The voting rights of seniors is a subject that ignites emotions like a spark on a powder keg. On one hand, the older generation has every right to decide, as they built the state and paid taxes for decades. On the other, critics point out that the demographic dominance of seniors distorts balance, as they decide on a future they may not live to see. Controversial proposals are emerging: from reducing the weight of their vote to completely stripping people of retirement age of their voting rights. It sounds like heresy against democracy, yet the debate increasingly circles back to the question of whether the electoral system truly reflects generational balance, or instead blocks changes that would benefit the young. And you – whose side are you on?

Voting rights and living on welfare is a topic that has sparked heated disputes for years and questions the very foundations of democracy. For some, it is obvious that every citizen has a voice regardless of their source of income – because that is what the constitution guarantees. Others provocatively ask whether someone living solely off other people’s taxes should decide how that money is spent. This strikes at the dilemma of equality before the law versus citizens’ financial responsibility. Supporters of restrictions warn against “buying votes” through welfare programs, while opponents see in it the threat of creating second-class citizens. Is this still democracy, or already a system based on economic selection?