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 |
#111
|
|||
|
|||
"Child Support" money?
"Jon" wrote in message news:Gvxsb.181492$HS4.1507961@attbi_s01... 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. ....decided to pay?!?!?...... "Gini52" wrote in message ... In article jPtsb.10$6G3.8@fed1read06, Chris says... Family kourt forces a man to give "child support" cash to the woman. She uses such proceeds to purchase lottery tickets, alcoholic beverages, cigarettes, gifts for her lover, and bon bons. How is this "child support" money? === It's the "trickle down" effect--You know, "Reaganomics." In the case of middle income dads, the presumption is that if you give them (CPs) way more than they need, there is a greater chance that enough will "trickle down" to the kids to keep them from starving. Note: This does not include CS ordered to low income dads that does not meet the basic needs of the child or upper income dads who are not subject to CS guidelines. === === .....more like FORCED To pay under threat of a gun. I sometimes think people like you wont be happy until we cant shyt with out a court order. |
#112
|
|||
|
|||
"Child Support" money?
"Jon" wrote in message news:Gvxsb.181492$HS4.1507961@attbi_s01... 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. ....decided to pay?!?!?...... "Gini52" wrote in message ... In article jPtsb.10$6G3.8@fed1read06, Chris says... Family kourt forces a man to give "child support" cash to the woman. She uses such proceeds to purchase lottery tickets, alcoholic beverages, cigarettes, gifts for her lover, and bon bons. How is this "child support" money? === It's the "trickle down" effect--You know, "Reaganomics." In the case of middle income dads, the presumption is that if you give them (CPs) way more than they need, there is a greater chance that enough will "trickle down" to the kids to keep them from starving. Note: This does not include CS ordered to low income dads that does not meet the basic needs of the child or upper income dads who are not subject to CS guidelines. === === .....more like FORCED To pay under threat of a gun. I sometimes think people like you wont be happy until we cant shyt with out a court order. |
#113
|
|||
|
|||
"Child Support" money?
"Cameron Stevens" wrote in message .. . "Dave" dave@freedoms-door wrote in message ... "Jon" wrote in message news:Gvxsb.181492$HS4.1507961@attbi_s01... So if you receive support you can never buy a lottery ticket or take a drink? Child support should not be used for anything other than for supporting the child. Supporting the mother *is* supporting the child. I know what you mean but there's no sane or reasonable way to enforce this. You are assuming that the current enforcement practices are reasonable! |
#114
|
|||
|
|||
"Child Support" money?
"Cameron Stevens" wrote in message .. . "Dave" dave@freedoms-door wrote in message ... "Jon" wrote in message news:Gvxsb.181492$HS4.1507961@attbi_s01... So if you receive support you can never buy a lottery ticket or take a drink? Child support should not be used for anything other than for supporting the child. Supporting the mother *is* supporting the child. I know what you mean but there's no sane or reasonable way to enforce this. You are assuming that the current enforcement practices are reasonable! |
#115
|
|||
|
|||
"Child Support" money?
"Chris" wrote in message news:O3Psb.335$6G3.63@fed1read06... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "Chris" wrote in message news:ZdEsb.258$6G3.133@fed1read06... "Jon" wrote in message news:AjCsb.187030$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? So they had to use an additional share of their own income to cover the children's expenses - now they've got no money left to also cover their own expenses, since they were covering the NCP's share - what would you suggest, they hold off being able to eat dinner till next month? Obviously, they ARE eating dinner; otherwise, they wouldn't be alive to pay for ANY expense. --------------------- Chris, I absolutely agree with what you are saying. I think it's proof in itself that there is/was enough money to raise the kids if those kids have in fact been raised. It's proof that cs is not for the support of kids. Intact families run the whole spectrum of income levels from millionaires to families living in their car and the kids do manage to get 'raised'. ~AZ~ "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? |
#116
|
|||
|
|||
"Child Support" money?
"Chris" wrote in message news:O3Psb.335$6G3.63@fed1read06... "Moon Shyne" wrote in message ... "Chris" wrote in message news:ZdEsb.258$6G3.133@fed1read06... "Jon" wrote in message news:AjCsb.187030$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? So they had to use an additional share of their own income to cover the children's expenses - now they've got no money left to also cover their own expenses, since they were covering the NCP's share - what would you suggest, they hold off being able to eat dinner till next month? Obviously, they ARE eating dinner; otherwise, they wouldn't be alive to pay for ANY expense. --------------------- Chris, I absolutely agree with what you are saying. I think it's proof in itself that there is/was enough money to raise the kids if those kids have in fact been raised. It's proof that cs is not for the support of kids. Intact families run the whole spectrum of income levels from millionaires to families living in their car and the kids do manage to get 'raised'. ~AZ~ "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? |
#117
|
|||
|
|||
"Child Support" money?
"The Beast" wrote in message .com... "Cameron Stevens" wrote in message .. . Supporting the mother *is* supporting the child. I know what you mean but there's no sane or reasonable way to enforce this. You are assuming that the current enforcement practices are reasonable! No... It doesn't matter if the practices are reasonable. Paying the mom, regardless of the amount of fairness, supports the child. How WELL the child is supported is then left to the mom (CP, sorry). Cameron |
#118
|
|||
|
|||
"Child Support" money?
"The Beast" wrote in message .com... "Cameron Stevens" wrote in message .. . Supporting the mother *is* supporting the child. I know what you mean but there's no sane or reasonable way to enforce this. You are assuming that the current enforcement practices are reasonable! No... It doesn't matter if the practices are reasonable. Paying the mom, regardless of the amount of fairness, supports the child. How WELL the child is supported is then left to the mom (CP, sorry). Cameron |
#119
|
|||
|
|||
"Child Support" money?
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 21:32:16 GMT, "Bob Whiteside"
wrote: 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. Or modified downward. 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. WHo probably make up a small portion of the reported numbers. If I remember the majority of support was given to those 21 and up. The $4,755 does not include healthcare insurance and reimbursements, life insurance, daycare, etc. that are add-ons to the basic CS order. It very well may. My state includes daycare expenses in the support order already added in. Life insurance? Reimbursements? Those are judgements that are seperate from the CS order anyway. I dont know one person who got life insurance ordered. I have seen reimbursement for medical expenses or extrordinary expense like braces, private school, etc. However, most children dont go to private school and many dont need braces. And it does not include education CS paid directly to adult children attending college. Where did you see this statement? It also does not account for the additional support value for non-cash support that 60% of CP's report receiving from NCP's. What is non-cash support? 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. Possibly in some cases but not all. In some cases this could be less. 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. I doubt that. |
#120
|
|||
|
|||
"Child Support" money?
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 21:32:16 GMT, "Bob Whiteside"
wrote: 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. Or modified downward. 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. WHo probably make up a small portion of the reported numbers. If I remember the majority of support was given to those 21 and up. The $4,755 does not include healthcare insurance and reimbursements, life insurance, daycare, etc. that are add-ons to the basic CS order. It very well may. My state includes daycare expenses in the support order already added in. Life insurance? Reimbursements? Those are judgements that are seperate from the CS order anyway. I dont know one person who got life insurance ordered. I have seen reimbursement for medical expenses or extrordinary expense like braces, private school, etc. However, most children dont go to private school and many dont need braces. And it does not include education CS paid directly to adult children attending college. Where did you see this statement? It also does not account for the additional support value for non-cash support that 60% of CP's report receiving from NCP's. What is non-cash support? 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. Possibly in some cases but not all. In some cases this could be less. 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. I doubt that. |
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 |