GCSB Protest March

Welcome Guest.

You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.

Forums › Off topic › GCSB Protest March

1 | ... | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | ... | 48

509 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#879856 16-Aug-2013 22:46

Geektastic:
sdav:
Geektastic:

I'm not 100% convinced by democracy myself: it gives votes to idiots, which is a bad thing. The modern world is far too complex and the cost of rectifying economic mistakes far too great for people who can barely string a sentence together to be allowed an equal say in what happens. At the very least, a 'Voting Licence' should be required, for which you must sit a test to demonstrate a reasonable grasp of economics, foreign policy and so on. Passing a more stringent version of the licence test should be required before you can stand for election, too.

Hmmm I know what you mean but No! Instead of giving votes to only to the "educated" you are better educating everyone equally in the first place.

The reason I don't jump on the band wagon and criticise the government at every opportunity is I know the world is more complex than I will ever (and sometimes care to) understand. I think the current state of mis-information and half truth politics to undermine whoever is in power just for the sake of it is more damaging and gets the country nowhere. The Greens are the worst at it I think. OT again... I'll leave it there!

How can you educate everyone equally? My IQ is almost 140. How can you educate someone whose IQ is say 90 equally to me? How can you educate me equally to someone whose IQ is say 180?

Some people are just stupid. They should not be allowed to vote unless they can prove that they understand what they are being asked to vote on. Otherwise it is too easy for politicians to bribe them with cheaper petrol/beer/fags/houses (insert the bribe du jour here) because they are unable to extrapolate the consequences of what they are being offered.

We expect people to demonstrate minimum levels of skill and understanding when they want to drive a car: why not when they decide on our collective future?

If I can place , selectively, material in front of you, I can alter your opinion , probably get you to vote one way or another on an issue , sure it will be harder if you are smarter, but not impossible. The difference with a car is I can only hurt about 5 people at a time :)

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#879870 16-Aug-2013 23:07

turnin:
Geektastic:
sdav:
Geektastic:

I'm not 100% convinced by democracy myself: it gives votes to idiots, which is a bad thing. The modern world is far too complex and the cost of rectifying economic mistakes far too great for people who can barely string a sentence together to be allowed an equal say in what happens. At the very least, a 'Voting Licence' should be required, for which you must sit a test to demonstrate a reasonable grasp of economics, foreign policy and so on. Passing a more stringent version of the licence test should be required before you can stand for election, too.

Hmmm I know what you mean but No! Instead of giving votes to only to the "educated" you are better educating everyone equally in the first place.

The reason I don't jump on the band wagon and criticise the government at every opportunity is I know the world is more complex than I will ever (and sometimes care to) understand. I think the current state of mis-information and half truth politics to undermine whoever is in power just for the sake of it is more damaging and gets the country nowhere. The Greens are the worst at it I think. OT again... I'll leave it there!

How can you educate everyone equally? My IQ is almost 140. How can you educate someone whose IQ is say 90 equally to me? How can you educate me equally to someone whose IQ is say 180?

Some people are just stupid. They should not be allowed to vote unless they can prove that they understand what they are being asked to vote on. Otherwise it is too easy for politicians to bribe them with cheaper petrol/beer/fags/houses (insert the bribe du jour here) because they are unable to extrapolate the consequences of what they are being offered.

We expect people to demonstrate minimum levels of skill and understanding when they want to drive a car: why not when they decide on our collective future?

If I can place , selectively, material in front of you, I can alter your opinion , probably get you to vote one way or another on an issue , sure it will be harder if you are smarter, but not impossible. The difference with a car is I can only hurt about 5 people at a time :)

You'll never convince me that some of the dullards I see on TV and in the streets should be voting for anything I'm afraid, no matter what material you put in front of me

Watch Police 10-7 sometime and tell me if you think the people featured in that ought to be able to do anything at all that affects your country's wellbeing!

sdav

846 posts

Ultimate Geek

#879893 16-Aug-2013 23:49

Geektastic:
sdav:
Geektastic:

I'm not 100% convinced by democracy myself: it gives votes to idiots, which is a bad thing. The modern world is far too complex and the cost of rectifying economic mistakes far too great for people who can barely string a sentence together to be allowed an equal say in what happens. At the very least, a 'Voting Licence' should be required, for which you must sit a test to demonstrate a reasonable grasp of economics, foreign policy and so on. Passing a more stringent version of the licence test should be required before you can stand for election, too.

Hmmm I know what you mean but No! Instead of giving votes to only to the "educated" you are better educating everyone equally in the first place.

The reason I don't jump on the band wagon and criticise the government at every opportunity is I know the world is more complex than I will ever (and sometimes care to) understand. I think the current state of mis-information and half truth politics to undermine whoever is in power just for the sake of it is more damaging and gets the country nowhere. The Greens are the worst at it I think. OT again... I'll leave it there!

How can you educate everyone equally? My IQ is almost 140. How can you educate someone whose IQ is say 90 equally to me? How can you educate me equally to someone whose IQ is say 180?

