User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 10:57:27 AM EDT
[#1]
I may end up paying $550 to $650 for one child.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 10:57:32 AM EDT
[#2]
20% of my take home pay goes for my one son
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 11:01:17 AM EDT
[#3]
well, after the last year of working hard at it trying to make it work, me and the wife decided to call it quits. 1 child, support $606 a month 2 years alimony 193 a month, (just cause i care, didnt have to pay.)
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 11:04:54 AM EDT
[#4]
Poll fail. Should be measured as a % of take-home or gross income.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 11:13:40 AM EDT
[#5]
Quoted:
20% of my take home pay goes for my one son This is the TX standard for one child. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 11:14:50 AM EDT
[#6]
In Iowa pretty much set by the court, based on income and number of kids. There is almost no negotiation involved. I've been out of child support for few years now (thank God). They must have a chart that tells them how much. I got by fairly cheap, I was unemployed when first divorced and the ex only went back to get it bumped up a couple of times. I want to say i was paying around $500 a month for two kids towards the end. Ex continued to work. Probably made more money than me.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 11:15:44 AM EDT
[#7]
$1500 a month plus 60% of all expenses for two kids.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 11:17:03 AM EDT
[#8]
$200/kid, I have two + all health insurance premiums and anything above $200 in copays or prescriptions (not and, or)
Not too bad. She's a rotten bitch and I got her good. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 11:19:30 AM EDT
[#9]
$1123 a month on $4075 a month gross. Don't even ask...
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 11:30:10 AM EDT
[#10]
0 one child.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 11:31:27 AM EDT
[#11]
Quoted:
In Iowa pretty much set by the court, based on income and number of kids. There is almost no negotiation involved. I've been out of child support for few years now (thank God). They must have a chart that tells them how much. I got by fairly cheap, I was unemployed when first divorced and the ex only went back to get it bumped up a couple of times. I want to say i was paying around $500 a month for two kids towards the end. Ex continued to work. Probably made more money than me. MO has a calculation based on income of both parties. Based on what was calculated for me, as a matter of principle, I told them I would close my business, putting a dozen people on unemployment and I would voluntarily become a ward of the state. I told my lawyer to tell them(the court) to get real or fuck off. This had nothing to do with taking care of my kids, which have been very well provided for over the last 16 years. Luckly my ex is reasonable and never had any problems with what I pay. I pay more than half thier expenses and will pay for all of there schooling, including college. Also, provide them with summer jobs making better money than any kids thier age. The system is completely broken and I have no doubt is a contributing factor in the destruction of the institution of marriage. In other words men are getting wise, that no matter how much you think they love you things can always turn sour and men know they are the ones that get screwed. I always laugh when I here women complain about not being able to find a good man, haha, they all over the place, they just don't want to take the chance of getting screwed by the system. jmho eta: In fairness and full disclosure, I'm remarried and have a daughter.  But if this one doesn't work, I swear, never again.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 11:31:45 AM EDT
[#12]
$900x2
Until the next extortionate increase, of course.... 
