Quote:
Originally Posted by sterlingice
(I don't know if I wholly agree with my overall statement, for the record- but I think it needs to be said that it's much more complicated than things that can be fit 50 times on the backdrop of a politician's press conference or 2 line post)
That's a very interesting question. At first blush, I would have to say 18 as at that age you can vote. If you choose not to vote but have the right freely available to you, then that's your own (foolish) choice.
However, we do grant people younger than that limited freedoms but we do essentially give their parents the rights by proxy to speak for them until they are old enough to make a good decision. And, while you cannot choose your parents and have only limited influence over them- I think having parents vote is a much better system than having someone younger than, say, 16 vote (16-18 is a nebulous area but I think 18 is quite reasonable- another topic for another day).
SI
|
so then you're going to "sin-tax" all of those kids before they reach 18?
i also think you still underestimate the problem of "who decides what gets taxed at what rate" and the unpopularity of taxing certain things (example: as much as i agree with you on say big fuel-guzzling SUV's and trucks can you imagine the uproar in rural areas, in states like Texas etc. if those were taxed higher?) And then what if you taxed things at different rates that happen to be functions of regional-consumption or for different occupations that are more essential?
you'd have construction workers up in arms if you taxed fuel-guzzling vehicles more due to the lower fuel efficiency of trucks. and you'd have poor people claiming economic discrimination if you tax "fast food" more if that's all they can afford.
it's a fucking mess. no way it could ever happen to the extent you say. too many discrete groups would be up in arms.