A controversial take I don't think should be controversial

Landed immigrants, foreign students of age and permanently residents, basically anyone who is going to be here long term should be able to vote.

Why? Because they contribute to the economy and the future of the country and the politicians get huge amounts of control over their future. So I believe they should get a say.

You don't have to be a citizen for the government to have huge amounts of control over your daily life, so you should not have to be a citizen to vote. Period.

You don't have a democracy if not every person impacted by the vote gets a say.

I also would lower the voting age to 16 since you don't have to be 18 to enter the workforce and contribute. And I don't think there is any magical wisdom that happens between 16 to 18.

This page is a permanent link to the reply below and its nested replies. See all post replies »

trollslayer · 46-50, M

I can agree maybe for local elections - sheriff, school board, bond issues, etc. anyone who owns property, pays property tax, or has kids in school has a stake in how their money is spent.

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

@trollslayer Restricting it to local elections that really don't matter much seems like just moving the arbitrary restrictions up one level.

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

@trollslayer Also realistically the immigrants and foreign students who already own property will realistically be the "golden passport" types that already have special privileges already based on their money back in the old country and in their new country.

Realistically no first generation immigrants are going straight to suburbia unless they already have a head start.

trollslayer · 46-50, M

@PicturesOfABetterTomorrow idk - I think in a national level you may only want people voting who have demonstrated some kind of long term commitment to that country.

PicturesOfABetterTomorrow · 41-45, M

@trollslayer except none of your criteria has anything to do with commitment.