|
|
|
|
|
| what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/19/2008 4:54:26 PM | You can be bitter, and think you are entitled all you like, but once that money leaves your hands, IT IS NOT YOUR MONEY ANYMORE. YOu arent investing it in anything but your children.
its true ..this is a gold diggers Paradise ..and the courts are all on board with these women ..your house in Ontario hasn't appreciated the way things have out here ..we are talking about millions of dollars being made in real estate ..with child support payments..why wast time and lawyers and court time chasing broke dead beats ,,go after the gold diggers to pay there share back..the money is there ..its called child support money right? no its my money now says the CP ..sick set up.. | |
|
| what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/19/2008 5:00:59 PM | "You can be bitter, and think you are entitled all you like, but once that money leaves your hands, IT IS NOT YOUR MONEY ANYMORE. YOu arent investing it in anything but your children. "
Not bitter, sorry if it came accross that way. Just trying to find equitable solution where there may be none. But that is what discussion are about to if there is a solution and if there isn't one, we move on.
As for me, I have always seen the $900 I pay and have paid since we separated and subsequently divorced as paying for a roof over her head, food etc... In addition, I always paid for 50% of the clothes and daycare (when she used to go) because I thought it was right, since clothes are dam expensive. We also split the costs evenly for all of her activities and school costs. The one thing that we did though is that I claimed the child care costs as I paid them directly, she reimbursed me for her 50%, and when I got my tax refund, the portion attributable to the child care expenses was shared equally.
I did though once think of trying to get it reduced since I was taking care of her 50% of the time, its down to about 40% now but it was a simple cost benefit that made me think otherwise. Pay my ex the extra amount or pay it to lawyers. Hmmm not a difficult choice there, I chose to pay it to her since she is great mother and she takes care of really well. In the end, its only money (hey that's coming from an accountant), either I would have spent on her or her mother does.
So bitter, not in the least. I got a great relationship with my daughter and her mom and money can't buy that (well in 99.9999% of the cases). | |
|
| what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/19/2008 5:04:02 PM |
its true ..this is a gold diggers Paradise ..and the courts are all on board with these women ..
java, i am going to quit posting in this thread,Just for your sake. I really feel very sorry for you. You are very bitter, i am sincerly worried about your mental health.
I truly hope you can someday get passed all your anger, life is too short sweetums. | |
|
| what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/19/2008 5:17:54 PM | | Davidsauvigon your statement addresses how the amount of child support paid is determined, however this forum topic is "What is Child Support Meant For". I am aware that the ways of calculating the amount paid may differ according to laws per state. But once again the topic at hand is "What is Child Support Meant For"...And I will state again...Reimbursement to the Custodial Parent for Food, Shelter, and Clothing for the Child. | |
|
| what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/19/2008 5:19:04 PM |
Not bitter, sorry if it came accross that way.
I'm sorry toooBUT now this just speaks volumes....and hard to take any other way when you say ...
.
Because part of the child support money pays for a roof over the child's head therefore the increase in the value is something that you are indirectly investing in.
The issue is that although the NCP helps offset some of the costs of the mortgage payment through child support (ie: helping to keep a roof over their heads)neither the kids not the ncp (who helped pay the mortage) get to enjoy the benefits from the increase in value of the property when sold.
Sooooooo, a CP is shrewd enough business wise, or money managable enough, or even motovatied enough to acquire a house instead of dumping 18 years of payments in the landlords lap, now the house should be turned over to the kids.....or they should sell it...???
fgnjeruthasjgfnaskdjgn
((( sorry, head fell on keyboard))))))
FYI, I hope the venting here, is just that....a way out and therapy in a way of some sort.
I hope children are never abreast of the family finances (its non of their concern) and when a heartship on either side are just explained, as....."sorry we just don't have the money for that right now" and this brow beating is not infront of the children.
Again my situation is totally solo, and I need not go over someone eles's books or receipts , to discuss anything. I clearly brought numbers to the thread as a single parent, and explained any that was questioned.
Good luck. 
POST EDIT...
