Currently, suffrage is limited to all adults. This discriminates against and unnecessarily infringes the freedoms of those young people who are net contributors to the public purse and therefore to society at large. At the same time, it unreasonably discriminates in favour of those adults who are a drain on the public purse and are given a vote enabling them to elect political parties who further entrench, enhance and enlarge the client state, creating a vicious cycle of growing client state, taxation and erosion of freedoms of the working poor to enjoy the fruits of our labour.
It also unfairly discriminates in favour of pro-high-taxation pro-client state pro-statist anti-personal freedom political parties who are given permission to buy votes with taxpayer money and create a captive voting block by promising to enhance, enlarge and entrench the client state. Unless everyone else is also granted permission to bribe voters and buy votes, this infringes the fundamental freedom of everyone else to participate equally in the election of our legislature.
Abolish all age restrictions on suffrage, while limiting suffrage to only those who are net contributors to the public purse, taking the vote away from all those who are net recipients of public money (be it welfare recipients or public employees).
No taxation without representation, no representation without taxation.
Why does this idea matter?
Firstly, because suffrage is a basic human right of every individual who is a net contributor to society. It is unreasonable to deny suffrage from people who are contributing to the community, no matter how young.
More importantly, if you do not limit suffrage only to net contributors to the public purse, the client state will simply continue to grow as a proportion of GDP as it inexorably has done ever since universal suffrage was introduced. Some governments might stem the progress temporarily from time to time, but every time a pro-client state party gets back into power, the unstoppable march continues at a pace far surpassing any cuts to the client state achieved by the preceding regime. Logic suggests this will happen and history is witness that this is indeed what happens. Can you see any reason why it would not continue?
As the population ages, and as the chickens of the present economic crisis (and subsequent ones) come home to roost, as fewer and fewer people work and support more and more dependants and as we at the same time become relatively poorer compared to the rest of the world, e.g. China, those who work will simply become unable to support the client state and if forced to continue supporting it – as they, being outnumbered, inevitably will, unless there is suffrage reform – we will have chaos, violence and revolution as the working people rebel.