xahteiwi,
@xahteiwi@mastodon.social avatar

One of the flaws of democracy is that there is no way to exclude people from decisions whose consequences won't affect them, if they lack the decency to act on the behalf of those whom those decisions will affect.

No person over 70 has any business acting against the interest of a 20-year-old, when it comes to mitigating climate disaster.

pludikovsky,
@pludikovsky@chaos.social avatar

@xahteiwi Which is why I'm all for a maximum voting age of (statistical life expectancy - minimum voting age), both active and passive.

For example in Austria that would mean no active voting rights after 66, no election to parliament after 64.

xahteiwi,
@xahteiwi@mastodon.social avatar

@pludikovsky No, that doesn't work. You can't exclude those people from, say, decisions about healthcare or pensions or public transport which absolutely do affect them.

It's a flaw. It's not fixable by a tweak to the system. Any such fix is a net loss, on balance.

There is no substitute for decency.

foax,
@foax@mas.to avatar

@xahteiwi @pludikovsky
One attempt to mitigate this could be to give additional votes to the parents of underage children.

xahteiwi,
@xahteiwi@mastodon.social avatar

@foax @pludikovsky Given how the 70+ generation can evidently not be trusted to vote in the interest of their children, do you really think that's a good idea?

ascherbaum,
@ascherbaum@mastodon.social avatar

@xahteiwi They could live until age of 100+ - but then it should be in their best interest to make sure the remaining years are not miserable.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • random
  • PowerRangers
  • DreamBathrooms
  • tacticalgear
  • magazineikmin
  • vwfavf
  • Youngstown
  • ngwrru68w68
  • ethstaker
  • slotface
  • rosin
  • mdbf
  • thenastyranch
  • kavyap
  • modclub
  • provamag3
  • Durango
  • cubers
  • osvaldo12
  • GTA5RPClips
  • everett
  • khanakhh
  • InstantRegret
  • Leos
  • tester
  • normalnudes
  • cisconetworking
  • anitta
  • megavids
  • All magazines