Again...OMG..
a shelter claim would tip the scales when the realestate investment returns a huge proffit ..so this isnt true..when the claim for shelter turns into a huge asset its not an expense..
Hummmmmmm..... soo a house taken by the government for a highway, lost in natural diaster like Katrina and not reembursed, or house loses value do to government work site, or inter city spraw ....the NCP is gonna rush to save the day with retro active payments to make up the loss....ROFLMAO | |
|
| what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/19/2008 5:19:07 PM | The principle purpose of child support appears to be to prolong the agony of the divorce until the child reaches the age of 18, and insure that the parties involved become as bitter as humanly possible with each other. It is an opportunity to continue to fight about money long after the judge otherwise puts that little argument to rest...
Child support was a good thing at one time, but it was written back in the days when the man worked, and mom gave up her career to stay home with the kids. In those days, if a man walked out on his family, they were screwed... and in order to keep that from happening, the concept of spousal and child support were born...
Then you had this thing where, instead of common sense, the support was a certain percentage of your income.
These days it seems to CAUSE custody battles. Cuz the person with the most custody, receives the money...
My ex and I agreed NEVER under any circumstances to put our child in the middle, and had a 50/50 custody arrangement worked out BEFORE we decided to split up.
THEN she saw an attorney, found out how much SHE COULD GET IF she got sole custody, and suddenly, I went from a good father, to someone who should be restricted to visitation only, and a bitter 2.5 year battle ensued.
Her attorney basically billed all she could bill, and then substituted out on the eve of trial. Our custody ended up 50-50, just like we ORIGINALLY agreed to, before setting money on fire in attorneys fees for no reason...
The family law system kinda sucks. Too many kids fall through the cracks, and one size fits all solutions do not work. | |
|
| what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/19/2008 5:24:53 PM | Reimbursement to the Custodial Parent for Food, Shelter, and Clothing for the Child
a shelter claim would tip the scales when the realestate investment returns a huge proffit ..so this isnt true..when the claim for shelter turns into a huge asset its not an expense.. | |
|
| what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/19/2008 5:32:02 PM | | Birdman I could not have said it better myself. Esecialy when in Canada you have to pay support for ex step children. | |
|
| what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/19/2008 5:34:56 PM | The point is to have a fair reimbursement of the cost of Food, Shelter, and Clothing. If Joe Blow (dad) makes $100,000 per year and Mary Jane(mother w/ custody) makes $110,000(mother)....Joe Blow still owes Mary Jane his fair share of the cost.
If the situation were switched and Mary Jane made $100,000 with no custody of the child and Joe blow made $110,000 and had custody of the child ...Mary Jane s owes Joe Blow some child support...
The point is for the custodial parent to receive what is fair and equitable amount that is due to them...It just seems like common sense to me. | |
|
| what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/19/2008 5:41:36 PM | This is not a discussion about Real Estate Profits...lol It is a discussion about "What is child support meant for"...
If the Shelter is paid off..then it would be common sense that their is not expense, however that is not usually the case (speculation)...would have to see statistics on home owners that are custodial parents. | |
|
| what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/19/2008 5:59:59 PM | | LOL Wow....After reading through this thread I'm thinking there are some people who still need to resolve some old anger issues before looking for a new relationship. Mercy. | |
|
| what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/19/2008 6:57:26 PM | | How can you say that my child support goes to my mortgage? I paid my mortgage, on my own, for 7 years before I had my child. My support goes to food, diapers, toys and all the other things that the CHILD needs. Not what *I* need. I already take care of what I need. | |
|
| what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/19/2008 6:58:20 PM | The point is for the custodial parent to receive what is fair and equitable amount
So how is fair and equitable then calculated or should we just stick with the system we have?
The one thing that we fought for in the 90's here in Canada was the concept of shared parenting. Each parent is an equal partner in the children's lives. This way the only child support being paid is the difference between what one parent would pay and the other would pay. The concept or rule of underemploying oneself would apply to both parties and the arguments over money would diminish.
The best part is that we would get away from the cp and ncp concept. Each parent would be an equal partner the way it should be. Now, I know this wouldn't work for every couple that breaks up, it didn't work in mine, but I have seen countless examples of where it has worked.
