Compulsory voting

[mista200]

Seeing as the Liberal vs Labor thread was going a bit off the rails I've decided to start a new thread.

For starters I couldnt care less about politics and neither do most people I associate with. To me there is hardly any difference between the 2 main parties....althoughIi guess if I did vote I would vote Liberal...based on economic management.

I wont enrol to vote! (I have been eligable to for nearly 7 years now) I have never got any fine or anything like that.

But why should i be forced to line up (waste my time) and then vote for someone who I hate. I am yet to see a single politician that I like...really

I know some people have to vote in order to keep the democracy going but why force people who dont give a s*#t, to line up and randomly tick boxes or do a donkey vote?

 

[rederob]

But why should i be forced to line up (waste my time) and then vote for someone who I hate. I am yet to see a single politician that I like...really

I have to agree Mista.
People who do not vote should be clearly identified.
As a voter, I believe you have the right to opt out of the "system" and therefore opt out of the benefits that exist because we have governments that make decisions about public services that are paid for by taxes.
By opting out of the system I would allow you to keep all your income as taxes should not be paid as you should not need to access any public services.
I'm not sure how you will cope without water, electricity, communications or access to roads - all of which are controlled by governments although not necessarily owned by them. There are lots of other services that you might not have access to, butyou shouldn't be too concerned as you won't be paying for them.
If you want to get a petition going please put my name down.
Ooops.
You would have to send it to a politician so they could present it in parliament.
So we have a problem, don't we!

 

[bullmarket]

hi mista200

as you are probably aware, I posted my reasons supporting compulsory voting in the Liberal v Labor thread

but imo a more accurate question for your poll could be 'should we be forced to go to vote in elections' because even with 'compulsory voting' you still have the option to vote informal if you choose to and so essentially not vote.....but maybe I'm just being picky... ....joe or wayne could edit the question for you if you like.

cheers

bullmarket

 

[Bobby]

My opinion,

Only people that have paid income tax can vote.
All bludgers can't vote.

Bob.

 

[tarnor]

I was out of town when we had a local election here.. a bi election or something... it was just for our little area and I had no idea about it.. Consequently i copped a small fine I thought 'FO!! i aint paying that'.. Hence that fine became a 120 dollar fine which i ignored untill they came looking for me.. they then left a letter to my mum trying to track me down... so i payed.. I'm still really annoyed about it, that fines way to much specially since i had NFI i had to vote, if some people can not go on the roll why can't they take me off

 

[Julia]

I was out of town when we had a local election here.. a bi election or something... it was just for our little area and I had no idea about it.. Consequently i copped a small fine I thought 'FO!! i aint paying that'.. Hence that fine became a 120 dollar fine which i ignored untill they came looking for me.. they then left a letter to my mum trying to track me down... so i payed.. I'm still really annoyed about it, that fines way to much specially since i had NFI i had to vote, if some people can not go on the roll why can't they take me off

Fining you was a bit over the top. We had a by-election here a few months ago. I knew it was on but simply forgot. So did about 80% of the population. No one was fined. I don't blame you for being annoyed about it.

Julia

 

[wayneL]

I have to agree Mista.
People who do not vote should be clearly identified.
As a voter, I believe you have the right to opt out of the "system" and therefore opt out of the benefits that exist because we have governments that make decisions about public services that are paid for by taxes.
By opting out of the system I would allow you to keep all your income as taxes should not be paid as you should not need to access any public services.
I'm not sure how you will cope without water, electricity, communications or access to roads - all of which are controlled by governments although not necessarily owned by them. There are lots of other services that you might not have access to, butyou shouldn't be too concerned as you won't be paying for them.
If you want to get a petition going please put my name down.
Ooops.
You would have to send it to a politician so they could present it in parliament.
So we have a problem, don't we!

I don't think I have ever seen such a divisive, tenuous and illogically emotive argument in my entire life. By logical extension, you are suggesting that children, foreigners, and the incompetant (as in intellectually handicapped etc) should be excluded from participating in society, because they don't vote either.

Listen, it's OK to have an opinion that people should be compulsed to vote. That is your right of free speech. Likewise, those who don't believe in compulsory voting have that right to express that belief.

But to draw such a long bow as you have is totally ludicrous. A politicians job is represent ALL of his constituents, not just those who have voted for him.

Lets say our piece, but ferchrissake, respect others even if you disagree!!!

"If we don't believe in freedom of expression for
people we despise, we don't believe in it at all."
-Noam Chomsky

 

[bullmarket]

hi wayne

I thought rederob's post was said with tongue firmly planted in cheek although it's clear he also supports compulsory voting

is there an emoticon for tongue in cheek?

.....and btw....I think you'll find compelled = compulsed

hi tarnor

I forgot to vote in a byelection many years ago and copped a penalty notice and fine of about $50 about 6 months later.

But I wrote back with an excuse saying that on my way to the voting booth at about 5:45pm (voting closed at 6pm) the fan belt in my car snapped and by the time I put on the spare fan belt I had in the boot it was past 6pm.

A few weeks later I received a letter back saying I was excused from paying the fine

good night and sweet dreams everyone.............

bullmarket

 

[visual]

these days whenever I think about not voting ,i remember what happened in iran,the young people thought that those morons were all the same ,so they did`nt vote ,unfortunately by doing that it meant that the biggest moron
of them all got in.maybe had they voted ,who knows ,better to have the guy who tries knowing hes going to be shut down than have a guy like the moron who got in.

but yes my vote will go to the liberals,even though they will totally ignore us as we are a safe labour sit,which means neither party really has to do anything for us.

