If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#91
|
|||
|
|||
"Child Support" money?
Gini52 wtote:
In article , Fighting For Kids says... On 12 Nov 2003 18:45:30 -0800, Gini52 wrote: ==== Yep. It comes from your percent share. (My proposal is, however, that only the amount over reasonable actual expenses should be subject to accounting.) ==== ==== But what is a reasonable amount? Not one person here has agreed to any amount proposed. ==== I have repeatedly suggested that a reasonable amount is commensurate with the amount states pay for foster children. This includes regional COL variances. How can one set amount for all children in the same geopgraphical area be reasonable? Should Trump pay CS at the same rate as Joe Average who earns 40K? In the same county you can have poverty level and millionares paying CS. Is it really reasonable for a millionare to pay the same CS as the poverty level person? Should children that have been raised all of their lives stop getting the creature comforts they have been getting because their parents divorce? Of course the obligatory *the NCP can then contribute anything they want above the base support* is expected. However the problem lies in that without being forced to provide above foster care level of support some will choose to spend on themselves, their new SO, or just about anything other than their child. I happen to know someone that DOES save receipts and sends copies of every receipt to her ex, as he kept bellyaching about how he paid too much. All it has done is create more animosity between the two of them. He calls her and questions why his kids can't eat plain hamburgers rather than chicken nuggets. From what I have seen it just leads to nitpicking. I do feel CPs should be responsible for showing how the CS is spent, that way any nogoodnicks will have to straighten up. Overall I bet if all were required to show where the CS money is going there would be a lot less of *I pay too much* but a lot more critical comments that will virtually make no differance at all in the end. Mrs Indyguy ==== ==== |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
"Child Support" money?
"Fighting For Kids" wrote in message ... On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 22:40:36 -0500, "Tiffany" wrote: Outrages amounts? What to you is a reasonable amount? 4755 is the average support thats been ordered for BOTH mothers and fathers. Thats about 400.00 for each case, not each child. Is that reasonable? The $4,755 is the amount CP's claim has been ordered and this number is from 1999 orders that could have been modified upward twice since the Census data was collected. For perspective it needs to be stated this average CS amount includes teenage mothers aged 15 and up who have had children with very low income teenage boys, as well as adult children over the age of majority for CS but under age 21. The $4,755 does not include healthcare insurance and reimbursements, life insurance, daycare, etc. that are add-ons to the basic CS order. And it does not include education CS paid directly to adult children attending college. It also does not account for the additional support value for non-cash support that 60% of CP's report receiving from NCP's. The average CS award has got to be at least $400-500 per month more than the Census shows when you consider all the other factors NCP's are required to pay. The government has an agenda to make CS payments and collections sound low to continually increase the guideline amounts and justify the $4 billion bureaucracy that has been created to chase down NCP's. |
#93
|
|||
|
|||
"Child Support" money?
"Fighting For Kids" wrote in message ... On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 22:40:36 -0500, "Tiffany" wrote: Outrages amounts? What to you is a reasonable amount? 4755 is the average support thats been ordered for BOTH mothers and fathers. Thats about 400.00 for each case, not each child. Is that reasonable? The $4,755 is the amount CP's claim has been ordered and this number is from 1999 orders that could have been modified upward twice since the Census data was collected. For perspective it needs to be stated this average CS amount includes teenage mothers aged 15 and up who have had children with very low income teenage boys, as well as adult children over the age of majority for CS but under age 21. The $4,755 does not include healthcare insurance and reimbursements, life insurance, daycare, etc. that are add-ons to the basic CS order. And it does not include education CS paid directly to adult children attending college. It also does not account for the additional support value for non-cash support that 60% of CP's report receiving from NCP's. The average CS award has got to be at least $400-500 per month more than the Census shows when you consider all the other factors NCP's are required to pay. The government has an agenda to make CS payments and collections sound low to continually increase the guideline amounts and justify the $4 billion bureaucracy that has been created to chase down NCP's. |
#94
|
|||
|
|||
"Child Support" money?
If your child isnt being taken care of properly you probably would
have CPS on your steps, knocking at your door. To take your children away. On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 14:47:31 -0500 (EST), wrote: Chris ... In most states, there is no accountability on how CS is spent. If your child is not being taken care of properly, then you jump in with both feet and make sure the money goes where it's supposed to. nm |
#95
|
|||
|
|||
"Child Support" money?
If your child isnt being taken care of properly you probably would
have CPS on your steps, knocking at your door. To take your children away. On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 14:47:31 -0500 (EST), wrote: Chris ... In most states, there is no accountability on how CS is spent. If your child is not being taken care of properly, then you jump in with both feet and make sure the money goes where it's supposed to. nm |
#96
|
|||
|
|||
"Child Support" money?