The way it would work is that when the parties initially go to court there would an automatic presumption of shared parenting, this is the default position if there are no objections. If there are reason's why one parent should not have equal time then that can be presented at that time, but at least the starting point would be equal instead of the way it now. The presumption in Canadian courts now is mother custody but its getting better and allot more judges are embracing joint custody.
So, once the financial aspect is removed then the focus can truly be on the children.
Unfortunately, when this concept got to the then minister of justice was sent back to committee never to heard of again. | |
|
| what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/19/2008 7:16:02 PM | I'm sorry too
Wow that sound sincere; lmao
"Sooooooo, a CP is shrewd enough business wise, even motovatied enough to acquire a house instead of dumping 18 years of payments in the landlords lap,"
So, ncp parents are are not shrewed and motivated enough to make these decisions, oh right I'm not a contractor silly me. What the hell would I know about business and finance. According your amusing posts nothing.
"Hummmmmmm..... soo a house taken by the government for a highway, lost in natural diaster like Katrina and not reembursed, or house loses value do to government work site, or inter city spraw ....the NCP is gonna rush to save the day with retro active payments to make up the loss....ROFLMAO "
^^^makes no sense what so ever and what it has got to do with the discussion I have no idea, but I guess the meds were wearing off for youa gain, lmao yet again,
Here's a suggestion try to stay ON TOPIC.
btw why have you deprived your children of child support from either your son's mother or the bio mother. If they have passed away I can understand but it is totally irresponsible for you not to go after this on behalf of your kids, woops that mean you couldn't play the victim so well. | |
|
| |
| what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/19/2008 8:22:21 PM |
btw why have you deprived your children of child support from either your son's mother or the bio mother. If they have passed away I can understand but it is totally irresponsible for you not to go after this on behalf of your kids, woops that mean you couldn't play the victim so well.
Please OH please pull up ANY of my POST ANYWHERE on the net where I play the victim... Interesting enough when I called you out on the BS several of your post ago to enlighten us here with your magical accountant wisdom you could not rebut, but low and behold you wish to jump in the crosshairs with again a blundering mathmatical error.
This in America would be answered with 2nd grade math... I'm typing slow, so you can follow....(sorry again )
It would be spending a dollar chasing a nickle....plain and simple... Raising children is not some sort of carnival game to see if I can get the biggest prize off the top shelf in the form of a child support check.The Bio DAD has been MIA since the child was born... In and out of jail and drug use.. I spent somewhere around 5-7K in the mid 90's trying to get this on the books...
Now for some reason, bio mom decided almost 6 years ago to take off and live on the streets... Assets between the pair might night equal the price of a lunch....
I would need to spend a minimum of 5-7K just to get them in court... Postponements/hearings/summons/them hiding...actually X has several warrants from last summer....
Now each day I would have to show for court cost me a minimum of 400-500 dollars.
I'm guessing a handfull of these would take place... Eventually they would be held accountable and with their life style would be subjected to pay 20-40 dollars a week...sad, but true... since they are both pretty much wards of the state or homeless...
......can't get blood from a turnip...plain and simple...
Then there would be the account of collectability.... Back to court and such...
By now even U can see it would be rediculious to spend thousands to Maybe collect a few hundred.. Not sure how the system works there, but as someone that has been envolved with foster/group home kids. Several years of family courts here I know the workings.
So you see chef... While you may carry the admirable grace of providing for your child in some fashion, my step son and daughter don't have that.
Here in America, since he was never legally adopted by myself, I am in noway responsiblable for him.. When he called and asked to come home, I could have easily said "BYE'...click.
Again, if I wished ,I could easily get the state to provide health care and a check in the amount of around 600 dollars a month... This would be granted with ease and would take nothing more then giving my lawyer $2,500 and a couple of court hearings...
However, Again... As I have never mentioned anywhere EVER that I needed money for either child,, this thread/another/or anywhere in the Internet or courts ,your comments
why have you deprived your children of child support ......but it is totally irresponsible for you not to go after this on behalf of your kids...
show your complete ignorance in the well being of my children...