Some people are just stupid. They should not be allowed to vote unless they can prove that they understand what they are being asked to vote on. Otherwise it is too easy for politicians to bribe them with cheaper petrol/beer/fags/houses (insert the bribe du jour here) because they are unable to extrapolate the consequences of what they are being offered.

We expect people to demonstrate minimum levels of skill and understanding when they want to drive a car: why not when they decide on our collective future?

I didn't mean you should educate everyone equally to the same level (poor choice of word on my part). How would that even work? I was meaning you are best to educate all people properly to a decent level in the first place. At no point during school did we get taught how to run a budget or what politics even was. These things should be basic skills and not just taught in specialised classes. I picked up all these things on my own as well as having parents that took an active interest in my education and life in general. Not everyone has this.

People just have different views on politics and what matters to them due to circumstance. How can you so easily compare your intelligence
to someone else's and decide how they vote is right or wrong? I make far more effort than most people I know when I vote - reading through most, but not all policies of parties that interest me (but as a serious, intelligent voter you would consider all your options right?). I also know that it is pretty much rendered irrelevant by someone voting for their mum or dad's party without even knowing who the party leader is but it doesn't matter to me, it's their vote.

And how do you even begin to measure someone's ability to vote? Do you have to pass a test covering all the ministries in NZ? That's just absurd.

But like I already said, I feel your frustrations and feel like some people's votes are a waste. But who am I to judge what is important to them?

Edit to delete a wild copy and paste...

freitasm

BDFL - Memuneh
79253 posts

Uber Geek

Administrator

ID Verified

Trusted

Geekzone

Lifetime subscriber

#879954 17-Aug-2013 09:58

An example of what happens without oversight: NSA broke privacy rules thousands of times per year, on Washington Post.

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#879978 17-Aug-2013 11:13

sdav:
Geektastic:
sdav:
Geektastic:

I'm not 100% convinced by democracy myself: it gives votes to idiots, which is a bad thing. The modern world is far too complex and the cost of rectifying economic mistakes far too great for people who can barely string a sentence together to be allowed an equal say in what happens. At the very least, a 'Voting Licence' should be required, for which you must sit a test to demonstrate a reasonable grasp of economics, foreign policy and so on. Passing a more stringent version of the licence test should be required before you can stand for election, too.

Hmmm I know what you mean but No! Instead of giving votes to only to the "educated" you are better educating everyone equally in the first place.

The reason I don't jump on the band wagon and criticise the government at every opportunity is I know the world is more complex than I will ever (and sometimes care to) understand. I think the current state of mis-information and half truth politics to undermine whoever is in power just for the sake of it is more damaging and gets the country nowhere. The Greens are the worst at it I think. OT again... I'll leave it there!

How can you educate everyone equally? My IQ is almost 140. How can you educate someone whose IQ is say 90 equally to me? How can you educate me equally to someone whose IQ is say 180?

Some people are just stupid. They should not be allowed to vote unless they can prove that they understand what they are being asked to vote on. Otherwise it is too easy for politicians to bribe them with cheaper petrol/beer/fags/houses (insert the bribe du jour here) because they are unable to extrapolate the consequences of what they are being offered.

We expect people to demonstrate minimum levels of skill and understanding when they want to drive a car: why not when they decide on our collective future?

I didn't mean you should educate everyone equally to the same level (poor choice of word on my part). How would that even work? I was meaning you are best to educate all people properly to a decent level in the first place. At no point during school did we get taught how to run a budget or what politics even was. These things should be basic skills and not just taught in specialised classes. I picked up all these things on my own as well as having parents that took an active interest in my education and life in general. Not everyone has this.

People just have different views on politics and what matters to them due to circumstance. How can you so easily compare your intelligence
to someone else's and decide how they vote is right or wrong? I make far more effort than most people I know when I vote - reading through most, but not all policies of parties that interest me (but as a serious, intelligent voter you would consider all your options right?). I also know that it is pretty much rendered irrelevant by someone voting for their mum or dad's party without even knowing who the party leader is but it doesn't matter to me, it's their vote.

And how do you even begin to measure someone's ability to vote? Do you have to pass a test covering all the ministries in NZ? That's just absurd.

But like I already said, I feel your frustrations and feel like some people's votes are a waste. But who am I to judge what is important to them?

Edit to delete a wild copy and paste...

I'm not suggesting that your approach is wrong - the Voter Test could easily be something you take at 18 with whatever other exams they do in NZ at that age. My point is that demonstrating you understand at least to a reasonable level how governments work, how state finances, taxation and so on work should be a prerequisite for being allowed the privilege to affect their outcomes.

For example, if a politician says to you on your doorstep "I can guarantee that if you vote for me/my party your weekly beers will cost 50% less because we will cut beer tax!" you should at least have demonstrated you will be informed enough to say "And how will you replace the tax income you loose from doing that?" instead of just saying "Chur bro! Sounds pretty sweet aye!"

