3 ms·
I’d take it a step further and limit who is allowed to vote. You mention competent adults; an adult in 1800 was probably competent around 16 years of age. An ad
by 0x8BADF00D 7y ago
I’d take it a step further and limit who is allowed to vote. You mention competent adults; an adult in 1800 was probably competent around 16 years of age. An adult today is similarly competent at a later age.
Regardless of competency, there should be some eligibility requirements to vote. Holding a job should be one. Proof of citizenship should be another.
- tjr225 7y agoI very rarely downvote comments here as a matter of principle but yours here is almost comically absurd. 1. Do you have any evidence that people were more competent at a younger age in 1800? In fact I would think that the opposite is probably true - but again this seems impossible to prove so I'm simply asking you if you have any reason to believe what you're saying is true other than your feelings. 2. People without jobs have just as many rights as those with jobs. Do you also think people without land should not vote? Perhaps not women? Maybe black votes should have less of an impact? I'm curious if you're not American- maybe this would explain a cultural difference I am missing?
- ClumsyPilot 7y agoAt least be consistent with the despicable point you are making! How does flipping burgers qualify you to have a say in how to run a country? Take away votes from the uneducated, the criminal, the insane, people with low IQ, and the tax dodging millionaires.