They are secure in the routine of a daily lifestyle that does not change EVER. They are not latch key children, do not receive child rearing by a Nanny,Day care, or health worker, or even have a babysitter. Their Father puts them on the bus and is there when they come home.
If I was to actually recieve some sort of payment, Frankly I'm not sure what I would even do with it. Maybe turn it over to the church or another worthy avenue.
A safe wager at this point is that in the last 3 years I have spent more on my children then you Net( after CS of course), and by your own post spend several times more time with them and their activities...
I'm not some big shot that handles billions, but I do rather well with what I have....
As you wisely stated....it's only money.....
support should be for the needy, not the greedy... JMHO.
Support is for in fact the children.... anyone that would spend years in the SP threads weaseling out of such responsibilities and present ever red herring, smoke and mirror trick to belittle CP's from inflaming commets of right to own a house and the condoning of an unemployment hardship excuse of the NCP to feed their own child is abominable, or even atrocious at best...JMHO | |
|
| what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/19/2008 8:26:05 PM | | Percent of Income Model: Arkansas utilizes the percentage of income formula which determines the amount of child support as a percentage of the income of the parent obligated to pay the child support. This percentage is determined by factoring the number of children requiring support. | |
|
| what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/19/2008 8:41:16 PM | It doesn't take a rocket scientist to determine the cost of a healthy meal...which food is only one of the basic needs of providing for a child...and any decent accountant can do a simple estimation this one. My son's dad has been paying $52 per week....a very reasonable amout. If you spend $3 per meal @ 3 meals a day($9 per day) . The total cost would be $63 a week for meals alone for one 16 year old boy. Keep in mind this is an estimation.
$3 x 3 meals per day x 7 days a week = $63 for meal for 1 child
$63 - $52 = $11
I'm actually getting "shortchanged" on meals alone...there is certainly no overcharge to my sons dad the NCP; so this is certainly not unfair to him...Any more questions... | |
|
| what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/19/2008 9:05:34 PM | I have to laugh.. because I'm sorry but NCP parents spend their money in much more frivilous ways than the CP usually.
I haven't taken a vacation in years, I don't get to buy "toys" like sailboats or recreation propertie because I'm too busy feeding and educating kids.
Child support goes to support the kid.. If some of that money needs to support the custodial parent who has day to day care and control of the children, so be it.
All we do is split hairs on the whole child support things.
Two basic facts.
Some people HATE paying child support and will do anything to reduce or not pay it.
Some people pay it because they see it as their responsibility. | |
|
| |
| what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/20/2008 7:36:04 AM | | well after reading all the posters i see most CP's feel child support is for them to spend how ever they wish ..the crack head hoe can spend it on dope..the working girl can invest it in real estate .its no wonder they go after sole custody ,,even when fathers are asking for equal custody..it pays well.. | |
|
| what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/20/2008 7:45:21 AM |
The point is for the custodial parent to receive what is fair and equitable amount that is due to them...It just seems like common sense to me.
Jade....you are very right......that does seem fair and equitable.
But what if the the custodial parent is earning double what the non custodial parent is earning.......say $35,000 as opposed to $70,000
Is it fair or equitable that the ncp pays $520 month even though the children are there 30% of the time.......so $35,000-4,255 (income tax)$30,745-$6,240(cs payments) leaves in a potential non custodial parents hands $24,505 to provide housing provide for a safe car for the children to ride in and to provide food for the children when they are on her access. Housing or rent $1,200 means the 24,505 is now $10,105 of disposable cash or $845 for car payments......food....heat hydro...insurance...car maintenance...gas that is going up.......going to six flags on her access weekends.....somehow I think they will not be able to afford all or even all the essentials.
OMG they can no longer afford to be active participating parents in their child's life!
Because after all every time they are on their access weekend they will be opening the fridge using the heat and causing the bills or expenses to go up.
I am the custodial parent.....I earn the higher income(hypothetical number used however)....i benefit from the equivalent to married deduction plus the applicable children's tax credits.
Yes the cost is higher but I still feel it is important to leave resources in the hands of the non custodial parent. Please do not think I care a whit about my ex...I care only for the relationship that the children have.
