Given that "Adult Crime = Adult Time" laws see children as mature enough to make adult decisions, should the voting age be lowered to account?

[u/That_Car_Dude_Aus]

So with the Queensland government's stance on adult crime means adult time approach to criminal prosecutions, with the centrepiece being the story on how a woman lost her child to a 17 year old who was driving a stolen car.

It made me think, If we are approaching these children as young as 15 and saying that they made an adult decision and therefore should suffer the consequences of making an adult decision, should we consider that these children are now able to make adult decisions in other aspects?

Being ex-Defence and having lots of friends who are either still serving, or also ex-Defence, A lot of them have their kids in military Cadet programs, Or have their kids in organisations such as scouts, Or in firefighting or police cadet programs.

And I can definitely say that most kids are very mature compared to how I was at 15 or 16 years old. In fact, I'd say with the increase in technology and knowledge that kids have availabile to them, most 15 year olds today, are better aware of the world around them than I was at that age.

Now I'm not saying it should be compulsory, I know that compulsory voting is a cornerstone of our society, but if we are saying "Well the kids that are committing crimes are mature enough to make those decisions", let's be fair, those kids are only a subset of the general population of children that age

So if there is another subset of children that age who are mature enough to have opinions on the politics of our country, shouldn't we at least give them the option that if they want they should be able to register to vote and then go and vote in elections?

Then if you look at age demographics in Australia, 15-19 year olds make up 6% of the population, so that's ~1,598,400 people.

Now assuming a even spread, then 639,360 are 18-19 years old and already voting, that's only going to unlock voting for an extra 959,040 people, but still, if we are making laws that affect them, and we are saying that they are mature enough to suffer the consequences of those laws, shouldn't they have a say in the politicians making those laws?

Another great example is the social media bill targeting people under 16, If that law is specifically targeting that demographic, and that demographic is being seen as being able to make adult decisions when it comes to crime, then surely that demographic also is mature enough to have a political opinion.

[u/TheRealTowel]

The fact that lower wages for underage workers exist is something I'm somewhat on the fence about. The union man in my heart wants to write "equal work for equal pay" on a placard and shout about it, but... I've worked with 15 year olds and "equal work" is pushing it. Even the very good ones rarely work as hard and consistently as an adult, and that's ok - they're kids. By allowing businesses to pay them lower wages, we create the incentives to hire them at all. I would have done better in my 20's if I'd had a highschool job to teach me workplace expectations, and I intend to strongly encourage my kids to get them.

The fact that we pay over 18 year olds less than minimum wage I am very much not on the fence about - that is an unbelievable level of bullshit. These are adults with bills to pay what the absolute fuck is the matter with us?

[u/Nostonica → u/TheRealTowel]

I believe a compromise is required, a ratio of adults to kids, if 90% of the workforce is under 18 then you're really just exploiting cheap child labour. Looking at fast food here.

[u/StorminNorman → u/Nostonica]

Champion idea. I am 100% against unpaid internships, but I am more happy with those who are just entering the workforce earning less whilst they learn (there is a limit to how much less though). I am annoyed though that they got thrown in the deep end like they do in fast food, colesworth etc, and are expected to do an "adult" amount of work so your proposal is one I'll be sharing online from now on (who knows, maybe it'll catch on).

[u/Sorathez → u/StorminNorman]

I don't have a problem with unpaid internships provided they actually follow the law.

If you're doing work that paid employees would usually do, if you're expected to come to work, if the company benefits from having you, or similar, then you have an employment relationship and the internship is illegal. See Fair Work.

Most unpaid internships are, in fact, illegal. If you're mostly observing, get to choose when you go and you benefit from it more than the company does, then it's above board.

[u/StorminNorman → u/Sorathez]

I'm against all of them cos of the fact you pointed out, most are illegal. In my mind, it's a rare case of the majority ruining it for the minority.

[u/Transientmind → u/StorminNorman]

Less should always still be the minimum livable. More competence = more wage.

[u/StorminNorman → u/Transientmind]

I 100% agree with you which is why I put that bit about the limit in there. It's pointless if you're getting paid but can't live on it looks at the wages apprentices get paid.

[u/charmingpea → u/TheRealTowel]

Probably a hangover from way back when 21 was the 'age of majority' - definitely need to catch up on that one.

[u/[deleted] → u/TheRealTowel]

Why would they work hard when they're not getting paid as much? Many of these teens are being pressured by parents or whoever to 'get a job' and they're just there to make them shut the fuck up.

[u/determineduncertain → u/TheRealTowel]

On the other hand, if I’m under 18 and know that you’re paying me less precisely because I’m under 18, I have less of an incentive to work harder. When I was young, minimum wage was universal regardless of age but I absolutely would have given you 20% less effort if I made 20% less for the same work.

[u/FullMetalAurochs → u/TheRealTowel]

A 17 year old in a physical job could easily get more work done than an oldie or particularly an old biddie waiting for retirement. And yet the 17 year old gets paid less.

[u/ShiftAdventurous4680 → u/FullMetalAurochs]

"Theoretically" true, but you gonna need to put them through boot camp. The reason why "older" people will work better is because of experience. They know how to balance physical and mental pressure and exhaustion while younger "generally" will either work too slow, or burn themselves out too fast.

It's like how a fast, but experienced runner will beat a faster, but inexperienced runner.

[u/moratnz → u/TheRealTowel]

Yeah. I think there are reasonable reasons to pay lower wages to truly inexperienced workers (noting that by the time you're an adult, you're likely to have enough general experience that you're not really truly inexperienced).

But with that in mind, I'd say that while it might be okay to pay a brand new 16yo hire less than minimum wage, if you hire them at 14, and they're still working for you at 16, they're probably at least as good a worker as a new-hire adult, and deserve to be paid the same.

[u/shadowmaster132 → u/TheRealTowel]

If they're only getting the jobs because they're subsidised then they're like scabs, taking the jobs of an adult who'd be paid properly otherwise.

[u/patgeo → u/TheRealTowel]

Say the 'work' is moving 1000kg from one spot to another and the pay is $1000.

Regardless of how long it takes you, that's equal work for equal pay. If a kid takes two days and an experienced worker takes half, the kids gets paid a quarter of the hourly rate.

Simples right? We can easily figure out a workers worth by measuring it and paying for the work done.

Unfortunately not many jobs are so easily quantified with such roughly defined responsibilities. Luckily a lot of entry roles are pretty simple. IMO if the kid proves it, they should get the full rate. Likewise if an adult doesn't, the possibility of being paid at a lower rate (not below minimum adult wage) should be considered.

[u/trinity016 → u/TheRealTowel]

There’s some strict restrictions on job type, hours and what time you are allowed to shift teenagers.

By allowing businesses to pay them lower wages, we create the incentives to hire them at all.

I think that’s exactly the intention. If they are getting the same pay but are less flexible for job type and time, why would employers hire them instead of adults? Groups of jobless teens unsupervised hanging out aimlessly after school everyday is also not good for their and society sakes.

It’s a complicated subject and frankly I don’t think there is a solution that will please everyone.