Woolly

119 posts

Master Geek
Inactive user

#880019 17-Aug-2013 12:11

Intelligence doesn't always equate to common sense or practical knowledge.

For example I drew the short straw for doing interviews. We had 3 short listed from the agency. The 1st one arrives University degree a long list of CNE's (novell - long time ago).

I'm flat stick so said can you format that pile of floppy disks on that machine and then we'll start the interview. He said ok.

5 minutes later I asked how he'd got on? He didn't know how to format floppies. It was a short interview.

Re: NSA Violations reported in Washington Post

If they were fined heavily for each violation their system would improve quickly.

PaulBags

809 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#880055 17-Aug-2013 12:35

Geektastic: I'm not suggesting that your approach is wrong - the Voter Test could easily be something you take at 18 with whatever other exams they do in NZ at that age.

I remember me at 18, and I'd severely hope there would be a chance to retake the test later in life when your not so much of an idiot.

Also as a non-citizen (non-voter) can I pay less tax? After all if I don't have the same rights, why should I have the same responsibilities?

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

sdav

846 posts

Ultimate Geek

#880074 17-Aug-2013 13:00

Geektastic:
sdav:
Geektastic:
sdav:
Geektastic:

I'm not 100% convinced by democracy myself: it gives votes to idiots, which is a bad thing. The modern world is far too complex and the cost of rectifying economic mistakes far too great for people who can barely string a sentence together to be allowed an equal say in what happens. At the very least, a 'Voting Licence' should be required, for which you must sit a test to demonstrate a reasonable grasp of economics, foreign policy and so on. Passing a more stringent version of the licence test should be required before you can stand for election, too.

Hmmm I know what you mean but No! Instead of giving votes to only to the "educated" you are better educating everyone equally in the first place.

The reason I don't jump on the band wagon and criticise the government at every opportunity is I know the world is more complex than I will ever (and sometimes care to) understand. I think the current state of mis-information and half truth politics to undermine whoever is in power just for the sake of it is more damaging and gets the country nowhere. The Greens are the worst at it I think. OT again... I'll leave it there!

How can you educate everyone equally? My IQ is almost 140. How can you educate someone whose IQ is say 90 equally to me? How can you educate me equally to someone whose IQ is say 180?

Some people are just stupid. They should not be allowed to vote unless they can prove that they understand what they are being asked to vote on. Otherwise it is too easy for politicians to bribe them with cheaper petrol/beer/fags/houses (insert the bribe du jour here) because they are unable to extrapolate the consequences of what they are being offered.

We expect people to demonstrate minimum levels of skill and understanding when they want to drive a car: why not when they decide on our collective future?

I didn't mean you should educate everyone equally to the same level (poor choice of word on my part). How would that even work? I was meaning you are best to educate all people properly to a decent level in the first place. At no point during school did we get taught how to run a budget or what politics even was. These things should be basic skills and not just taught in specialised classes. I picked up all these things on my own as well as having parents that took an active interest in my education and life in general. Not everyone has this.

People just have different views on politics and what matters to them due to circumstance. How can you so easily compare your intelligence
to someone else's and decide how they vote is right or wrong? I make far more effort than most people I know when I vote - reading through most, but not all policies of parties that interest me (but as a serious, intelligent voter you would consider all your options right?). I also know that it is pretty much rendered irrelevant by someone voting for their mum or dad's party without even knowing who the party leader is but it doesn't matter to me, it's their vote.

And how do you even begin to measure someone's ability to vote? Do you have to pass a test covering all the ministries in NZ? That's just absurd.

But like I already said, I feel your frustrations and feel like some people's votes are a waste. But who am I to judge what is important to them?

Edit to delete a wild copy and paste...

I'm not suggesting that your approach is wrong - the Voter Test could easily be something you take at 18 with whatever other exams they do in NZ at that age. My point is that demonstrating you understand at least to a reasonable level how governments work, how state finances, taxation and so on work should be a prerequisite for being allowed the privilege to affect their outcomes.

For example, if a politician says to you on your doorstep "I can guarantee that if you vote for me/my party your weekly beers will cost 50% less because we will cut beer tax!" you should at least have demonstrated you will be informed enough to say "And how will you replace the tax income you loose from doing that?" instead of just saying "Chur bro! Sounds pretty sweet aye!"

I think we agree on the same thing in principle just disagree that you lose your right to vote by failing a test.

Demonstrating that you understand how governments work, how state finances, taxation work etc should be part of education at a very young age. But then how do you stop the inevitable criticism of the government in power controlling young minds etc...

PaulBags

809 posts

Ultimate Geek
Inactive user

#880077 17-Aug-2013 13:10

sdav:
Geektastic:
sdav:
Geektastic:
sdav:
Geektastic:

I'm not 100% convinced by democracy myself: it gives votes to idiots, which is a bad thing. The modern world is far too complex and the cost of rectifying economic mistakes far too great for people who can barely string a sentence together to be allowed an equal say in what happens. At the very least, a 'Voting Licence' should be required, for which you must sit a test to demonstrate a reasonable grasp of economics, foreign policy and so on. Passing a more stringent version of the licence test should be required before you can stand for election, too.

