Child Support Enforcement A Fraud

"My Own Doppelganger" wrote
Are you smoking crack?! It doesn't matter who left who.... Get with
the real world.
==
Oh geez, I'm am speaking of what *should* be (my opinion), not what is. Why
don't
you guys just trim your crosspostings if you are having trouble keeping up?
(I'm posting from ac-s, if that
helps.)

"My Own Doppelganger" wrote in message
...
Are you smoking crack?! It doesn't matter who left who.... Get with
the real world.

Here in Illinois, it is a flat 25% of take home that the NCP must pay
the CP. End of story.

Oh really? What are the Illinois gross income adjustment factors used to
determine "take home"? 25% is for two children, right? What are the
percentages used for one child, three children, four children, etc.? What
variances to CS guideline calculations are allowed under Illinois law? How
is child support calculated for self-employed individuals? Do the judges
have any discretion to order CS guideline variances in Illinois?

Gini wrote:
"Andre Lieven" wrote
........................

Yeah, didn't he know that all that is only OK if one is a woman... ?
==
Exactly WHO is it that claimed that, Andre?

Andre did, as he always does. He makes up stuff as he goes.

(was that a rhetorical question?)

"Gini" wrote in message
news:8MQBg.6040$z12.4913@trndny02...

"Andre Lieven" wrote
........................

Yeah, didn't he know that all that is only OK if one is a woman... ?
==
Exactly WHO is it that claimed that, Andre?

Certainly wasn't me. I say the same thing to any money-hungry person who
posts that they are not being given enough for luxuries.

On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 00:35:51 GMT, "Gini" wrote:


"My Own Doppelganger" wrote
Are you smoking crack?! It doesn't matter who left who.... Get with
the real world.
==
Oh geez, I'm am speaking of what *should* be (my opinion), not what is. Why
don't
you guys just trim your crosspostings if you are having trouble keeping up?
(I'm posting from ac-s, if that
helps.)

alt.mens-rights,alt.child-support,alt.support.divorce

Pot, Kettle, Black,
Follow your own advice, you and your crones have cross posted the hell
out of here for the last two days with your quips, innuendoes and
'coffee-clatch invectives'. .

Trim your own damn headers.

A jury is 12 individuals who decides who has the best lawyer.
- Mark Twain

"Gini" ) writes:
"Andre Lieven" wrote
"Gini" uses ovular thinking:
"Robert" wrote
I am a custodial father of three children and the amount of child support
that is paid by most NCP is not enough to support a DOG!
My ex wife pays $195 (at most - when she does pay) a MONTH for 3 growing
teenagers!
==
But, you *chose* to leave and you *chose* to take the kids with you. If
you
didn't want to accept the responsibility for those choices, you should
have
chosen differently. Your ex wife should not have to fund *your* choices.

Given that DR. Sanford Braver's research shows that women are the
leavers in 70% of all divorces, and that the vast majority of them leave
for non crucial reasons, it is very *funny* to see a FemiTwit whine when
women get a small dose of... *equality*.

Yes, you're right about one point; this custodial father should get the
same proportion of the ex wife's earnings, as she would, were he the one
made to pay a custodial mother.

Whasamatter, dontcha like... *equality* ?

Andre
==
Ok, Andre, try to keep up--This NCP, who happens to be a dad,
is whining that he isn't getting enough money from the ex.

IOW, he shows that he does believe in *equality*, as Dr. Sanford Braver
has shown that most women collecting CS do the same...

It is my belief that if one party makes
a unilateral choice to leave the relationship (and that party is usually the
woman), that party
should be prepared to accept the financial consequences of that choice
(usually a woman).

So, please post proof of your having communicated this " belief " to legal
and legislative authorities. Otherwise, its a convenient claim of belief
that is created only to criticise one man, for doing no worse than millions
of women do.

The fact
that this leaving party happens to be the dad, has no bearing on the
responsibilty of said choice.

Really ? From Meyer & Garansky, Techincal Analysis Paper Number 42, US
Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Income Security:

Percentage of Custodial Parents Who Recieve A Child Support Order:
Mothers: 79.6%
Fathers: 29.9%

Percentage of Custodial Parents Who Totally Default On Support Orders:
NCP Mothers: 46.9%
NCP Fathers: 26.9%

Now, until you can explain to us all why women with kids in the majority
get orders, while the majority of men with kids aren't granted them, and
until you can explain why almost half of women under an order totally
default on paying, while just a bit more than half the proportion of
men under an order fail to comply, then, yes, the sex of the party IS
*greatly relevent* to such an issue.

