"Galileo" wrote in message
oups.com...

DB wrote:

Like it or not, impoverished fathers should never be threatened with jail

Impoverished? What about the impoverished mothers, who are trying to
raise the kids? Whichever person winds up with the kids (woman or man)
has the greater burden, and you know it.

So if mom is impoverished, she can get government assistance, but if dad is
impoverished he can go to jail?



and the State has absolutely no business threatening law abiding citizens
over money issues, especially when they squander massive amounts of money
so
easily themselves.

And state troopers have no business stopping people for speeding when
the troopers routinely speed themselves?

We're right back to: if you don't want to pay support for a kid, don't
have one.

Oh, so you are suggesting that a married man whose wife divorces him because
she found someone else should never had fathered children with her just in
case she might some day decide to divorce him? Do you really believe that
it is a man's responsibility to support those children *at the same standard
of living they enjoyed before the divorce*? Because that's what the CS
system demands-- the same standard of living. It isn't the *fact" of
support, but the *level* of support that most are complaining about. Do you
really believe that Dad should get a second job so Junior can continue
playing 3 sports? Or do you think that Junior can scale back a bit so Dad
only has to work one job?