No vote, but still taxed?
Voices | This activity is for everyone
In this video, David explains that, in the United States, some people can work and pay tax before the age of 18. Their income is taxed in the same way as adults, but they do not get a vote or a say in how their tax dollars are spent because they aren't able to vote.
Video not working? Follow this link: https://bit.ly/voices-david
Do you think people who pay tax should have a say in how their country is run?
Tell us what you think
You might want to structure your answer like this:
I agree / disagree with this idea because [something said in the video]. One reason for my view is [fairness, representation, or responsibility]. However, others might argue that [a different point of view].
Make sure you read the comments from other Topical Talkers and respond to someone whose choice or opinion is different from yours.
Comments (22)
I agree with this video because as stated in the video David gave an instance using the united states that people under the age of 18 start their business and get taxed from their income but still has no right to vote until the respectable age. so imagine i start a business and its going very well and the tax collector come to collect tax and upon that tax they collected i don't get to vote its very painful
in conclusion i think that teenagers below 18 that has a business and pays tax should be granted that right to vote
I agree with this idea because even outside of the U.S. in various cultures, starting from 16 (or even 14 and under) young people can take up jobs whether willingly or not. The state still taxes them the same way that any other adult would get taxed except they cannot influence their own lives. This is a manipulative system which cause hate and resentment toward the government because you do not understand your own laws. This is unfair, it's exactly the same as gender inequality. Completely arbitrary since if kids can have the same responsibilities as adults then they, like them, should get to decide their fates. This all falls on the 'no taxation without representation' which is a foundational right which democracy is built on. The person whose revenue is being collected should have a say in how this taxed money is used whether for education, infrastructure, healthcare or defense.
However, others might argue that the right to vote is not based on tax-paying status but on maturity (this is yet another dilemma, what matters more? Age or maturity?). They might say that society sets age limits for a reason. Well, my counterargument is this: people could get drafted into a war and still not be able to drink or vote, does that make any sense to you? You can be in a war, treated as a man but when you come back home (if you come back), you cannot do anything regarding the politics that sent you there in the first place (Vietnam War).
Well, in contrast to what you have said, I have rather diverse opinions compared to the ones you have stated. I can't lie; you did a pretty good job, and I have found myself in agreement with some of your points, but not all you have said sits well with me.
You argue that it is not fair that the 14-17-year-olds around the world don't get a say in how their taxes are used, but the real problem which I see is that do they really understand the other effects apart from the monetary aspects? Voting is a lot more than just the determination of how taxes are used. It entails geopolitical understanding, risk management, and deep research on the kind of governance you prefer. You have to think about the pros and cons of the candidate you want to choose and also understand how this is going to affect the entire country. Youths are shown to be mostly good at concentrating on one aspect, giving rise to the problem of shortsighted voting. Imagine a candidate who vows to use your money well, but as soon as he enters power, he removes subsidies from all private companies. This is just a simple show that the trick effectively got him one more vote. I would rather recommend that we should vote based on assessment, which will allow us to sort those who are politically mature, from those who are rather just immature.
I think people who pay tax should be able to have a saying how their country is run. In the video, David gave an example of how people under the age of 18 in the United States have no right to vote despite the fact that the can work and get taxed. This should not be so because since they are able to to take the responsibility of handling their works by themselves, they should also be trusted to vote and decide their leaders. If the government have no intention of letting the young teenagers participate in voting and have a say on how to run the country, they may as well stop collecting taxes from them.
lastly, I think young people below the age of voting who pay taxes should have a say in the running of their country because their income is taxed in the same way as adults and so they should be given equal rights and privileges.
I agree with this idea because David gave an instance using the USA as an example stating that people below the age of 18 can take up full time or part time jobs but still don't have the right to vote. This is my opinion is unfair based in the fact that if youths below 18 have the right to have a job why can't they vote? Reason being that, if people below 18 have the ability to have jobs they also have the intellect and ability to vote. What the government doesn't see is that children too have a voice and can reason also. However, others might argue that the point I made might be invalid well everyone has their own views,opinions and perspectives. Thank You.
I disagree with the idea that people who pay taxes should automatically have a say in how the country is run. Just because someone is paying taxes doesn’t mean they’re ready to make decisions about the country’s future. In the video, David talks about how some people work and pay taxes before they’re 18, but they don’t get to vote. I think this is fair because voting is a big responsibility. It’s not just about paying taxes; it’s about understanding laws, politics, and what’s best for the country. People need to be able to make informed decisions, and that takes maturity.
