Lower the voting age to 16 AND cap voting at 70

1. I like the number 70.
   70 was the percentage of NZers in a spot poll run by RNZ yesterday who were against lowering the voting age to 16.
   I don’t know what will enrage Martyn more, the poll result or that I’m citing RNZ.

   • What was the percentage who were against those at an age that dementia sets in and they have no idea what parties are who. Polls slant a question.
     What was the percentage of NZers who agree that those 16yr olds who are working, contributing to the tax take, are able to vote? Oh that question wasn’t asked?

2. I like the way it is. It does make a lot of sense to me to have a voting age of 18 and no cap of 70 or even beyond that age. Retirees are often marginalised because of their status and the sole politician who has put the effort in to keep them afloat often seems to be that stalwart from New Zealand First.

3. Not many baby boomers have $500k in superannuation funds. I’m guessing most people my age (mid 50’s) intend to continue working past 65, not because we want to, but because we can’t afford to stop working.

   • I agree John and I see in many businesses the lack of retention initiatives. I think if you’re 65 and over, and you are still working full-time and you have been with your employer for five years or longer, provided you have no ongoing health issues and no issues with performance, then you ought to automatically receive an extra bonus in your pay packet. The reason is that if you are in that position and leave, your replacement is likely to be more unreliable than you are, and less skilled. It often amounts to a mistake for employers to overlook their long serving staff in favour of younger workers.

   • Mid 50’s would make you a X-er not a boomer.

4. Martyn you make a few good points. But I don’t see that dropping the voting age to 16 would help. They would vote and push some things through but when problems occur as they will, and many would be chronic ones, they would think oh hell there is no answer and just want to die in larger numbers. What we need is all to acquire some skills in listening and understanding other people, being willing to give and take, what limitations we face in actuality, and how to set things down on paper setting out the problems which everyone agrees on. That is after the question is asked – what do other people you know or have heard or read abut say are the problems? That means you have to think about all those nut cases who just might have one point right.

   It all sounds too hard but we need to do it. And all have must do a short curse (Freudian slip) but then a course, covering the topics and understandings we need to have, young and also old – who may be surprised at how much has changed and happened since their school days, and which has passed them by! And not be like the Masons who are picky and the Rotarians who try to get a spread of professions but still narrow, or inclined to be rather frivolous as in this listing on google for the UK Probus group womens part (I think that the movement for votes for women and personal rights to property started in the UK, byt seems to have got a bit soppy like a wet lacy handkerchief.)
   Description. Meeting of retired ladies for companionship and coffee. We also have a speaker in once a month covering different topics.
   Ladies’ Probus Club – Find a Live Well Service
   https://livewellservices.cheshireeast.gov.uk › Services › La...

5. A 70 year old has most likely paid between 50 and 60 years of tax a portion of which was invested so that by 65 a pension could be paid. The pension is paid to all people at 65 irrespective of if they worked or not . Another portion of that same tax went to education the young that followed so they could work to contribute to their pension and so the circle goes on .

   • Yes Trevor people pay taxes but should they expect to get looked after from cradle to grave and is it fair that the biggest group receiving welfare (that being the pension) when many have accumulated wealth and don’t need government assistance. There is intergenerational equity issues at play here. Yes by all means we need to look after our elderly but not at the detriment of our young people we need to be fair.

     • I understand hat you are saying and in Australia the pension is not available to those classed as wealthy however my arguement against that is why should someone who works hard saves and accumulates assets loses a benefit while someone who pisses his money each week get rewarded by a full pension. Not sure how that is worked out.

     • Have those 50 – 60 years of taxes been adjusted for inflation Trevor?

6. Hey Martyn

   I’m 70 -does this apply to me?

   “Have you ever heard anything other than offensive bullshit out of a 70 year olds mouth?”

7. “…ummmmm, couldn’t a whole bunch of adults fall into the exact same categories that Kate feels bans you from voting?” 16 yr olds do become adults quite quickly.
   It won’t seem very far back till now when you are 70 Martyn , and you are not likely to be less opinionated than now. And you suer as hell will not feel ineligible to vote.
   D J S

8. Given the crimes against fashion that her husband commits on a daily basis, Kate has some cheek for calling out young people as a bunch of criminals for the tiny fraction that have actually been guilty of offending.

   • Quite right. She should not be able to vote given her husband dresses as a 15 year old.

