Should voters be made to pass a test before being able to vote?

Because so many bogans vote Liberal these days to "stop the boats" and to look after "working families", i think it's fair to say they're doing a good enough job of that themselves

 

I believe in flexible representation. Democracy is great and all, but sometimes a country needs a more authoritarian approach too. I'm not saying we're at that point, but some countries are. There's various stages in a country's ability to govern itself, and democracy can easily get in the way just as other forms of government can be counter-productive too.

Our problem (America's moreso) is who runs the democracy. People bag Chinas obvious propaganda and corruption. We're just more subtle imo. Case in point: Mining tax (the original version). Busted by the corporations and their disproportionate wealth, and single-minded motivation: profit.

 

No test, just be a net tax contributor. That way the tax payers get 100% say in how their money is spent. No voting yourself free stuff from the payers,

 

There are some that think that welfare / charity, is the big new industry that`ll save the country, somehow. I can see why life is a bit frustrating for them, poor petals can`t even go on strike to get their own way.

 

I can see why you don`t like the thought of stopping the boats. After all, if people smugglers are to not be impeded, we could have twenty thousand drowning per annum in five years. As for looking after working families. Meh, who needs em, let em all go on the dole.

 

I believe a standardised voting right test would work really well, and eliminate fools and idiots from the voting system.

A few basic questions like:

1) Why do you vote?

If a person answers, they only vote because they have too, then their voting right should be eliminated, because it demonstrates, they have no interest in the system.

2) Why do you vote for a particular candidate or political party?

If a person answers, they only vote the same way friends and family vote, they should also be eliminated from the right to vote, because it demonstrates they have no knowledge of the system.

Everyone should be able to sit the test every 5 years, and the questions should be verified, so people cannot think they can cheat their way into the right to vote.

 

So this dude rocks up, picks up your questions and writes.

1: I want to be part of the democratic process. I believe it is every level headed persons duty to participate and truly make our democracy the voice of the people.
2: I look closely at the candidates ultimate ideology, his views on proposed policies, his experience and characteristics that would make him a true representative of me. I look into any parties or outside influences and ensure he is on my page.

As he walks away smiling he chortles under his breath "Suckers will believe anything"

 

Lol!

 

It`s amazing how you can type on a keyboard, post your message into a thread, and make your post look like it was written in crayon.

 

I suppose you are so used to writing and reading in crayon that you can't tell the difference when grown ups write, understandable...

What has your reply got to do with either the topic or my answer ... absolutely nothing ... just the typical response of someone with nothing to add ... childish insults

- - - Updated - - -

What's the matter Aussie, stuck for an intelligent answer? LMFAO

 

Considering that you posted.

"So this dude rocks up, picks up your questions and writes.
1: I want to be part of the democratic process. I believe it is every level headed persons duty to participate and truly make our democracy the voice of the people.
2: I look closely at the candidates ultimate ideology, his views on proposed policies, his experience and characteristics that would make him a true representative of me. I look into any parties or outside influences and ensure he is on my page.
As he walks away smiling he chortles under his breath "Suckers will believe anything""

Your post didn`t deserve an "intelligent" answer. Now draw me a picture of a cat sitting in front of a house, with green smoke coming out of the chimney, please.

 

Using excuses and lame "childish" insults leaves a lot to be desired aussie! Pack it all up lad........ pack it all up and go home!

 

In any properly functioning democracy voting is not just a right but a responsibility & in my opinion mandatory voting should be kept. When you have a test to decide if a citizen can vote what you are really doing is deciding if that person has the right to be a citizen.

A better way to address voter apathy/ignorance is to add two options to the ballet paper in addition to the candidates. The first option should be at the top of the voting list where first candidates name would normally be & read "I don't know or don't care" & the second option at the bottom of the voting list should read "Non of the above".

 

There`s no denying that the "None of the above" option would be popular. The old saying "we get the government that we deserve" ,rings true. When we see voters whose voting "decisions" are determined entirely by self interest, the size of their welfare cheque, free ice cream for THEMSELVES, and not the welfare of the country, we can understand why questions such at the topic of this thread arise as a daily occurrence.

I can fully understand why honest, hard working people would come to resent the fact that lazy bludgers should have the same voting value as productive people.

 

So do you reckon 5% of the population should not have a vote based on their lack of employment, which is probably made up of over 70% of youth by the way who probably don't vote anyway!

 

Exhibits, A,B,C,D, & E.

 

The answer to the original posts question is no. The governments compuslory vote policy should remain and you do not have to be a rocket scientist to know why.

In the US presidential elections you get all the hollywood types getting on their soapbox getting people to vote. This nation who thinks they are democratic, who loves invading nations to give them democracy, allows it citizens to not vote. The saying your vote counts, is unture, this is a foundation cornerstone of a democratic society, that every citizens vote counts and the US do not have this scenario so they are un-democratic, among other reasons.

Complusory voting does not mean you have to vote, but what it does mean is you get the choice either vote, get your name checked off the e;ectoral role and voiding your vote or paying the fine.

I have been eligible to vote ofr eight federal elections and I have never even seen a ballot paper. I would rather pay the fines as a form of civil protest. If everyone did that we would get a good guide as to what the citizens actually thought of their leaders and the choices for those leaders.

 

Í understand your reasoning, but giving these scum-bag politicians another $72.00 fine for not voting has paid my meat bill for a few weeks. They get enough fee money out of me without offering them more.

Unfortunately, without a vote testing system, we would still get a high percentage of idiots who have no interest in politics show up on election day, and cast an arbitrary vote, rafter than getting their name crossed off and not submitting the paper into the ballot box.

 

So you vote?

- - - Updated - - -

So you vote?

 

Only if our elected representatives have to pass a morals test instead of a drug test.

 

Iran already does this. In Australia this would not actually be a problem for the political party that would introduce the morality legislation as the morality codes could be tailored to only allow people from one side of politics to stand for election & the voting test would be biased for the same purpose as well knocking out voting rights for a quarter of the population easily.

- - - Updated - - -

Iran already does this. In Australia this would not actually be a problem for the political party that would introduce the morality legislation as the morality codes could be tailored to only allow people from one side of politics to stand for election & the voting test would be biased for the same purpose as well knocking out voting rights for a quarter of the population easily.

 

If there was an option on the ballot paper "Non of the above" & votes for "Non of the above" are required to be counted without redistribution & published it would be harder for politicians to ignore than just saying X number of people could not be bothered to turn up to vote.

 

How many more public servants would the Labor party have to hire to implement & administer the new vote testing system, how many hundreds of millions of dollars of new government expenditure would it gobble up & would the new department trusted to look after the new vote testing system & various political appointments including those within opposition parties be called "The Department of Acceptable Morality & Purity of Thought"?

 

Ahhhh, I see. So this is it?

 

Nope ... The department of Culldav Morality & no thought.