One reason for my view is fairness. If someone is too young to vote, then it’s because they’re not considered fully ready to understand the larger issues. So it wouldn’t be fair to give them a say just because they pay taxes. They may be paying taxes on their small jobs, but that doesn’t mean they should be making decisions for everyone.
However, others might argue that it’s unfair for people to pay taxes but not have a voice in how their money is spent. I get that point, but I think voting is about more than just money; it’s about understanding and making choices for the good of the whole country.
I agree to this notion because paying taxes does not qualify anyone to influence how a country is run. While it is a vital responsibility, it doesn't automatically qualify someone to have to necessary knowledge and maturity to make decisions regarding politics. In the video, David explains that individuals work and pay taxes before turning 18 years old, but aren't allowed to vote. This is relatable, as voting is not just a question of paying taxes, but about understanding politics, laws and outcomes.
I partly agree with you because if someone was responsible for himself, paying fees and taxes and supporting the whole family, that clearly shows this person is responsible and of course has experience as daily challenges are faced. However, as you said, responsibility and experience aren't enough to vote in decisions that shape the society.
Why do I agree with you?
I strongly agree with your point because when someone pays taxes, it doesn't mean their brain is ready to take world-changing decisions.
As an evidence, I saw some young people here in Egypt who work at the age of 13 or 14, so they pay taxes. Still, they MUST NOT be allowed to vote in the elections as their brain isn't well-developed, don't have the skills that would "qualify" them to vote, and MAY not be well-educated and the most important one is that their brain is "occupied" by stereotypes.
Stereotypes are really common in Egypt and many other countries, which would be a strong barrier that stops them from thinking about different perspectives and having a wider view of the world. Unfortunately, stereotypes limit the development of new skills. They became rocks that can't be reshaped.
Why do I disagree with you?
As not all young people aren't well-informed; this is something which can't be known by a country deciding who is allowed to vote and who is not.
To avoid dictatorship and unfairness, countries must have a role in helping them to raise their voices, educating them well, organizing debates between experts, business leaders AND young children to fill the gap that every one of these people lack.
I find your comment interesting. Can you explain more about what you mean about brains being "occupied by stereotypes and how this has an impact in your country?
Some people believe that paying taxes should give a person the right to vote, but I don’t agree with this idea because it could create an unequal and unfair system. Taxes are something most people are expected to pay as part of everyday life, not a qualification for political power. If voting rights were linked to paying tax, then people who earn more money or work full-time could end up having more influence than others, which goes against the idea of democracy being equal for everyone. Voting should be about citizenship and shared responsibility, not about how much money someone contributes.
Another issue is that many people who do not pay taxes still depend heavily on government decisions. Students, carers, unemployed people, and those who are ill all rely on public services and laws that affect their daily lives. Excluding them from voting would mean their needs and opinions could be ignored, even though government policies directly shape their futures. That would be deeply unfair.
Linking tax payments to voting could also pressure people into working or paying tax just to gain political rights, which is not realistic or ethical. Voting is meant to represent the voices of the whole population, not just the working population. For these reasons, paying tax should not be used as a rule for deciding who deserves a say in how the country is run.
I agree with this idea beecause, as the video explains that some people under 18 years old work and pay taxes but do not have a say in how that money is been spent. One raeson for my view is fairness, as paying tax is a responsibility and those who contributed should be represented. However, others might argue that only adults should vote because young people may lack experience. If young people are responsible enough to pay tax, shouldn't there also have some say in how their country is runned?
I disagree with this idea because the idea may sound fair once you just heard his statement, but if you look at the idea closely then there are a lot of problems that you may face if we accept this idea, which is that people who pay tax should have a say in how their country is run.
I also agree that paying taxes is a way of contributing to the country. However, I believe that there are more to consider if the fact that simply paying taxes allows people to participate in election and vote, which are crucial for the country.
Simply paying taxes doesn't mean that they are mature enough. The maturity and ability to make decision doesn't come from how much taxes they pay. It comes from how much wisdom they gained through their lives and how much their brain grew.
According to a research notable from the University of Cambridge which was even published in Nature(2025), human brain may still be ongoing a period of rewiring until the age of 30s depending on the person, meaning that their brain has not achieved 'adult mode' which contains stability and maturity.