ETA: Oh, and that's "taking into account" the fact that I ALSO pay for their health insurance, 84% of unpaid medical, and 100% of their college funds. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 11:35:10 AM EDT
[#13]
Quoted:
Poll fail. Should be measured as a % of take-home or gross income. I have a theory. Personally I've read the statistic on raising a child. However, having 4 children of my own I can say that the cost of raising those children is substantially lower than what is published. Without children my housing cost would be the same, perhaps my home would be configured in a different way, or I might have different amenities. The cost for nutritional food is the same for big earners and low earners. There are all the other miscellaneous cost, but in my opinion there is a base $ amount needed. A father with an affluent income might provide expensive activities, private school tuition, and more expensive clothes and toys....but those are extras and not necessities. When the father is divorced, even with a good income. He has to provide at minimum another home and everything that goes with it, and stock a second pantry with food. A woman who receives "court ordered child support" benefits. Society says the children must be provided the lifestyle for which they are accustomed, which means the custodial parent enjoys that same environment. It is tantamount to hidden alimony. If the father wants the children, has a better income, and is a good father then in my opinion then he should get the children. If the mothers income potential is less, and she fights and wins the custody then her overhead cost should be adjusted to HER income. Child Support should then be calculated off of that amount. So the poll isn't a "fail". In my opinion child support should be standard, or capped. A custodial parent benefits from the custody payment. At the very least there should be a way to calculate this "excess" and the father be given a tax deduction. If you are at a 30% marginal Federal tax rate with state income tax thrown in, then you are paying a much higher percentage of your net after tax income than a father who is at an 18% marginal federal tax bracket. So in my opinion gross percentage of income is a travesty. I want hard dollars, not percentage of gross income. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 11:35:19 AM EDT
[#14]
Quoted: $1123 a month on $4075 a month gross. Don't even ask... for how many kids? That's about right in NY for 2-not including reimbursement for day care/babysitting |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 11:36:35 AM EDT
[#15]
I have custody of my 2 kids and their mother pays $50/month. She's suppose to pay 50% of all medical plus 50% of daycare costs but until she exceeds the poverty limit, she doesn't have to pay. Right now, she'd rather live on welfare than support the kids.
Good thing they live with me! |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 11:39:26 AM EDT
[#16]
Quoted:
$1123 a month on $4075 a month gross. Don't even ask... 
God damned condoms are a bargain. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 11:41:34 AM EDT
[#17]
Quoted:
Quoted:
$1123 a month on $4075 a month gross. Don't even ask... for how many kids? That's about right in NY for 2-not including reimbursement for day care/babysitting At the risk of incurring the wrath of that which is GD, it's on 8 children. One X wife, all with her, no twins. Just all stupid. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 11:42:58 AM EDT
[#18]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
$1123 a month on $4075 a month gross. Don't even ask... for how many kids? That's about right in NY for 2-not including reimbursement for day care/babysitting At the risk of incurring the wrath of that which is GD, it's on 8 children. One X wife, all with her, no twins. Just all stupid.
I wish you the best of luck brother. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 11:47:34 AM EDT
[#19]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
$1123 a month on $4075 a month gross. Don't even ask... for how many kids? That's about right in NY for 2-not including reimbursement for day care/babysitting At the risk of incurring the wrath of that which is GD, it's on 8 children. One X wife, all with her, no twins. Just all stupid. That's a freakin' bargain right there. Eight kids? That's less than $150 a month per child. Chris |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 11:47:38 AM EDT
[#20]
Quoted:
20% of my take home pay goes for my one son Reason 45276367356 to not have kids. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 11:51:55 AM EDT
[#21]
$575/month for one child.