And NO, this
leaving father should NOT "get the same proportion of his ex wife's
earnings, as she would, were she the one to leave."

So, you support INequality. Got it.

NEITHER leaving party should get a proportion of the other's earnings if
they leave.

Then, show us your letters of comment to the legal authorities and to your
legislative respresentatives to bear your claim out.

That *is* "equality." Your comment to me that: "it is very *funny* to see a
FemiTwit whine when
women get a small dose of... *equality*, makes you look totally silly and
clueless.

And, it makes you a person who CANNOT answer the raised point, but a mere
slinger of ad hominems.

" Ad hominem, the last refuge of the whipped scoubdrel. " anon.

I have been a father's
rights supporter for decades and have been around here for nearly as long.

Yet, you don't support this one's *right to equal treatment under EXISTING
law*... which belies your unsupported claim. HTH.

YOU, Andre, are a hypocrite if you think
it is OK for NCP dads to receive lifestyle support while claiming NCP moms
should not (and they should not).

Hey, I'm consistant; If the law exists for one sex, I believe that it exists
for BOTH.

*You're* the one appearing to demand that an EXISTING law NOT be applied to
a... *woman*.

That greatly suggests WomenFirsterism on your part.

Andre

"Gini" ) writes:
"Andre Lieven" wrote
........................

Yeah, didn't he know that all that is only OK if one is a woman... ?
==
Exactly WHO is it that claimed that, Andre?

You. HTH.

Andre

My Own Doppelganger ) writes:
Are you smoking crack?! It doesn't matter who left who.... Get with
the real world.

Indeed. And, it should be pointed out that it was WomenFirsters who
demanded " no fault " divorce. OK, they got it, which makes them
*ineligable* to them demand a finding of fault against a MAN.

Here in Illinois, it is a flat 25% of take home that the NCP must pay
the CP. End of story. It doesn't matter how much the CP makes or
doesn't make, unless you make what the courts deem as beyond normal
circumstances (i.e if you made 30 MM a year and your ex makes 50 MM a
year). Only in those cases could a NCP petition for a reduction.

Quite. But thats the Real World, not WomenFirster CloudCuckooLand...

On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 00:15:48 GMT, "Gini" wrote:

Ok, Andre, try to keep up--This NCP, who happens to be a dad,
is whining that he isn't getting enough money from the ex. It is my belief
that if one party makes
a unilateral choice to leave the relationship (and that party is usually the
woman), that party
should be prepared to accept the financial consequences of that choice
(usually a woman). The fact
that this leaving party happens to be the dad, has no bearing on the
responsibilty of said choice. And NO, this
leaving father should NOT "get the same proportion of his ex wife's
earnings, as she would, were she the one to leave."
NEITHER leaving party should get a proportion of the other's earnings if
they leave.
That *is* "equality." Your comment to me that: "it is very *funny* to see a
FemiTwit whine when
women get a small dose of... *equality*, makes you look totally silly and
clueless. I have been a father's
rights supporter for decades and have been around here for nearly as long.
YOU, Andre, are a hypocrite if you think
it is OK for NCP dads to receive lifestyle support while claiming NCP moms
should not (and they should not).

Andre

"Gini" ) writes:
"My Own Doppelganger" wrote
Are you smoking crack?! It doesn't matter who left who.... Get with
the real world.
==
Oh geez, I'm am speaking of what *should* be (my opinion), not what is.

Funny how your chosen case of " what should be " involves slamming one of the
relatively few MEN who got custody "...

Why don't you guys just trim your crosspostings if you are having trouble
keeping up?

Straw Woman, Fallacy of ASSumption, and Demand That A Man Do Her Work.

Wow, three WomenFirster Fallacies in one sentence.

(I'm posting from ac-s, if that helps.)

Indeed, which further highlights your NON father's rights stance.

Thanks for further outing yourself. g

Andre

"teachrmama" ) writes:
"Gini" wrote in message
news:8MQBg.6040$z12.4913@trndny02...

"Andre Lieven" wrote
........................

Yeah, didn't he know that all that is only OK if one is a woman... ?
==
Exactly WHO is it that claimed that, Andre?

Certainly wasn't me. I say the same thing to any money-hungry person who
posts that they are not being given enough for luxuries.

Yet, the CS recipience is apparently recieving way, way, less than the
CS tables suggest that he be getting.

I'd be more convinced by seeing woman getting less than guideline payments
being criticised for demanding a penny more...

Andre