But based on this economy i will be going down for this calender year as sales are slower. perhaps I should consider a change as it is for the children and if it forces her out of her home...then it is after all in the best interest of the children? Or as Jade says....that seems fair and equitable?
And i have the same problem for custodial parents who marry into a large combined income. However if my ex re-marries and they have a joint combined income that is healthy......then there is re-consideration! | |
|
| what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/20/2008 7:58:26 AM | | the point is we should do away with the concept of even having a custodial parent,,many fathers want to continue being a part of there children's lives after a brake up,,to get those little pictures they bring home from school,,to see them run to great them after a day at work ,,it is so rewarding to have children a part of your life ..its criminal to take them away from one parent and give them to the other and its time the courts started treating men and women as equals ,,women are not just home makers ..this isn't 1950 anymore. I can see many are now out there working as hard as the fathers to provide a home for there children ..equal custody would do away with so much of this pain and loss and controlling ..and its a well known fact the children are better off when they can have both parents in there life ..but as long as there is a dollar sign on our children's heads some will use the system..it seems impossible to talk about equal custody without the CP's talking about not getting there money ..if the courts award equal custody they still ask the man to pay his ex even if they have 50-50 arrangements ,I read most men complain about loosing there children more then paying any child support..this system is out dated ..lets see some equality ladies..your the hold up here ..many women still make less money but if you want to move your womens movment ahead you have to let go of old ways and make room for the new ,,if you want to ever see equality and freedom ..you have to stop demanding sole custody,,and our jails are just getting to full now so lets get with the program ladies..this system isnt working..this isnt 1950 anymore..stop acting like you cant financialy look after yourself ..all your doing is holding back the many women who do and can .. | |
|
| what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/20/2008 8:39:20 AM | Okay, in response, cause I'm a little cranky as well today..
Men, buck up.. don't expect your ex to raise the kids... make sure you keep your jobs, get a good place to live, stay clean so you can have the kids half of the time. Make sure you plan for this and that you learn from birth how to take care of your kids.
Don't expect to get sympathy or bail out when the kids are sick, don't feel like doing their homework or start sampling drugs or alcohol. What happens on your watch is your issue.
No more expecting mothers to take the time off work to be with sick kids, drive them to doctors, dentists, orthondontist appoints. No more expecting mothers to deal with the schools, the homework, shopping for school supplies or homework.
Equal parenting means EQUAL responsibility. It means men must no longer realize they are parents and take the first stage coach out of dodge. This system simply no longer works. This is 2008 and all you are doing is hurting all the men who do want to raise their children equally.
Our culutral and societal beliefs about raising children are out dated.. It's been proven that a man can change a poopy diaper, can clean up vomit in the middle of the night, and can bake cookies or cupcakes for the class treat. By acting like you can't, you simply make it easier for mothers to step up to the plate.
Gawd, I'm so sick of men who think women are the issue.
Prison populations are primarily male.. There are women's prisons, but men do far outwiegh women. All these male prisoners most likely have families at home. Stop those evil women who step up to the plate.
Deadbeat dads.. let's hunt them down, make them take responsiblity for shared parenting. Kids can bop off to dad's house every other week. It should be mandatory. No excuses.. if you can't "parent".. you should go to jail.
Okay.. I'm back in reality.. I just had to see what it was like to cross over into that alter reality that many men and women live in.
Life is what it is.. it isn't easy and there is no easy answer. It's the way it is. Roll with the punches, make the best of it. | |
|
| what is child support meant for?
Posted: 3/20/2008 8:40:51 AM | | Vallyejavastop!!!! here ye here ye!!! By god I think he has it!!!! GREAT POST my friend!!!! Take a look at the stats and see how many men get physical custody of there children here in the state of Missouri compared to woman. There are a lot of GREAT woman out there FACT!!!! There are aslo a lot of great men. FACT but according to the stats women are always great ,the guys are always Trash in the eyes of THIS SYSTEM!!!! Changes need to be made. | |
|
|
| Page 4 of 15
|
1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 |
|
Home
login 