Lastly, my question is that, how would the voting age be defined based on the taxes that you pay when it should be more about maturity of yourself and even 30 years old human brain may not be on mature state yet?
If you have answer to the question, please feel free to write as a reply. I would love to listen to your opinions too. Thank you for reading my comment.
I disagree with this idea because some people pay taxes but don't have the knowledge that "qualify them" to vote for the elections. Voting is not about age, or money. It's about maturity, experience, critical thinking skills and the ability to think about a topic widely and deeply taking in consideration long-term consequences. So, it was just about paying the required tax to vote, people may vote randomly and wrong decisions will be chosen. This could ruin a country!
Another reason for my view is "responsibility". As mentioned in David's video, some people under 18 are paying taxes so if they were allowed to vote, they will choose non-sense answers that will not help the country at all. JUST CONFUSING AND HARMING IT.
I believe that countries choosing specific people of specific ages, and genders are mostly stable because voters should be well educated and their minds free of stereotypes.
However, others might argue that taxpayers give part of this income to the government, so it will be really unfair if they didn't have a voice in how this money is used. Instead of being happy that they are helping their community to improve, they will feel that they are being enforced.
I totally agree with them, but here comes the big question, "Are all taxpayers responsible, well-informed and mentally okay to take a chance in such a very important topic like the elections??"
I agree that young people being taxed but not being allowed to vote is unfair. This is because the government is treating them as adults when it works to their benefit, but when it comes to voting, which may affect the country, they deem young people as "misinformed" or "too young".
Personally I think this is rather outrageous. Before I watched the video, I didn't know that 16-year-old people can get taxed, but now that I do know, I think it's really unfair and somewhat cruel, because these people are working, paying tax, helping run the country or city the live in in one way or another, but their voice is unheard. They work hard and do what they should do, and in the end are not even rewarded with the simple right to vote and have their voices heard. Because who knows, maybe the person they could have voted for might have made a change that greatly affected their lives? What if because they hadn't voted, the election went to the favour of somebody else, whereas if the had voted, the end result would have been completely different?
I disagree because paying taxes is just one part of being a reponsible citizen, but it does not necessarily translate to having a say in governance. For instance, many Nigerians pay taxes but corruption and poor governance often means those funds are not used effectively. What we really need are stronger systems for accountability, transparency and citizen engagement. Imagine if there is a platform where taxpayers can track how their money is; being used or if there are real consequences for leaders who mismanage funds.
It is not just about paying taxes, but it is about creating a system where citizens have a genuine voice. Maybe then, we will see better governance and more development, and I think that can drive a positive change.
i agree with David because in most countries teenagers can start working even thought they arent eighteen. They must have the right to vote because they must decide where their tax money is going.
I also feel like if they are able to work they should be able to make certain decisions that affect their lives. There could be an instance where the change in governance could help improve or reduce the quality of their work experience.
So, I believe they should have a say in governance. It also helps improve their decision making skills.
And i believe this would help them shape their decision making ability too. It would also help them see that they are seen and recognized in the society as important. Being able to make decision at a very young age helps to develop the brain and has its positive impacts too. It makes them take responsibility for their actions and see themselves as sufficient.
I agree with this idea because as David mentioned in the video that it doesn't seem fair to treat them as adults then suddenly stop treating them like adults when the voting comes.
One reason for my view is that it isn't fair because the whole point of taxes is to take some of you to improve things to improve your life. The thing is how can they improve your life without listening to what do you need. Does this seem to you like logic? No, like explains to me how to improve somebody's life without knowing what he needs. Then what I conclude is that this money is used on nothing important or what is even worse this money is used to help adults only who have a say not younger people.
However, others might think that young people are young to know what they do need but i don't thing we are thinking the same way as 5 years old children we have a brain.
If your paying into the system you should have a say in voting and a voice but if only taxpayers got a say a lot of people would see it unfair
So its better governments policies are changed and it would be said that everyone needs to have a vote and taxpayers money shouldn`t be wasted by allowing them to vote when necessary and another thing is that you get money the government takes a part of it and we should have a voice in what they do with it to ensure a free and fair running of democracy in our country.
THANK YOU FOR LISTENING
I believe that those who contribute to the country's well-being by paying tax should be considered legally for voting no matter the age of such individuals because the fact that they are mentally and physically able to make their own income implies that they are more than ready to vote for who runs the affairs involving their tax and how it is used.