9. Oh Martyn, you are just baiting us again! Simmer down. We all know its a slow news day.

   Not a bad idea to stop voting when you cease earning but that should apply the other way round and you should only get the vote when you start earning.

   However the major fly in that ointment is that Superannuation would go the way of the dinosaur in short order. The Me generation are not going to voluntarily pay tax for oldies and as there would be no political consequences for screwing the old then as sure as God made little green apples, one of our 2 Neo Lib parties would pile onto that in a heartbeat.

   But dont worry, we have legalised Euthanasia and like our dear liberal friends with the Maple Leaf we can simply exterminate any oldie too poor to pay their own way!

   Yep, NZ truly is God’s own country.

   • Fantail flick your tail and swoop around getting some real facts for your daily diet please on euthanasia. I suggest that you don’t spend your time doing a Gandalf to new procedures that would be welcomed by some in society but require legal limits and controls and skill to be done properly.

     The euthanasia we have is nothing like the sort that you indicate we should be frightened of. What I am frightened of is not having suitable, well-drawn legislation to properly apply where needed and instead, people proceeding despite that, with eventual bad outcomes. All because people who aren’t brave enough to live full lives and make some important decisions themselves and wish to stop others doing so. Instead leaving us being run by a hypocritical societal system as now.

     • So are you happy to be deemed too old to vote GW?
       D J S

     • Oddly enough Greywarbler, I did a ton of research on euthanasia before the referendum. I read far and wide. Like others, I thought – your life your choice, die with dignity etc and then I read something that made me sit up and think, Maybe I should look at this before glibly settling on a view.

       I found there were many reasons not to support Euthanasia and few (though very significant ones) to support it. I wrote a 3 page submission against quoting some fairly disturbing statistics.

       For me this is not about religion, fear or anything else. It is about the Neo Liberal/ Capitalist world we live in. Palliative care is very expensive. In every country that legalised Euthanasia, there was a marked drop off in palliative care funding over time and not just a drop off to match Euthanasia rates but a drop off in real terms often significantly.

       Why do you think Seymour championed the Bill? Because he is a Libertarian (possibly) but I guarantee you that the fact it allows for savings on taxes wouldnt have been lost on him either.

       And BTW, wouldnt you know it in the same year that euthanasia came in here, the government lowered funding for palliative care.

       People with life long disabilities also are very expensive to maintain. Did you read the recent Guardian article called something like Toor Poor to Live? Canada, that beacon of liberalism who was held up by the government in its info campaign as how Euthanasia could be controlled and done ‘nicely’ is now accepting the deaths of people who cant afford the kind of accommodation they need to maintain their special needs.

       The other reason I didnt support it was the slippery slope argument. Again doing a deep dive into Holland? and Belgium where its been going for a long time. The individual stories in some cases are heart breaking. You have supposed laws in place, which get loosened every so many years and market driven death clinics where 17 year old sexual abuse victims or similarly young anorexics are being allowed to kill themselves because its easier and cheaper. Talk about victimising victims. Too hard basket, too expensive, lets get 2 Drs from the market driven clinic to sign off and bada bing, lethal injection, next please.

       Given the very bleak examples around the world (and I didnt find one country other than Canada at that time – which has now gone the same way), I think we will inexorably arrive at a similar place in time. We will kill people who are traumatised, disabled, mentally ill and eventually too poor to survive. The govt already has plans in place to widen the categories slightly at the end of X period of time (2 yrs maybe?).

       Maybe I am a fearful luddite but I can easily picture Seymour, Luxon or even Robbo balancing the books by lopping another $100 Mill off the budget so that the currently 50/50? palliative care funding goes to pay poorly spent public debt. I envisage a kind of reverse fag tax scenario when the going gets tough.

       To me, euthanasia is too much about victimisation of the poor and vulnerable to ever be palatable although for some it is absolutely necessary. It only works when we are very clear about why we are doing it and what is acceptable. And like climate change and every other thing, politics and money will end up in the driving seat.

       In any event, NZers spoke and it is what it is.

       • Thanks for this, very informative.

10. “Have you ever heard anything other than offensive bullshit out of a 70 year olds mouth?” – ah yes, as has the author. What a dick thing to say.

11. what about some term limits so we can thin out some of the grifters in parliament

12. If you don’t work you don’t vote, easy

13. Identity politics still going strong, why not euthanise those over 65 apart from the woke, just because they can! Sarc.