Chris wrote:
"Jon" wrote in message news:AjCsb.187030$e01.681443@attbi_s02... What I am saying is this: The actual physical child support dollars that come in the form of a check from the Family Support Registry do not have to be spent on the children if the custodial parent has already had to take the NCP's share out of their own income to pay direct and indirect child expenses for any given month. This is not rocket science. If they've already paid for such expenses out of their own pocket, then they don't need the "child support" money, do they? Clarify please. Are you trying to say if the CP earns enough to totally support their child that the NCP shouldn't have to pay any CS? My niece is employed. She remarried and her new husband earns a considerable amount. Should her ex no longer pay CS because the two of them can do it on their own? You know the really sad thing is that her new DH would gladly do so, he loves his SD. If given the chance to not pay her ex would take the offer in a heart beat, speaks volumes about him doesn't it. Mrs Indyguy "The Dave©" wrote in message ... Jon wrote: So if you receive support you can never buy a lottery ticket or take a drink? FYI. Child support "dollars" can be spent on anything the CP wants, as long as they have already had to beg, borrow or steal from others to make up the the deadbeat's share before he decided to pay. So, you admit that CS is really general income for the CP (read: mother), and should be taxed accordingly? |
#97
|
|||
|
|||
"Child Support" money?
Chris wrote:
"Jon" wrote in message news:AjCsb.187030$e01.681443@attbi_s02... What I am saying is this: The actual physical child support dollars that come in the form of a check from the Family Support Registry do not have to be spent on the children if the custodial parent has already had to take the NCP's share out of their own income to pay direct and indirect child expenses for any given month. This is not rocket science. If they've already paid for such expenses out of their own pocket, then they don't need the "child support" money, do they? Clarify please. Are you trying to say if the CP earns enough to totally support their child that the NCP shouldn't have to pay any CS? My niece is employed. She remarried and her new husband earns a considerable amount. Should her ex no longer pay CS because the two of them can do it on their own? You know the really sad thing is that her new DH would gladly do so, he loves his SD. If given the chance to not pay her ex would take the offer in a heart beat, speaks volumes about him doesn't it. Mrs Indyguy "The Dave©" wrote in message ... Jon wrote: So if you receive support you can never buy a lottery ticket or take a drink? FYI. Child support "dollars" can be spent on anything the CP wants, as long as they have already had to beg, borrow or steal from others to make up the the deadbeat's share before he decided to pay. So, you admit that CS is really general income for the CP (read: mother), and should be taxed accordingly? |
#98
|
|||
|
|||
"Child Support" money?
"Fighting For Kids" wrote in message ... On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 23:02:34 -0800, "Chris" wrote: "Fighting For Kids" wrote in message .. . On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 20:56:39 -0800, "Chris" wrote: That ought to be left up to the parent to decide; dontcha think? If a utopia exsisted, yes. It doesn't. Some parents are able to come to reasonable agreements that work for them. Some parents are not able to reach a reasonable agreement and must have a third party intervene. Whether it be a mediator or judge. And WHO'S the judge as to whether or not they need a judge? "Reasonable" is a matter of opinion subject to the individual. Usually one of the people in the parties. Our state has madatory mediation requirements in all divorces (im not sure about the custody and child support arrangements in which the parents were not married) I think thats a good step because it forces people to sit down and try and make a resonable agreement. Some mediations dont work out and the court is the next step. Who decides in any lawsuit if a judge is needed? This is called negotiating in the shadow of the court. It's a joke. The attorney for the mother will tell her: "Here is what you can expect to get if we go to a judge. Don't agree to anything less than that." The whole mediation process is set up to fail. It's a waste of time and taxpayer money. |
#99
|
|||
|
|||
"Child Support" money?
"Fighting For Kids" wrote in message ... On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 23:02:34 -0800, "Chris" wrote: "Fighting For Kids" wrote in message .. . On Wed, 12 Nov 2003 20:56:39 -0800, "Chris" wrote: That ought to be left up to the parent to decide; dontcha think? If a utopia exsisted, yes. It doesn't. Some parents are able to come to reasonable agreements that work for them. Some parents are not able to reach a reasonable agreement and must have a third party intervene. Whether it be a mediator or judge. And WHO'S the judge as to whether or not they need a judge? "Reasonable" is a matter of opinion subject to the individual. Usually one of the people in the parties. Our state has madatory mediation requirements in all divorces (im not sure about the custody and child support arrangements in which the parents were not married) I think thats a good step because it forces people to sit down and try and make a resonable agreement. Some mediations dont work out and the court is the next step. Who decides in any lawsuit if a judge is needed? This is called negotiating in the shadow of the court. It's a joke. The attorney for the mother will tell her: "Here is what you can expect to get if we go to a judge. Don't agree to anything less than that." The whole mediation process is set up to fail. It's a waste of time and taxpayer money. |
#100
|
|||
|
|||
"Child Support" money?
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
misc.kids FAQ on Breastfeeding Past the First Year | [email protected] | Info and FAQ's | 0 | July 29th 04 05:16 AM |
misc.kids FAQ on Breastfeeding Past the First Year | [email protected] | Info and FAQ's | 0 | February 16th 04 09:58 AM |
The Determination of Child Custody in the USA | Fighting for kids | Child Support | 21 | November 17th 03 01:35 AM |
So much for the claims about Sweden | Kane | Spanking | 10 | November 5th 03 06:31 AM |
Helping Your Child Be Healthy and Fit sX3#;WA@'U | John Smith | Kids Health | 0 | July 20th 03 04:50 AM |