Hmmm I know what you mean but No! Instead of giving votes to only to the "educated" you are better educating everyone equally in the first place.

The reason I don't jump on the band wagon and criticise the government at every opportunity is I know the world is more complex than I will ever (and sometimes care to) understand. I think the current state of mis-information and half truth politics to undermine whoever is in power just for the sake of it is more damaging and gets the country nowhere. The Greens are the worst at it I think. OT again... I'll leave it there!

How can you educate everyone equally? My IQ is almost 140. How can you educate someone whose IQ is say 90 equally to me? How can you educate me equally to someone whose IQ is say 180?

Some people are just stupid. They should not be allowed to vote unless they can prove that they understand what they are being asked to vote on. Otherwise it is too easy for politicians to bribe them with cheaper petrol/beer/fags/houses (insert the bribe du jour here) because they are unable to extrapolate the consequences of what they are being offered.

We expect people to demonstrate minimum levels of skill and understanding when they want to drive a car: why not when they decide on our collective future?

I didn't mean you should educate everyone equally to the same level (poor choice of word on my part). How would that even work? I was meaning you are best to educate all people properly to a decent level in the first place. At no point during school did we get taught how to run a budget or what politics even was. These things should be basic skills and not just taught in specialised classes. I picked up all these things on my own as well as having parents that took an active interest in my education and life in general. Not everyone has this.

People just have different views on politics and what matters to them due to circumstance. How can you so easily compare your intelligence
to someone else's and decide how they vote is right or wrong? I make far more effort than most people I know when I vote - reading through most, but not all policies of parties that interest me (but as a serious, intelligent voter you would consider all your options right?). I also know that it is pretty much rendered irrelevant by someone voting for their mum or dad's party without even knowing who the party leader is but it doesn't matter to me, it's their vote.

And how do you even begin to measure someone's ability to vote? Do you have to pass a test covering all the ministries in NZ? That's just absurd.

But like I already said, I feel your frustrations and feel like some people's votes are a waste. But who am I to judge what is important to them?

Edit to delete a wild copy and paste...

I'm not suggesting that your approach is wrong - the Voter Test could easily be something you take at 18 with whatever other exams they do in NZ at that age. My point is that demonstrating you understand at least to a reasonable level how governments work, how state finances, taxation and so on work should be a prerequisite for being allowed the privilege to affect their outcomes.

For example, if a politician says to you on your doorstep "I can guarantee that if you vote for me/my party your weekly beers will cost 50% less because we will cut beer tax!" you should at least have demonstrated you will be informed enough to say "And how will you replace the tax income you loose from doing that?" instead of just saying "Chur bro! Sounds pretty sweet aye!"

I think we agree on the same thing in principle just disagree that you lose your right to vote by failing a test.

Demonstrating that you understand how governments work, how state finances, taxation work etc should be part of education at a very young age. But then how do you stop the inevitable criticism of the government in power controlling young minds etc...

By countering that you have to know how things work now to be able to disagree with it, also by teaching not just our own system of government but those of other counrties and possibly even fictional governments. I would also suggest that you can't work towards better government systems without understanding the current ones first, our current teachings on the workings of government are like jumping from 2+2=4 in the classroom and then straight to calculus in the real world. I suppose you could argue that that's life, that school will never fully prepare you.

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#880132 17-Aug-2013 15:18

sdav:
Geektastic:
sdav:
Geektastic:
sdav:
Geektastic:

I'm not 100% convinced by democracy myself: it gives votes to idiots, which is a bad thing. The modern world is far too complex and the cost of rectifying economic mistakes far too great for people who can barely string a sentence together to be allowed an equal say in what happens. At the very least, a 'Voting Licence' should be required, for which you must sit a test to demonstrate a reasonable grasp of economics, foreign policy and so on. Passing a more stringent version of the licence test should be required before you can stand for election, too.

Hmmm I know what you mean but No! Instead of giving votes to only to the "educated" you are better educating everyone equally in the first place.

The reason I don't jump on the band wagon and criticise the government at every opportunity is I know the world is more complex than I will ever (and sometimes care to) understand. I think the current state of mis-information and half truth politics to undermine whoever is in power just for the sake of it is more damaging and gets the country nowhere. The Greens are the worst at it I think. OT again... I'll leave it there!

How can you educate everyone equally? My IQ is almost 140. How can you educate someone whose IQ is say 90 equally to me? How can you educate me equally to someone whose IQ is say 180?

Some people are just stupid. They should not be allowed to vote unless they can prove that they understand what they are being asked to vote on. Otherwise it is too easy for politicians to bribe them with cheaper petrol/beer/fags/houses (insert the bribe du jour here) because they are unable to extrapolate the consequences of what they are being offered.

