[antattack]

If started at 16 young people would be much better voters at 18 than current 18 year old voters are and so on. There are examples of uninformed voters at all age groups (voting across party lines is one example). Young people should have a chance to participate in our democracy and should be able to vote, if not in general, at least in municipal elections.

[seba_dos1]

How so? How is being able to vote or not influencing people being informed or not? (which, by the way, is absolutely not what I was talking about in my previous comment)

Having voted before does not make you a better voter in the future. I don't think the fact that I had to wait with my first vote for almost full voting cycle longer because there were elections right before my 18th birthday that I couldn't take part in had influenced my political stances in any way.

[oceanplexian]

I’m OK with this as long as we make 16 the age of adulthood. Otherwise it’s a bit hypocritical to say that a 16 year old is mature enough to vote but not mature enough to have a beer.

[runnerup]

I think it makes sense for age of adulthood to be a graduated system for different perks at different ages.

If we ever make “K-16l” schooling free I suspect it will come about in tandem with increasing the perceived age of adulthood.

Meanwhile I do believe that 14-18 year olds should be provided far, far more agency than they currently are.

[antattack]

That is an interesting idea, but hard to implement in practice, to only allow mature enough people to vote. Being mature means different things to different people, but I suspect that even we we agreed on a definition we would find that a lot of adults would not qualify.

[bcrosby95]

You could argue that an adult shouldn't be represented by someone they didn't have the ability to vote for or against. But in that case you would probably need to lower the voting age even more.