Imagine yourself in a classroom where there is a class contribution for the betterment of the classroom and you discover that the teachers who are independently in charge of the money took themselves out or kept the money for themselves without the children's knowledge. Well, if the government keep up with this ignorance, this will be the exact situation we will be putting the under 18s that pay tax in.
In fact, in my opinion, age should not be the only criteria for voting, it should be tax because there are many adult voters that don't make enough money to adequately pay tax, yet they have a say in how that tax is being used while on the other hand, there are many young people below 18 in the US that make their money and pay tax but yet they are deprived of the opportunity to have a say in how that tax should be spent by casting their votes.
You make a good case that contributing to the state through taxes should permit someone to vote, so that they may have a voice in how their taxation is spent. You also posit the inverse: that those not paying tax should not have a vote. I'm curious how you see this applying to people who don't currently pay income tax - such as retirees, students, disabled people, or stay-at-home parents - yet are still affected by political decisions. How would their contribution to society factor into your view of voting rights?
You make a very good point, one that I have failed to consider. Yes I agree that there are many individuals that don't pay tax, but in this, I understand your complaint. I have failed to mention who exactly I am talking about think of those that spend their whole day doing nothing but drinking, gambling, and some, even secretly vandalising property, these people are aiding to the detriment of the society, do you really think these people deserve to participate in the affairs of the society?
I see where you're coming from. One implication of that position could be that people struggling with addiction or past criminality would be excluded. Do you think it could be more nuanced than that however?
Criminals voting is a contentious point, and in some countries convicts cannot vote with the state having taken that same position. However the question to pose even in those circumstances - what of those who reform and turn their life around? Should they not be allowed to participate once again in society? And if yes - how would you assess it without creating an unfair risk of false negatives - i.e. those who have been reformed but were not assessed as such?
On the topic of those suffering with addictions, this is something that many countries around the world consider a mental health problem as opposed to a problem of character. Often those trapped by their vices are either escaping something, or seeking something they are missing. The former might include those who have experienced abuse or trauma, and the latter potentially the neurodiverse who find themselves dysregulated in neurotypical society and challenged to produce their own natural 'happy chemicals' like serotonin or dopamine so seek it from other sources. Their vote might improve their circumstance if they voted in favour of mental health services access.
Do you think in all these circumstances that such individuals should be ineligible to partake in society - and if some should be able to, how would you identify and enforce those that can versus those that cannot?
I see where you are going, I never said criminals, but I can agree that some countries take away the voting rights of criminals and past convicts - even though they reform and change their ways. So for this, I feel there could be some amendments like there could be like a vote regaining program for those who have lost their voting privileges for some act or the other (those willing to participate), this also answers your question in your last paragraph.
And with the question of those that are suffering from addiction, abuse or trauma and those neurologically unstable, maybe their voting rights could be with-held for some time, while they are given therapy because I think we will be able to differentiate between these people and those not suffering from anything.
I agree with this idea in my opinion. In South Africa, you are allowed to already start working at the age of 15 and that means that you would be contributing towards the economy (yes it might not be a lot but it still is something) but we are only allowed to start voting at the age of 18.
I think this is a similar situation as when America changed their voting age restriction from 21 to 18 because of the Vietnam War. They were losing so they started to draft and send more soliders to the war to essentially fight and die, and they would be from like 18 and sometimes below. So they lowered the drafting age to 18, and in turn people were like `hey Im 18 and i cant vote on the policy that is going to affect me and lets me get send to a war to die’. So essentially it became this movement of you say I'm old enough to fight in this war and die for my country but I'm not old enough to have a say in the policys that effect me when I'm living at home in america. So thats when they changed the voting age to 18, so that they could justify sending more soilders to fight in this war.
Yes, I know this situation is not as hectic or as serious as the example I have given, I think it still shows that there should be fairness in some way.
I disagree with this statement.
People aren’t necessarily well informed at all times. People often focus on issues that affect them over issues that affect others, despite severity. As such, the government's job is to redistribute money to all issues, so they are all addressed properly. As an example, many of Canada's indigenous communities didn’t have proper access to clean water for a long time, and has recently been addressed due to a public outcry. However, much of the public was not aware of this issue, hence if they were allowed to vote issues like those would go unaddressed and likely worsen.
Children with jobs would also be allowed to vote. This provides the same issues as the proposed cap on voting, where young individuals vote on issues that shouldn’t take precedence over other issues, but because many youths are under informed, they focus on issues that affect them and not greater issues. This would again, cause minorities issues to go unnoticed, and worsen.
