is even more true for those at 14).

The average 16-year old is not some political maverick as is often made out - most of them have no clue how taxation works or how government spending works as simply they have no reason to find out.

This argument could apply to voters in their late teens or early twenties also, but most of those are either in work or higher education so are in a much better position to understand things.

You could say the same thing about people in their late twenties, thirties, fourties, etc. I'd be surprised if most 40+ year olds understand how taxation works, let alone how government spending works. People who are above the age of 18 might be in a better position to understand things, but that doesn't mean that they do understand things.

I don't support lowering the voting age, but I think that these arguments are less about a voting age and more about voting entirely.

I’d agree with that, but you’d be superseded how quickly you learn about these things when people start taking money off you.

What's that meant to mean?

Apologies for the typo. What I mean is that once you start paying tax, you’d be surprised how quickly you learn about tax.

I understand that, it's just that you seem to be suggesting that I don't yet pay tax...? Or were you using the word "you" more generally?