Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by Aph)
    it does however a person with below average inteligence can get a good degree or a good job by hard work.

    People pay taxes to the state because the state owns the land they live on. you don't complain how your landlord spends the money you give him or how McDonalds spends the money you give them so you have no right to complain in a similar ilk about the state.

    If one party is put into power by the dead or dying then that is the people who live having to clean up their mess.


    ad hominems are not needed. and a 10 year old would have to meet the IQ component. although there are some who get degrees (generally in maths) iirc

    No, I wrote this to spark a debate to try and clean up my political dilemma... but this house doesn't understand debate it has just been 'this offends me' which is stupid.


    How would you improve implementation?
    Stop making ludicrous bills then ......................
    Online

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Nay. I don't see the point in disenfranchising people. The more varied a group of opinions and worldviews we can get, the better.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Aph)
    ad hominems are not needed. and a 10 year old would have to meet the IQ component. although there are some who get degrees (generally in maths) iirc
    IQ is adjusted for age, is it not?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    it does however a person with below average inteligence can get a good degree or a good job by hard work.

    People pay taxes to the state because the state owns the land they live on. you don't complain how your landlord spends the money you give him or how McDonalds spends the money you give them so you have no right to complain in a similar ilk about the state.

    If one party is put into power by the dead or dying then that is the people who live having to clean up their mess.

    No, I wrote this to spark a debate to try and clean up my political dilemma... but this house doesn't understand debate it has just been 'this offends me' which is stupid.
    Actually, you do have the right to complain. You choose what food you buy, you choose what house to live in; tax is not an option, you pay it, or go to jail. If you have to pay it, you should have a say in how it's spent. So let us not pretend they are the same things.

    Again, you can turn your point around regarding "living cleaning up the mess" of old people. One could argue that the current Conservative government is currently cleaning up the mess of the last Labour government, a government that was more popular among.... the youth.

    It is also ironic that you whinge about debate here, yet when someone such as myself does debate you, you just repeat the same points over and over even when people retort them. Then make questionable (at best) comparisons as some sort of back up or justification.

    Luckily, if this bill reaches a vote, one would imagine that it shall be resoundingly beaten.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    IQ is adjusted for age, is it not?
    indeed.
    (Original post by BenC1997)
    Actually, you do have the right to complain. You choose what food you buy, you choose what house to live in; tax is not an option, you pay it, or go to jail. If you have to pay it, you should have a say in how it's spent. So let us not pretend they are the same things.
    you choose what country to live in, if you don't pay your rent you get kicked out, you have to pay it because you have no option.

    Again, you can turn your point around regarding "living cleaning up the mess" of old people. One could argue that the current Conservative government is currently cleaning up the mess of the last Labour government, a government that was more popular among.... the youth.
    This isn't about politics in that sense. whether they are cleaning up a mess or making more of it is irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that ultimately the dying are taking away the right to self determination from the not dying.

    It is also ironic that you whinge about debate here, yet when someone such as myself does debate you, you just repeat the same points over and over even when people retort them. Then make questionable (at best) comparisons as some sort of back up or justification.

    Luckily, if this bill reaches a vote, one would imagine that it shall be resoundingly beaten.
    I wouldn't have to if sound arguments were being put forward.

    and from what I have currently seen this is very much because people aren't even willing to consider the issue.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Aph)
    indeed.
    So plenty (half to be precise) of 10-year-olds would have no problem reaching the 100 requirement.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by Saracen's Fez)
    So plenty (half to be precise) of 10-year-olds would have no problem reaching the 100 requirement.
    they would also have to demonstrate an understanding of current politics...
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    you choose what country to live in, if you don't pay your rent you get kicked out, you have to pay it because you have no option.

    This isn't about politics in that sense. whether they are cleaning up a mess or making more of it is irrelevant. The fact of the matter is that ultimately the dying are taking away the right to self determination from the not dying.


    I wouldn't have to if sound arguments were being put forward.

    and from what I have currently seen this is very much because people aren't even willing to consider the issue.
    Moving country is hardly a viable option for a lot of people.

    You say it is not about making a mess, yet the basis of most of your argument for the entirety of this has been that 'old people might make a mess for young people.'