We expect people to demonstrate minimum levels of skill and understanding when they want to drive a car: why not when they decide on our collective future?

I didn't mean you should educate everyone equally to the same level (poor choice of word on my part). How would that even work? I was meaning you are best to educate all people properly to a decent level in the first place. At no point during school did we get taught how to run a budget or what politics even was. These things should be basic skills and not just taught in specialised classes. I picked up all these things on my own as well as having parents that took an active interest in my education and life in general. Not everyone has this.

People just have different views on politics and what matters to them due to circumstance. How can you so easily compare your intelligence
to someone else's and decide how they vote is right or wrong? I make far more effort than most people I know when I vote - reading through most, but not all policies of parties that interest me (but as a serious, intelligent voter you would consider all your options right?). I also know that it is pretty much rendered irrelevant by someone voting for their mum or dad's party without even knowing who the party leader is but it doesn't matter to me, it's their vote.

And how do you even begin to measure someone's ability to vote? Do you have to pass a test covering all the ministries in NZ? That's just absurd.

But like I already said, I feel your frustrations and feel like some people's votes are a waste. But who am I to judge what is important to them?

Edit to delete a wild copy and paste...

I'm not suggesting that your approach is wrong - the Voter Test could easily be something you take at 18 with whatever other exams they do in NZ at that age. My point is that demonstrating you understand at least to a reasonable level how governments work, how state finances, taxation and so on work should be a prerequisite for being allowed the privilege to affect their outcomes.

For example, if a politician says to you on your doorstep "I can guarantee that if you vote for me/my party your weekly beers will cost 50% less because we will cut beer tax!" you should at least have demonstrated you will be informed enough to say "And how will you replace the tax income you loose from doing that?" instead of just saying "Chur bro! Sounds pretty sweet aye!"

I think we agree on the same thing in principle just disagree that you lose your right to vote by failing a test.

Demonstrating that you understand how governments work, how state finances, taxation work etc should be part of education at a very young age. But then how do you stop the inevitable criticism of the government in power controlling young minds etc...

Firstly by ignoring the criticism. If that does not work, have GCSB put a contract on the complainers.... ;-)

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#880133 17-Aug-2013 15:23

sdav:
Geektastic:
sdav:
Geektastic:
sdav:
Geektastic:

I'm not 100% convinced by democracy myself: it gives votes to idiots, which is a bad thing. The modern world is far too complex and the cost of rectifying economic mistakes far too great for people who can barely string a sentence together to be allowed an equal say in what happens. At the very least, a 'Voting Licence' should be required, for which you must sit a test to demonstrate a reasonable grasp of economics, foreign policy and so on. Passing a more stringent version of the licence test should be required before you can stand for election, too.

Hmmm I know what you mean but No! Instead of giving votes to only to the "educated" you are better educating everyone equally in the first place.

The reason I don't jump on the band wagon and criticise the government at every opportunity is I know the world is more complex than I will ever (and sometimes care to) understand. I think the current state of mis-information and half truth politics to undermine whoever is in power just for the sake of it is more damaging and gets the country nowhere. The Greens are the worst at it I think. OT again... I'll leave it there!

How can you educate everyone equally? My IQ is almost 140. How can you educate someone whose IQ is say 90 equally to me? How can you educate me equally to someone whose IQ is say 180?

Some people are just stupid. They should not be allowed to vote unless they can prove that they understand what they are being asked to vote on. Otherwise it is too easy for politicians to bribe them with cheaper petrol/beer/fags/houses (insert the bribe du jour here) because they are unable to extrapolate the consequences of what they are being offered.

We expect people to demonstrate minimum levels of skill and understanding when they want to drive a car: why not when they decide on our collective future?

I didn't mean you should educate everyone equally to the same level (poor choice of word on my part). How would that even work? I was meaning you are best to educate all people properly to a decent level in the first place. At no point during school did we get taught how to run a budget or what politics even was. These things should be basic skills and not just taught in specialised classes. I picked up all these things on my own as well as having parents that took an active interest in my education and life in general. Not everyone has this.

People just have different views on politics and what matters to them due to circumstance. How can you so easily compare your intelligence
to someone else's and decide how they vote is right or wrong? I make far more effort than most people I know when I vote - reading through most, but not all policies of parties that interest me (but as a serious, intelligent voter you would consider all your options right?). I also know that it is pretty much rendered irrelevant by someone voting for their mum or dad's party without even knowing who the party leader is but it doesn't matter to me, it's their vote.

And how do you even begin to measure someone's ability to vote? Do you have to pass a test covering all the ministries in NZ? That's just absurd.

But like I already said, I feel your frustrations and feel like some people's votes are a waste. But who am I to judge what is important to them?

Edit to delete a wild copy and paste...

