The funniest criticism against lowering the voting age was vomited up by privileged ZB Troll Kate Hawkesby…
But they lack the experience. They don’t have mortgages and hold down full time jobs by and large. They’re not raising families, they’re not paying bills, they’re not awash with life experience. Yes many may be bright and astute, but many are not. Many as we know, are just out ram raiding, or wagging school. And on that note, surely the priority for young people should be re-engaging them with school and teaching them how to contribute to a civilised society, over and above giving them the right to vote?
The numbers of young people not attending school is up, we have problems with literacy, and as many Police will tell you, issues with respect from youth who don’t even know how to be a part of a civilised society, far less make an educated vote on it.
…ummmmm, couldn’t a whole bunch of adults fall into the exact same categories that Kate feels bans you from voting?
I’ve met a lot more stupid and cruel adults than I have teenagers in my life.
Seeing as 16 and 17 year olds will be living with the climate crisis and inequality rigged system adults keep imposing upon them, shouldn’t they have a say in that process?
I want to see 16 and 17 year olds get the vote, but I also believe that we should give time to exploring capping the voting age at 70.
Have you ever heard anything other than offensive bullshit out of a 70 year olds mouth?
They have some pretty fucking crazy ideas about the world, and I just think removing all those who vote over 70 would make our politics far better.
We’ll get the same effect from Covid I suppose, and Gen Xers plus Millennials are now a larger voting block than the Boomers, but we won’t get to see their faces being told they can’t vote and that seems like a great sadness and loss.
Let’s get that voting age down to 16, but seriously consider capping it over 70 as well.
Increasingly having independent opinion in a mainstream media environment which mostly echo one another has become more important than ever, so if you value having an independent voice – please donate here.
If you can’t contribute but want to help, please always feel free to share our blogs on social media
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?
martyn re-gender or change the ethnicity in your little meme, then tell me how virtuous you feel about your scattershot tropes.
” Civilised society ”
That must be the society of the well kept and effluent in Gods own. The people that listen to Kate as she is one of them.
Meanwhile the other existing class of wage slaves and the human mules carrying the civilised society on their backs would think that there is merit in the idea despite the fact that ” civilised ” democracy has continued to walk all over the poor and unwashed.
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.
boomer is a lazy stereotype used by those who have no actual argument…bit like ‘lazy maori’ really…
and no I’M not a boomer or a property owner I just don’t like open displays of bigotry posing as virtue signalling….frankly TDB would be the first to condemn this shite were it aimed at ANY other sector of society.
some aging bourgeoise do fit the bill as charged, SOME, just as SOME members of other groups fit racist or sexist stereotypes.
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.
Gen X, the generation that got to see the boomers rip up all the policies that benefited them growing up and then see them create policies that feather their retirements. Millenilals just think its normal
Mid 50’s would make you a X-er not a boomer.
How about make voting for citizens only? *crickets chirping*
YUP castro, you’re obsessed but not wrong
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...
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?
and now people are paying tax that is paying pensions while having to also put more aside to cover their own retirements
Many of the things that benefited pensioners growing up have been removed to pay for things like the gold card….
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?”
Well, Martyn will get to 70 and then he can be among the offensive bullshitters too, because, as he says, “have you ever heard anything other than offensive bullshit out of a 70 year olds mouth?”
“…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
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.
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.
“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.
Yep. Most 70-year-olds I know are generally wise, contemplative and considerate of others. Most of them remember a more equitable New Zealand, lived close enough to war and to the depression to value the small things in life. Give me a 70-year-olds opinion any day to the recycled facebook outrage of a 16 year old.
what about some term limits so we can thin out some of the grifters in parliament
If you don’t work you don’t vote, easy
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!
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
Totally agree.
Stupid idea.
Heehee good for you Martyn and wee Baby Buddha!
Also Martyn don’t forget to pray to Sweet Baby Jesus either .. ;o)
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
So your’re advocating for over 70s to be tax exempt also?
Fair’s fair.
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.
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.
Anyone who thinks a 16 year old has the maturity to make decisions on how to vote is simply delusional.
For goodness sakes, 18 year olds don’t either and some adults never reach that point as is evidenced by a good number of posters on this place.
As soon as you mention “free” you should be excluded from voting because free doesn’t exist.
Paid by others does exist and it should be well understood that when somebody gets something for “free”, others are being deprived of their own property or income to achieve this.
With that in mind, such decisions to make things “free” should be done only where a common good exists.
Free education upto and including secondary school? Yes, and quite frankly more of it.
Free tertiary education? No, as it benefits only the chosen few. Partial subsidy is fine as long as people are actually progressing.
Having taught at university I can attest that half the students (at least) should never have been allowed on campus without a bucket and mop in their hands.
And whilst we are at it, cull the utterly useless woke “subjects” such as gender studies or at very least make them 100% user pays so that if some idiot wants to waste their time, they are at least not wasting other peoples money.
Take the money saved from that and cutting the useless from the civil service and start funding some actual vocational based training which has been largely left to rot since Rogernomics kicked in.
“Free tertiary education? No, as it benefits only the chosen few. ”
What sort of argument is that? Removing tuition fees would improve equality of opportunity and social mobility.