    Your solution to people having their self determination 'taken away,' which is not happening anyway so let us not make up 'facts,' is to take away other peoples' right to the very same thing. Hardly a good solution.

    People may struggle to make sound arguments against a Bill who's foundations lie in unsound logic.

    Your last point doesn't hold much weight either, evidently I have considered the issue, I still think it may be the strangest thing I have seen in my relatively short time here.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by BenC1997)
    Moving country is hardly a viable option for a lot of people.
    Doesn't matter... the option is there. And tge premise that we pay taxes to vote us still ludicrous.

    You say it is not about making a mess, yet the basis of most of your argument for the entirety of this has been that 'old people might make a mess for young people.'

    Your solution to people having their self determination 'taken away,' which is not happening anyway so let us not make up 'facts,' is to take away other peoples' right to the very same thing. Hardly a good solution.
    Right so lets look at a topical example shall we?
    The EU, it is well documented that the young like it and the old don't. If we vote to leave becuse of the grey vote it's the young that have to deal with the consequences. So how is it fair that the people running the country tomorrow don't get what they want?

    People may struggle to make sound arguments against a Bill who's foundations lie in unsound logic.

    Your last point doesn't hold much weight either, evidently I have considered the issue, I still think it may be the strangest thing I have seen in my relatively short time here.
    That is a nonsensical argument. If tge premise of the bill is false it should be easy to demonstrate.

    You have but most haven't thought to considered the arguments just gone with their gut fealing


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    Doesn't matter... the option is there. And tge premise that we pay taxes to vote us still ludicrous.

    Right so lets look at a topical example shall we?
    The EU, it is well documented that the young like it and the old don't. If we vote to leave becuse of the grey vote it's the young that have to deal with the consequences. So how is it fair that the people running the country tomorrow don't get what they want?


    That is a nonsensical argument. If tge premise of the bill is false it should be easy to demonstrate.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    If you can't afford something, it is not an option for you; so yes actually, it does matter, as the option may not be there

    If it is ludicrous then why are we yet to see a reasonable argument against it? People pay tax in the knowledge they will be part of the process that decides how it is spent.

    It is fair that they do not get what they want because that is how democracy works. If it was just the youth who could have the vote, why should one set of the youth accept the decision of another set of the youth in any given referendum? People will vote in the EU referendum based on the future as well as the present, so stop making out as if every political decision is made with just the following few weeks in mind, now that is a ludicrous idea.

    Other people may not be making the argument as they know they will just have the same conversation we are having now, which would be a waste of time.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    These are the kind of MPs you get in this government. Britain is doomed as long as we have MPs like Aph in government.
    • Political Ambassador
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    PetrosAC I know it's all well and good having an active MP and all, but how many bills and views like this will Aph have to produce before you come to the decision that Aph isn't actually Liberal at all and would be better off in the socialists? (i.e. out of your party)
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by BenC1997)
    If you can't afford something, it is not an option for you; so yes actually, it does matter, as the option may not be there

    If it is ludicrous then why are we yet to see a reasonable argument against it? People pay tax in the knowledge they will be part of the process that decides how it is spent.
    people pay taxes to maintain the state and prevent anarchy. Taxes are not a fee one pays to gain influence.

    It is fair that they do not get what they want because that is how democracy works. If it was just the youth who could have the vote, why should one set of the youth accept the decision of another set of the youth in any given referendum? People will vote in the EU referendum based on the future as well as the present, so stop making out as if every political decision is made with just the following few weeks in mind, now that is a ludicrous idea.
    but then you have the people who have to deal with the consequences of the decision not being allowed to make the decision and you expect them to live with it?! And 'that's how democracy works' isn't a valid argument because you are treating democracy as a means unto itself and suggesting that it is intrinsically valuable in its current form.

