rebuttal opeing statment.

Kyle’s opening is great, i agree on some of points that the government should lower the age limit of the voting age from the age of eight-teen to the age of sixteen. For example, one of his paragraph that says, “ I say it should, as lowering the voting age to six-teen will provide the option to young adults to vote on matters that will affect them when they are adults.” I agree with his sentence, but it is more likely to be an opinion. Because i do not not see any factual or outside resources supporting his idea, it is more likely to be an opinion. Also at his last paragraph or his conclusion paragraph he wrote, “ At six-teen, students are able to work a job and therefore pay taxes, so why shouldn't they have the right to vote too?” And when he said At six-teen, students are able to work a job and therefore pay taxes. I agree to him that at age sixteen, teens are able to get jobs during the summer or get permission to the school and parents for the job. But i never knew that sixteen could pay taxes because when i am sixteen i do not see any mail saying i have to pay taxes or at least a law that at sixteen i have to pay taxes. So i his part of of his sentence is not a factual sentences. It did not have a right fact. So he has some areas that are no facted correct and has no supporting evidence to support his idea.
There are more areas that did not make sense, one is on his conclusion paragraph that says, “ A lowered voting age would prove nothing but beneficial as having a wider base would be more fair and provide a cleaner point of view than older generations past.” When kyle wrote cleaner point of view than older generations past, i did not understand what he is trying to say. Is he trying to conclude his his two other paragraphs into one sentence or creating a new point. It was confusing to understand his idea at that sentence. At his second paragraph in the first sentences said, “ Students that are taught politics in school are politically active and denying their right to do so is destroying a useful voter base to stem stalemates between two parties.” i do not see any connection to his idea of teen voting. The other is on his first paragraph that said, “ The voter age has been eighteen because people at that age seem to be educated enough to know what they are voting for...,”. he just repeated his first sentence and added more words in the end of the sentences. Basically his opening statement has the lack of evidence, some sentences has no connection to idea, and just some parts are repetitive.