BUT, you’re on the money with your following statement:
“Having taught at university I can attest that half the students (at least) should never have been allowed on campus”
That’s the uncomfortable truth about our present unicorp model. More bums on seats = more $$ for the uni. It’s now about quantity more than quality.
We need to remove the user-pays model but tighten the requirements for getting in, and for staying in – fail three papers and you’re out.
I would endorse the Pope’s comment here.The user pays system is precisely what makes tertiary education the preserve of the already privileged and unavailable to kids from poorer families who show talent but needs of a poor family background don’t allow the cost.
I would have been one of the 50 % who should have been ineligible for lack of commitment though. What should happen is a system where the first year is paid by the state and from then on becomes dependent on performance so if you fail your subjects you don’t get state assistance next year. I should have been subject to that discipline ; I imposed it myself.
D J S
https://www.stuff.co.nz/opinion/128779804/lets-not-delay-lowering-the-voting-age
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….
Great satire Martyn. It was satire of identity politics, right?
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.
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.
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.
?
Watching boomers work while receiving the pension, allowed to own multiple properties, have assets, cash and shares, even have partners that work and still get the pension no problem at all and even get a gold card for discounts on everything to boot.
Yet the rest of us are means tested and if you have partners who work and you dont, tough. No help from the system at all.
The taxation we pay pays their pension, its just a glorified benefit but then we have to put aside our own on top of that to cover our own retirements, the deck is stacked against everybody else, why couldnt they have put aside some financials for their pensions knowing we would have this crunch when they all retired, why do the rest of us have to pay again?
Then we have the housing issue, they started the trend as they retired to feather their own nests and the expense of every other generation after them, they were also the generation that mechanised everything reducing the amount of available jobs and now look at where we are but at least they get to live comffortably till they die.
The boomer generation is the selfish generation – only ever put themselves first, who cares about every other generation after them.
The issue is not so bad if the boomers actually worked and lived in NZ most of their lives and paid taxes here because taxes have been up to 60% for workers in NZ in the 1970’s.
The biggest disgust is that the woke and neolbierals are destroying this by allowing overseas nationals who have not worked or lived in NZ very long and often not even speaking the language are allowed to ‘settle’ here close to or in retirement and have the rest of NZ support their lifestyle.
It is about giving back and rights to taxpayer money. The woke (often with elderly parents on pensions from overseas living with them) supported by neoliberals and local woke who have pushed this through.
Don’t forget the Greens of “ok boomer” voted against foreign pensioners having to live at least 20 years in NZ before they get the pension. They want to destroy the pensions and make sure that working NZ don’t get one when they retire as the money has all been paid out.
The 165,000 resident visas had zero age limit and reduced health and no language requirement limitations on them. Clearly they were not aimed at improving the skills in NZ but actually adding more burden to them.
If a person can’t speak the language in NZ then it adds to endless delays though our social, health and legal system because everything is delayed due to translators being required. So that adds more back log onto everyone else trying to get their court, social welfare, justice and legal situation (mostly all taxpayer paid) sorted out.
So next time the youth are at the polling booth, think what that means to them as super is the largest social welfare cost that NZ faces and immigration was not supposed to make it worse but reverse it.
Like housing everything the woke and neoliberal do, ends out the opposite for everyone, and that is why bright people are leaving.
They will come back to retire or if they need social welfare in NZ but it’s not very fair to current workers and professionals living here supporting so many pensioners from overseas who can just come here and claim with the woke cheering them on.
I agree with you Mark….As a new entry old age pensioner myself I do wonder why my friends who work also get the pension…And people who are very wealthy get the pension…It does seem wrong to me ..I thought that for years and my view has not changed…I was paying towards the pension of people older than me since January 1973 and now younger people are paying towards my pension…..You are possibly paying towards my pension Mark…The fact that I bought a section in 1976 for $3,800 , and paid about $400 too much I might add , while earning $53 nett was probably one of my better ideas….I borrowed $1200 from my folks…yes bank of mum and dad in 1976… had some savings myself and was begrudgingly lent $1800 from the OSB bank…I spent 20 years building a crib and had to add on when my son arrived…just building as I had cash ….I had a $20,000 mortgage by this stage…living in a construction zone bringing up a wee fella by myself for 20 years was interesting but we made do….Now my property is worth $800,000 up and I have people coming to the door asking if it’s for sale…I have savings and my pension and live the same humble , frugal way I’ve always lived…I have watched with despair at Rogernomics destroy this country , an now with much dismay..I am now a greedy boomer and despised by the younger generations….well bugger me….you do realise when I’m off to that big bar in the sky , I can’t take anything with me and a young person will get all I have…go without and just chip away at life Mark…like we did…and you will get there one day…
Sorry Mark …I must add …My $53 nett was per week and I was in my third year of an apprenticeship …$10 a week board to mum and dad…$10 a week for their loan….the OSB loan was $25 weekly I think…not much over for a social 21 year old lad…I do understand the loan to salary ratio is much higher now and I feel for you guys…but you must understand the boomer name is wrong….The Douglas , Prebble , Brash group are older than our lot….totally different…much more greedy and nasty…..I have spent most of my adulthood distancing myself from them…..You guys need to understand that…..thank you….
When Martin reaches the age of 70, or probably before, he will find a way of reversing (and justifying) his opinion.