Finally, it’s a threat to a country's security, as an individual with ill intent could attempt to sway public opinion to their favour, which could literally cause the self destruction of the country. Essentially, un-offical leaders will rise up and begin campaigning for their issues to be solved first, and it becomes a competition to have something that shouldn’t even have to be fought over, fixed.
I agree with this idea because, as David explains in the video, some young people in the United States can work and pay income tax before they are 18, but they still cannot vote or influence how that money is used. This raises an important question about fairness and representation.
One reason for my view is that if someone is contributing to the country through taxes, it seems reasonable that they should have some say in decisions about public spending. This connects to the wider democratic principle of "no taxation without representation," Which has been an important issue in political history.
However, others might argue that voting should depend on maturity and understanding of politics, not just whether someone pays tax. They may believe that the voting age should remain at 18 to ensure people are ready to make informed choices.
Overall, I think this topic highlights a broader debate about rights, responsibilities, and how democracies include young people in society.
I believe that people who are under 18 and pay tax should participate in the elections. These people work hard for money to pay for their needs, tax and rent so that they must have a part in the elections. Imaging if you are working hard to pay your tax and there is an election about tax and You have your own perspective and ideas furthermore you know who you will vote from the candidates however you do not have the right and democracy to express your vote in the elections because you are just under 18. Will you be happy about this situation?
Some countries like Syria and North Korea recruit young people in wars. Is this fair if these young people (16-17) were recruited in the wars and they do not have the right to participate in the elections? If you were recruited in a war and you were young besides you were stopped or even ignored in the elections. Will you be happy? Recruitment in wars is even against the children rights and countries make it worse by forbidding young people from participating in the elections.
By the way, young people are full of diversity, and they can express a small opinion or an innovative idea which can change a whole system. In my school, students made posters and published them on the school page, and we put them on the school walls and actually students, teachers and even outer people became more careful about the environment.
If young people (16-17) are already working from the beginning of their life to help their family or even to pay the school fees therefore they are responsible and they must share their point of views in the elections.
I agree that people who pay taxes should have the right to have a voice in the country they live in. The video shows that young workers are treated like adults when it comes to paying taxes, but not treated like adults when it comes to having a say in political decisions. This feels unfair, because they are contributing money to the government just like any other working citizen. If young people are expected to take on adult responsibilities, it makes sense that they should also be given adult rights.
One reason I strongly believe this is representation. If you pay tax, you are directly supporting the government, so you should have some influence over how that money is used. Many young people are affected by government decisions on issues like education, public transport, and working conditions, yet they are unable to express their opinions through voting. This means their views are often ignored, even though these policies shape their daily lives and futures.
Some people argue that voting should depend on age and maturity rather than whether someone pays tax. They believe voting ages exist to protect democracy and ensure informed decisions. However, the video suggests that young people are already engaged, informed, and affected by political choices. Ignoring their voices, despite their contributions, weakens democracy rather than strengthening it.
Hello topical talkers,
I think that age does matter when voting and I think anyone above the age of 16 should have the choice to vote here is why.
Firstly, many people at the age of 16-17 have a job and get taxed, therefore they should get a say in who runs their community and what they do with the money that they have earned. For example if a 16 year old get taxed £500, but since they don't have a say instead of something they may need like paying for public healthcare or safer roads it may be used for some things that may not be as beneficial to society!
In addition, it is the younger generations who will be living in the future and deserve to have a say on what their future will have in store for them! In 20 years time any consequences made my older generations will be projected into the younger generation's life!
Lastly, people the age of 16-17 have probably reached a level of maturity and awareness of what is happening economically, physically and environmentally to be able to have a vote!
Thank you for listening!😊
I think its difficult to decide what the starting point for voting is. In a way, David Sharyan is right because when you pay tax you are part of the system also it means money that comes directly from you is spent by the goverment so I see why he would think that you should be included in the decision as a voter.
On the other hand, to vote is a responsible decision and if some countries don't think you are responsible enough to drive a car or to buy alcohol, then do you have the capacity to decide who runs the country? We also have to look at statistics. What percentage of 16 year olds actually work and pay taxes, and if the percentage is small, should so many be given a right that only a few would have gained?
In my view we also have to take into account the fact that maturity comes after a certain age, in terms of how the brain develops, so 18 is probably a good age to be given the vote.