We already have age limits at the lower end. Why are people so against age limits at the upper end?

  • TommySalami@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    28
    ·
    1 year ago

    To answer your question, most people aren’t against age limits. But the elderly are the single strongest voting population and the people already in power won’t do anything against their own interest without significant voter follow through.

    • Banzai51
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      1 year ago

      Everyone is for age limits until they would be affected.

      • TommySalami@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        1 year ago

        I hope I have the wherewithal to maintain my convictions at that age. Perhaps that’s naivete, but I never became conservative, either.

        • Xariphon@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m still ardently pro-youth and against exclusion even at almost 40; I would like to believe I’ll still be for age caps when I’m old. Like actual old. I know I’m already fuckin’ old. You know what I mean.

            • howler@beehaw.org
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              ·
              1 year ago

              Ditto. I recognize my cognitive slide from even 10 years ago… And Mitch has decades on me… I also realize that the older my kids have gotten, the more out of touch I’ve become… These fossils dinner gaf though… Having strokes on live tv won’t even stop them.

    • circuitfarmer@lemmy.sdf.org
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because the elderly don’t work, so they can vote while everyone else is busy propping up the economy they built.

    • BorgDrone@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      We should move to a system where votes are weighted based on age. Up to, say, 40 years of age your vote has a weight of 1.0. Above 40 the weight should reduce linearly each year until it reaches 0.1 at the age that equals the current life expectancy. Basically: the closer you are to death the shorter you are affected by the consequences of your votes, so you should have less influence. Older people are probe to short term thinking as they won’t live to see the long term effects anyway.

      • StringTheory@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Ah, Dred Scott vs Sanford raises its ugly head again.

        When you get old enough to be worth 0.6, shall we call it “3/5” just for old times’ sake? As a compromise?