I'm not suggesting that your approach is wrong - the Voter Test could easily be something you take at 18 with whatever other exams they do in NZ at that age. My point is that demonstrating you understand at least to a reasonable level how governments work, how state finances, taxation and so on work should be a prerequisite for being allowed the privilege to affect their outcomes.

For example, if a politician says to you on your doorstep "I can guarantee that if you vote for me/my party your weekly beers will cost 50% less because we will cut beer tax!" you should at least have demonstrated you will be informed enough to say "And how will you replace the tax income you loose from doing that?" instead of just saying "Chur bro! Sounds pretty sweet aye!"

I think we agree on the same thing in principle just disagree that you lose your right to vote by failing a test.

Demonstrating that you understand how governments work, how state finances, taxation work etc should be part of education at a very young age. But then how do you stop the inevitable criticism of the government in power controlling young minds etc...

You don't lose your right to vote by failing the test. Like driving, you gain your right to vote by passing the test - you have no right to lose until you have done that.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#880156 17-Aug-2013 16:32

Geektastic:
sdav:
Geektastic:
sdav:
Geektastic:
sdav:
Geektastic:

I'm not 100% convinced by democracy myself: it gives votes to idiots, which is a bad thing. The modern world is far too complex and the cost of rectifying economic mistakes far too great for people who can barely string a sentence together to be allowed an equal say in what happens. At the very least, a 'Voting Licence' should be required, for which you must sit a test to demonstrate a reasonable grasp of economics, foreign policy and so on. Passing a more stringent version of the licence test should be required before you can stand for election, too.

Hmmm I know what you mean but No! Instead of giving votes to only to the "educated" you are better educating everyone equally in the first place.

The reason I don't jump on the band wagon and criticise the government at every opportunity is I know the world is more complex than I will ever (and sometimes care to) understand. I think the current state of mis-information and half truth politics to undermine whoever is in power just for the sake of it is more damaging and gets the country nowhere. The Greens are the worst at it I think. OT again... I'll leave it there!

How can you educate everyone equally? My IQ is almost 140. How can you educate someone whose IQ is say 90 equally to me? How can you educate me equally to someone whose IQ is say 180?

Some people are just stupid. They should not be allowed to vote unless they can prove that they understand what they are being asked to vote on. Otherwise it is too easy for politicians to bribe them with cheaper petrol/beer/fags/houses (insert the bribe du jour here) because they are unable to extrapolate the consequences of what they are being offered.

We expect people to demonstrate minimum levels of skill and understanding when they want to drive a car: why not when they decide on our collective future?

I didn't mean you should educate everyone equally to the same level (poor choice of word on my part). How would that even work? I was meaning you are best to educate all people properly to a decent level in the first place. At no point during school did we get taught how to run a budget or what politics even was. These things should be basic skills and not just taught in specialised classes. I picked up all these things on my own as well as having parents that took an active interest in my education and life in general. Not everyone has this.

People just have different views on politics and what matters to them due to circumstance. How can you so easily compare your intelligence
to someone else's and decide how they vote is right or wrong? I make far more effort than most people I know when I vote - reading through most, but not all policies of parties that interest me (but as a serious, intelligent voter you would consider all your options right?). I also know that it is pretty much rendered irrelevant by someone voting for their mum or dad's party without even knowing who the party leader is but it doesn't matter to me, it's their vote.

And how do you even begin to measure someone's ability to vote? Do you have to pass a test covering all the ministries in NZ? That's just absurd.

But like I already said, I feel your frustrations and feel like some people's votes are a waste. But who am I to judge what is important to them?

Edit to delete a wild copy and paste...

I'm not suggesting that your approach is wrong - the Voter Test could easily be something you take at 18 with whatever other exams they do in NZ at that age. My point is that demonstrating you understand at least to a reasonable level how governments work, how state finances, taxation and so on work should be a prerequisite for being allowed the privilege to affect their outcomes.

For example, if a politician says to you on your doorstep "I can guarantee that if you vote for me/my party your weekly beers will cost 50% less because we will cut beer tax!" you should at least have demonstrated you will be informed enough to say "And how will you replace the tax income you loose from doing that?" instead of just saying "Chur bro! Sounds pretty sweet aye!"

I think we agree on the same thing in principle just disagree that you lose your right to vote by failing a test.

Demonstrating that you understand how governments work, how state finances, taxation work etc should be part of education at a very young age. But then how do you stop the inevitable criticism of the government in power controlling young minds etc...

You don't lose your right to vote by failing the test. Like driving, you gain your right to vote by passing the test - you have no right to lose until you have done that.

possibly the silliest notion I have seen on these forums

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#880165 17-Aug-2013 16:56

KiwiNZ:
Geektastic:
sdav:
Geektastic:
sdav:
Geektastic:
sdav:
Geektastic:

I'm not 100% convinced by democracy myself: it gives votes to idiots, which is a bad thing. The modern world is far too complex and the cost of rectifying economic mistakes far too great for people who can barely string a sentence together to be allowed an equal say in what happens. At the very least, a 'Voting Licence' should be required, for which you must sit a test to demonstrate a reasonable grasp of economics, foreign policy and so on. Passing a more stringent version of the licence test should be required before you can stand for election, too.