 

[wayneL]

hi wayne

I thought rederob's post was said with tongue firmly planted in cheek although it's clear he also supports compulsory voting

is there an emoticon for tongue in cheek?

.....and btw....I think you'll find compelled = compulsed

Yes "compelled" is better. Sheesh!

 

[rederob]

I don't think I have ever seen such a divisive, tenuous and illogically emotive argument in my entire life. By logical extension, you are suggesting that children, foreigners, and the incompetant (as in intellectually handicapped etc) should be excluded from participating in society, because they don't vote either.

Would you like me to try again.
I was clearly not working hard enough to please you.

By the way, it can only be a logical extension if the logic was logical.
The logic underpinning the sense is contextual and it is that a person entitled to vote, chooses not to.
To extend this argument beyond that parameter is not useful. So why would one bring into it persons that did not have the entitlement?

It is also not useful to assume a sense that was neither stated nor implied: I cannot see anywhere that I discussed the matter of politician's job being about representing of his/her constituents (particularly as I would never assume the politician was always male).

And another assumption: “Listen, it's OK to have an opinion that people should be compulsed to vote.”

It does appear that you, Julia, have read into my post things that are not there.

I trust you will be more careful with your liberal interpretation of writings in future in case you buy a gift horse.

 

[Bobby]

Becarful Red,

Don't F*** with Wayne mate ! not recommended.

Bob.

 

[wayneL]

Would you like me to try again.
I was clearly not working hard enough to please you.

By the way, it can only be a logical extension if the logic was logical.
The logic underpinning the sense is contextual and it is that a person entitled to vote, chooses not to.
To extend this argument beyond that parameter is not useful. So why would one bring into it persons that did not have the entitlement?

It is interesting that you define voting as an entitlement and a choice. This is exactly so in a free and fair society. However in this country it has become an obligation under penalty of law. Hardly free or fair. Could it be that, by your language, you reveal a single facet of what we all intrisically know to be true freedom, rather than the couterfeit facsimile we now live with?

It is also not useful to assume a sense that was neither stated nor implied: I cannot see anywhere that I discussed the matter of politician's job being about representing of his/her constituents (particularly as I would never assume the politician was always male).

Ladies, pardon my unforgivable faux pas. Red, I misinterpreted this part of your post.. I retract.

And another assumption: “Listen, it's OK to have an opinion that people should be compulsed to vote.”

It does appear that you, Julia, have read into my post things that are not there.

I trust you will be more careful with your liberal interpretation of writings in future in case you buy a gift horse.

This was not an assumption at all, the merest impication in the context in which it was written perhaps, but not assumption. It was more directed at those who believe rights should be removed because of a particular view.... common these days... divisiveness reigns.

BTW You can't buy a gift horse. A gift horse is...... a gift!

Cheers

 

[Smurf1976]

THe problem with people not voting is that it dramatically increases the influence of organised minority groups. This can very easily go to the point of them gaining effective control of government.

So if you want to see those proposing 90% income taxes, shutting down anything with even the remotest impact on the environment, compulsory religious beliefs and other such radical views gain a greater foothold in government then non-compulsory voting is exactly what you want.

If, however, you prefer freedom then compulsory voting is a necessary evil to assist the majority view to prevail. A necessary evil in much the same way as brakes on a car are necessary despite being absolutely at odds with the obvective of making the car move.

If you don't wish to express an opinion then that's fine. Just draw a line through the form. But it's important to capture all opinions, even if they are to vote informally, rather than skew the vote with voluntary attendance. Most people, when required to vote, do in fact express their opinion thus diluting the power of minority groups compared to that which would exist with voluntary voting.

IMO those who would gain the most from voluntary voting are fundamentally socialist in nature since they are the ones with the motivated and active supporters most likely to vote.

 

[rederob]

Apologies to Julia who I confused with Wayne in earlier post.
So sorry Julia - was thinking about something else at the time!

 

[rederob]

BTW You can't buy a gift horse. A gift horse is...... a gift!

Exactly what I meant!

 

[Mumbank]

Great post Smurf!!

FWIW it seems to me that the people who complain the most about the government of the day and generally think they know how to fix everything then go on to say they didn't vote anyway (i.e. Kate Langbroek or whatever her name is on The Panel).

Anyway I am for compulsory voting much for the reasons set out in Smurf's post, heaven help us if we ended up with a country or state, or even Local Council, run by Pauline and her mates or similar!

 

[websman]

Whoa! Hang on here a minute Dudes!

You mean to tell me that the Australian government actually requires one to vote? And if you don't vote you get fined???

I'm sorry guys, but that sounds crazy to me. Voting is a privilege that I take advantage in the U.S., but I am not required to vote. The way I look at it is that I feel it is my duty to vote, but it is also my right to not vote if I so chose.

 

[mit]

My opinion,

Only people that have paid income tax can vote.
All bludgers can't vote.

Bob.

Does this include 45 year men who have been retrenched from their job and who have been actively looking for work? Does it include abandoned mothers without external support who cannot afford child care or a flexible job etc etc etc.

 

[bullmarket]

hi websman

no-one has to vote as we all have the option to vote informal...ie...submit a blank ballot sheet....but everyone is required by law to at least turn up to the voting booth on election day and have their attendance recorded on the register.....and that is the way it should be imo as I described in the liberal v labor thread.

cheers

bullmarket