    Other people may not be making the argument as they know they will just have the same conversation we are having now, which would be a waste of time.
    They wouldn't be if they made locically valid arguments
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    People pay tax because it is part of the agreement whereby the government creates the institution of private property in the first place.
    • Wiki Support Team
    Online

    20
    ReputationRep:
    Wiki Support Team
    (Original post by Unown Uzer)
    These are the kind of MPs you get in this government. Britain is doomed as long as we have MPs like Aph in government.
    It is indeed a curious PMB from the right honourable junior minister.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)

    but then you have the people who have to deal with the consequences of the decision not being allowed to make the decision and you expect them to live with it?! And 'that's how democracy works' isn't a valid argument because you are treating democracy as a means unto itself and suggesting that it is intrinsically valuable in its current form.


    They wouldn't be if they made locically valid arguments
    Yes, I expect them to live with it; principally because they have at least had a say in the process of deciding the result, something that a significant amount of people under this 'system' of yours would not have. You are the one, ironically, forcing people's opinions on others. Brilliant.

    Oh, and the sweet irony of you implying that I do not make 'locically' valid points as you put it is almost hilarious.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by BenC1997)
    Yes, I expect them to live with it; principally because they have at least had a say in the process of deciding the result, something that a significant amount of people under this 'system' of yours would not have. You are the one, ironically, forcing people's opinions on others. Brilliant.

    Oh, and the sweet irony of you implying that I do not make 'locically' valid points as you put it is almost hilarious.
    No, I'm saying that the people affected by the decision should be the sole people who make the decision. The aged and dying don't have to live with it so their voices shouldn't matter.

    Yes because you aren't.you are appealing to emotion.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    No, I'm saying that the people affected by the decision should be the sole people who make the decision. The aged and dying don't have to live with it so their voices shouldn't matter.

    Yes because you aren't.you are appealing to emotion.
    If someone has a life expectancy of 14 years then they are hardly going to not have to live with the results of their political decisions. Yet according to you they should not vote.

    I'm sure it is very easy to claim that in a poor attempt to save your argument, unfortunately for you I have no need to appeal to emotion, sanity suffices nicely.

    What emotion am I appealing to, exactly? I have put forward reasoned, thought out responses to an unreasonable bill. Just a while ago you agreed that I had considered thus assessed the idea, now I'm just some overly emotive, illogical fool.

    But ofcourse, the fact that practically no one agrees with you must mean that they're all appealing to emotion, and you must be right!

    Also, in what sense is "whaaah old people are ruining our lives" not appealing to emotion? Once again, the irony is almost poetic.
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    22
    ReputationRep:
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    (Original post by BenC1997)
    If someone has a life expectancy of 14 years then they are hardly going to not have to live with the results of their political decisions. Yet according to you they should not vote.

    I'm sure it is very easy to claim that in a poor attempt to save your argument, unfortunately for you I have no need to appeal to emotion, sanity suffices nicely.
    the medium term consequences yes but not long term. If you prefer I'll make it 10...

    Sanity is logic which you aren't using. You are claiming that democracy is important but you don't support it.

    What emotion am I appealing to, exactly? I have put forward reasoned, thought out responses to an unreasonable bill. Just a while ago you agreed that I had considered thus assessed the idea, now I'm just some overly emotive, illogical fool.

    But ofcourse, the fact that practically no one agrees with you must mean that they're all appealing to emotion, and you must be right!

    Also, in what sense is "whaaah old people are ruining our lives" not appealing to emotion? Once again, the irony is almost poetic.
    your idea as to why we pay tax is emotional and wrong...

    Yes... Most of the people are thinking with their hearts and not heads.

    Not saying that though...
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Aph)
    the medium term consequences yes but not long term. If you prefer I'll make it 10...

    Sanity is logic which you aren't using. You are claiming that democracy is important but you don't support it.


    your idea as to why we pay tax is emotional and wrong...

    Yes... Most of the people are thinking with their hearts and not heads.

    Not saying that though...
    Well, I can't say I've ever been told I do not support demorcracy because I believe more people deserve to vote than the person accusing me, who is proposing a bill that would remove many people's right to vote. Simply astonishing, one really could not make it up.

    What is emotional about stating people expect that when they pay tax they will at least have a say in how it is spent? You may believe it is wrong, but emotive? Come on.

    Also, that is essentially the basis of your entire argument. "Why should old people be allowed to affect the lives of us young people?!?!" Emotive.
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: May 30, 2016
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you rather give up sugar, or salt?
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.