Hmmm I know what you mean but No! Instead of giving votes to only to the "educated" you are better educating everyone equally in the first place.

The reason I don't jump on the band wagon and criticise the government at every opportunity is I know the world is more complex than I will ever (and sometimes care to) understand. I think the current state of mis-information and half truth politics to undermine whoever is in power just for the sake of it is more damaging and gets the country nowhere. The Greens are the worst at it I think. OT again... I'll leave it there!

How can you educate everyone equally? My IQ is almost 140. How can you educate someone whose IQ is say 90 equally to me? How can you educate me equally to someone whose IQ is say 180?

Some people are just stupid. They should not be allowed to vote unless they can prove that they understand what they are being asked to vote on. Otherwise it is too easy for politicians to bribe them with cheaper petrol/beer/fags/houses (insert the bribe du jour here) because they are unable to extrapolate the consequences of what they are being offered.

We expect people to demonstrate minimum levels of skill and understanding when they want to drive a car: why not when they decide on our collective future?

I didn't mean you should educate everyone equally to the same level (poor choice of word on my part). How would that even work? I was meaning you are best to educate all people properly to a decent level in the first place. At no point during school did we get taught how to run a budget or what politics even was. These things should be basic skills and not just taught in specialised classes. I picked up all these things on my own as well as having parents that took an active interest in my education and life in general. Not everyone has this.

People just have different views on politics and what matters to them due to circumstance. How can you so easily compare your intelligence
to someone else's and decide how they vote is right or wrong? I make far more effort than most people I know when I vote - reading through most, but not all policies of parties that interest me (but as a serious, intelligent voter you would consider all your options right?). I also know that it is pretty much rendered irrelevant by someone voting for their mum or dad's party without even knowing who the party leader is but it doesn't matter to me, it's their vote.

And how do you even begin to measure someone's ability to vote? Do you have to pass a test covering all the ministries in NZ? That's just absurd.

But like I already said, I feel your frustrations and feel like some people's votes are a waste. But who am I to judge what is important to them?

Edit to delete a wild copy and paste...

I'm not suggesting that your approach is wrong - the Voter Test could easily be something you take at 18 with whatever other exams they do in NZ at that age. My point is that demonstrating you understand at least to a reasonable level how governments work, how state finances, taxation and so on work should be a prerequisite for being allowed the privilege to affect their outcomes.

For example, if a politician says to you on your doorstep "I can guarantee that if you vote for me/my party your weekly beers will cost 50% less because we will cut beer tax!" you should at least have demonstrated you will be informed enough to say "And how will you replace the tax income you loose from doing that?" instead of just saying "Chur bro! Sounds pretty sweet aye!"

I think we agree on the same thing in principle just disagree that you lose your right to vote by failing a test.

Demonstrating that you understand how governments work, how state finances, taxation work etc should be part of education at a very young age. But then how do you stop the inevitable criticism of the government in power controlling young minds etc...

You don't lose your right to vote by failing the test. Like driving, you gain your right to vote by passing the test - you have no right to lose until you have done that.

possibly the silliest notion I have seen on these forums

You think it silly that idiots ought not to have a say in what happens to you and your family? Interesting.

Geektastic

17942 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#880166 17-Aug-2013 17:03

PaulBags:
Geektastic: I'm not suggesting that your approach is wrong - the Voter Test could easily be something you take at 18 with whatever other exams they do in NZ at that age.

I remember me at 18, and I'd severely hope there would be a chance to retake the test later in life when your not so much of an idiot.

Also as a non-citizen (non-voter) can I pay less tax? After all if I don't have the same rights, why should I have the same responsibilities?

If you are a permanent resident you can also vote - you do not need to hold citizenship.

If you accept you were an idiot at 18, surely you must also accept that you should not have been voting and that my test concept would have helped ensure you did not until you were no longer - in your own words - an idiot?!

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#880167 17-Aug-2013 17:05

Geektastic:
KiwiNZ:
Geektastic:
sdav:
Geektastic:
sdav:
Geektastic:
sdav:
Geektastic:

I'm not 100% convinced by democracy myself: it gives votes to idiots, which is a bad thing. The modern world is far too complex and the cost of rectifying economic mistakes far too great for people who can barely string a sentence together to be allowed an equal say in what happens. At the very least, a 'Voting Licence' should be required, for which you must sit a test to demonstrate a reasonable grasp of economics, foreign policy and so on. Passing a more stringent version of the licence test should be required before you can stand for election, too.

Hmmm I know what you mean but No! Instead of giving votes to only to the "educated" you are better educating everyone equally in the first place.

The reason I don't jump on the band wagon and criticise the government at every opportunity is I know the world is more complex than I will ever (and sometimes care to) understand. I think the current state of mis-information and half truth politics to undermine whoever is in power just for the sake of it is more damaging and gets the country nowhere. The Greens are the worst at it I think. OT again... I'll leave it there!