    As for lowering voting age, the majority of countries have voting age of 18 with some in the Pacific at 21, only a handful of countries often with a large illiterate population do 16, but maybe that is what the Greens and Labour want for NZ? Seems like it!

    As the woke join forces with the neoliberals to take away the youth’s future with climate change inaction and gross mishandling of NZ health care, social welfare, pensions, low wages, fake degrees/jobs and so forth for the rest of the world to partake in, they want to pacify ‘they care’ by appealing to NZ resident teenagers.

    Remember teens, you need to delete yourself if you are male and pale and cancel yourself for racism if you supported the school climate strikes as you are now not good enough to protest unless you meet a niche group elite.

    OK Boomer we know, it’s all your fault, please shut up as the next book about Greens endless MP worries on being youth, being gay, years of depression, being ADHD…..

    After reading their books, no wonder you need to call lifeline or are catching a plane ticket out of here!

14. I don’t think generalizing about Boomers and younger folks is the way to go….there are dopes plus brilliant thinkers from all age ranges.
    This article seems divisive & petty….Martyn I wonder what your next thoughts will be when you reach your elder years?

    • I’ll hope to have a sense of humour and pray to the baby Buddha that I won’t be such an easily triggered snowflake

15. Heehee good for you Martyn and wee Baby Buddha!

16. Also Martyn don’t forget to pray to Sweet Baby Jesus either .. ;o)

17. I can guarantee that no kiwi boomer would ever do this. They are just so different over here. The greed is immense. https://amp.nine.com.au/article/7181d49e-9a0e-45c4-b06c-fe203ce8ff04

18. So your’re advocating for over 70s to be tax exempt also?

    Fair’s fair.

19. Yes I’m with Fred, term limits for all politicians, no one should have a fat salary as a careerist in parliament. An absolute maximum of 3 terms. If a politician hasn’t achieved what he/she went into parliament for (other than the prestige and the dosh and the endless privileges) after 12 years they should have to bugger off.

    The other thing I want is a ‘no confidence’ option on the ballot paper. More people might be encouraged to go into the polling booth just to tick that option and show the parties that they are all crap and neither of the main parties represent the homeless, dispossessed, half starving, poor.

    As a 72 year old I will be voting for the party that will increase taxes on the wealthy, capital gains tax, a wealth tax and a financial transactions tax, do something radical about climate change, increase the housing stock by 10,000 a year by reinstating the Ministry of Works, increase beneficaries income. The only party at this point that I can see myself voting for is the Maori Party. They have the best climate change policy of any party in parliament.

    Only those that have reitired ought to receive superannuation, it is a choice, work or receive it at 65. The winter energy payment must be means tested. Why should the fat cats some of whom are in parliament be receiving this subsidy it is outrageous.

20. I wonder how many of the 70+ year olds were so sensible that they voted for Muldoon’s ‘get rid of the Labour Super scheme’ in 1976. And now suffering from that, not having the quality of life that scheme would have enabled.

21. Year 13 is appropriate to vote. Which is 17. As for Boomers….where would NZ First get votes from if people over 70 can’t vote. As most come from aged care homes… where they love Uncle Winnie….

22. Both the lowering and the cap are bad ideas. Some 16 year old’s are clearly informed enough to vote….and some 70 year old’s still work and don’t have a $1m house and 500k of savings. Everyone is unique and different situations. 18+ is fine.

23. While it would be insane to give kids the vote as suggested, I did enjoy the squealing of aaaaalll the triggered boomers a little too much.

24. The only 16 and 17 year olds that should be entitled to vote are those in the miltary who can be sent to war because you know “death without representation”.

    Most boomers never actually voted for pulling the ladder up behind them. That was Lickwood Smiths end of free tertiary, Roger & Ruth & Treasury end of cheap Housingcorp loans, sell off state houses, subsidise landlords, sell off the govt and community banks, demutualise insurance, privatise the bureacracy, flood the workforce with cheap overseas labour. All this was a surprise move most boomers had never thought of doing any of this, didnt support it and received it as a fait accompli. Most boomers did not and do not think future generations shouldnt receive the same 60s 70s socialist advantages they had received but when a political wideboy offers a tax cut peoole take it because most people always feel they are struggling. Really we just got given a nuclear free moment just like young voters now are being given an “identity rights” distraction.

25. ?

26. When Martin reaches the age of 70, or probably before, he will find a way of reversing (and justifying) his opinion.

Comments are closed.