How can you educate everyone equally? My IQ is almost 140. How can you educate someone whose IQ is say 90 equally to me? How can you educate me equally to someone whose IQ is say 180?

Some people are just stupid. They should not be allowed to vote unless they can prove that they understand what they are being asked to vote on. Otherwise it is too easy for politicians to bribe them with cheaper petrol/beer/fags/houses (insert the bribe du jour here) because they are unable to extrapolate the consequences of what they are being offered.

We expect people to demonstrate minimum levels of skill and understanding when they want to drive a car: why not when they decide on our collective future?

I didn't mean you should educate everyone equally to the same level (poor choice of word on my part). How would that even work? I was meaning you are best to educate all people properly to a decent level in the first place. At no point during school did we get taught how to run a budget or what politics even was. These things should be basic skills and not just taught in specialised classes. I picked up all these things on my own as well as having parents that took an active interest in my education and life in general. Not everyone has this.

People just have different views on politics and what matters to them due to circumstance. How can you so easily compare your intelligence
to someone else's and decide how they vote is right or wrong? I make far more effort than most people I know when I vote - reading through most, but not all policies of parties that interest me (but as a serious, intelligent voter you would consider all your options right?). I also know that it is pretty much rendered irrelevant by someone voting for their mum or dad's party without even knowing who the party leader is but it doesn't matter to me, it's their vote.

And how do you even begin to measure someone's ability to vote? Do you have to pass a test covering all the ministries in NZ? That's just absurd.

But like I already said, I feel your frustrations and feel like some people's votes are a waste. But who am I to judge what is important to them?

Edit to delete a wild copy and paste...

I'm not suggesting that your approach is wrong - the Voter Test could easily be something you take at 18 with whatever other exams they do in NZ at that age. My point is that demonstrating you understand at least to a reasonable level how governments work, how state finances, taxation and so on work should be a prerequisite for being allowed the privilege to affect their outcomes.

For example, if a politician says to you on your doorstep "I can guarantee that if you vote for me/my party your weekly beers will cost 50% less because we will cut beer tax!" you should at least have demonstrated you will be informed enough to say "And how will you replace the tax income you loose from doing that?" instead of just saying "Chur bro! Sounds pretty sweet aye!"

I think we agree on the same thing in principle just disagree that you lose your right to vote by failing a test.

Demonstrating that you understand how governments work, how state finances, taxation work etc should be part of education at a very young age. But then how do you stop the inevitable criticism of the government in power controlling young minds etc...

You don't lose your right to vote by failing the test. Like driving, you gain your right to vote by passing the test - you have no right to lose until you have done that.

possibly the silliest notion I have seen on these forums

You think it silly that idiots ought not to have a say in what happens to you and your family? Interesting.

universal suffrage is a basic human right.

1 | ... | 36 | 37 | 38 | 39 | 40 | 41 | 42 | 43 | 44 | 45 | 46 | ... | 48

News and reviews »

Air New Zealand Starts AI adoption with OpenAI
Posted 24-Jul-2025 16:00

eero Pro 7 Review
Posted 23-Jul-2025 12:07

BeeStation Plus Review
Posted 21-Jul-2025 14:21

eero Unveils New Wi-Fi 7 Products in New Zealand
Posted 21-Jul-2025 00:01

WiZ Introduces HDMI Sync Box and other Light Devices
Posted 20-Jul-2025 17:32

RedShield Enhances DDoS and Bot Attack Protection
Posted 20-Jul-2025 17:26

Seagate Ships 30TB Drives
Posted 17-Jul-2025 11:24

Oclean AirPump A10 Water Flosser Review
Posted 13-Jul-2025 11:05

Samsung Galaxy Z Fold7: Raising the Bar for Smartphones
Posted 10-Jul-2025 02:01

Samsung Galaxy Z Flip7 Brings New Edge-To-Edge FlexWindow
Posted 10-Jul-2025 02:01

Epson Launches New AM-C550Z WorkForce Enterprise printer
Posted 9-Jul-2025 18:22

Samsung Releases Smart Monitor M9
Posted 9-Jul-2025 17:46

Nearly Half of Older Kiwis Still Write their Passwords on Paper
Posted 9-Jul-2025 08:42

D-Link 4G+ Cat6 Wi-Fi 6 DWR-933M Mobile Hotspot Review
Posted 1-Jul-2025 11:34

Oppo A5 Series Launches With New Levels of Durability
Posted 30-Jun-2025 10:15

Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.

Updates »

Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.

RSS feeds: Main feed; Forums feed

Site features: Geekzone BI dashboard; Geekzone Badges; Geekzone Status Page

Affiliate links: Samsung; AliExpress; Wise; Sharesies; GoodSync

Site Information: Subscribe to Geekzone; Privacy Statement; Forum Usage Guidelines (FUG); Advertising; Trademark and copyright