Here are my main problems with child support: 1) I have to go through the County. I can not pay her directly and the county tacks on a 2% handling fee paid by me. 2) They take into account how much money SHE makes into the child support formula. I pay more because she choices to only work part time. 3) I pay all the income tax on the money. She gets the money tax free and gets to claim our child as a tax deduction. Number three is my biggest pet peeve. Either child support should come out of my check before taxes and she pays the income tax (it is more her income than it is mine) or I should get to claim 50% of the child deduction. I have no problems paying the amount I pay, I have a problem with the fact that I have to pay an additional tax and am taxed unfairly. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 11:52:08 AM EDT
[#22]
Quoted: Quoted: Poll fail. Should be measured as a % of take-home or gross income. I have a theory. Personally I've read the statistic on raising a child. However, having 4 children of my own I can say that the cost of raising those children is substantially lower than what is published. Without children my housing cost would be the same, perhaps my home would be configured in a different way, or I might have different amenities. The cost for nutritional food is the same for big earners and low earners. There are all the other miscellaneous cost, but in my opinion there is a base $ amount needed. A father with an affluent income might provide expensive activities, private school tuition, and more expensive clothes and toys....but those are extras and not necessities. When the father is divorced, even with a good income. He has to provide at minimum another home and everything that goes with it, and stock a second pantry with food. A woman who receives "court ordered child support" benefits. Society says the children must be provided the lifestyle for which they are accustomed, which means the custodial parent enjoys that same environment. It is tantamount to hidden alimony. If the father wants the children, has a better income, and is a good father then in my opinion then he should get the children. If the mothers income potential is less, and she fights and wins the custody then her overhead cost should be adjusted to HER income. Child Support should then be calculated off of that amount. So the poll isn't a "fail". In my opinion child support should be standard, or capped. A custodial parent benefits from the custody payment. At the very least there should be a way to calculate this "excess" and the father be given a tax deduction. If you are at a 30% marginal Federal tax rate with state income tax thrown in, then you are paying a much higher percentage of your net after tax income than a father who is at an 18% marginal federal tax bracket. So in my opinion gross percentage of income is a travesty. I want hard dollars, not percentage of gross income. Most fathers don't want the children full time. Then what?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 11:55:21 AM EDT
[#23]
I receive $104 a month from her and she carries the health insurance as well.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 11:56:59 AM EDT
[#24]
My girl is ordered to pay 70 a week to NJ. She's not working now and they're trying to collect. Letter says they'll report to the IRS.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 11:57:08 AM EDT
[#25]
She is supposed pay me...
Here is where it gets shitty. She made an agreement that I have the kids in primary custody. Found out later that it would change her child support payments. I waived her paying me on condition she left me the fuck alone. We have a court date for August. I hope to make her begin paying since she initiated the court date and is certainly fucking with me and the kids. Posted Via AR15.Com Mobile |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 11:58:42 AM EDT
[#26]
When my wife and I were divorced (we remarried in January), I paid her $1150 per month. One child.
-Mark |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 12:00:17 PM EDT
[#27]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
$1123 a month on $4075 a month gross. Don't even ask... for how many kids? That's about right in NY for 2-not including reimbursement for day care/babysitting At the risk of incurring the wrath of that which is GD, it's on 8 children. One X wife, all with her, no twins. Just all stupid. Let's see = $1123/8 = $140 per kid. Sometimes when you post something for symphathy you need to give all the information. But you knew that, didn't you?...So for an unofficial punishement you are not allowed to post in these types of topics anymore. You knowingly and willfully violated the man code by insinuating you had been "fucked" over by the man. You led us to believe your hard earned money was being torn right out of your pockets by a leechourous and corrupt legal system, you of course helpless to do anything because the boot of Justice was crushing your windpipe and any air you where able to draw in, went to keeping you alive... But you knew you hadn't been fucked over by the man when you were cutting a check for $140 per child, didn't you? So you tried to come clean in the most humble of manner... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 12:02:33 PM EDT
[#28]
Quoted:
Quoted:
$1123 a month on $4075 a month gross. Don't even ask...
God damned condoms are a bargain. Yup... 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 12:06:02 PM EDT
[#29]
18% for one child in Michigan, and 25% for two children in Nevada.
That is 43% total. They take 50% of my take home pay and I go $25.00 i arrears each week. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 12:06:24 PM EDT
[#30]
Quoted:
When my wife and I were divorced (we remarried in January), I paid her $1150 per month. One child. -Mark good luck with that shit 
my friend did the same thing and it worked out just like everybody except him thought it would... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 12:08:02 PM EDT
[#31]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
$1123 a month on $4075 a month gross. Don't even ask... for how many kids? That's about right in NY for 2-not including reimbursement for day care/babysitting At the risk of incurring the wrath of that which is GD, it's on 8 children. One X wife, all with her, no twins. Just all stupid. Let's see = $1123/8 = $140 per kid. Sometimes when you post something for symphathy you need to give all the information. But you knew that, didn't you?...So for an unofficial punishement you are not allowed to post in these types of topics anymore. You knowingly and willfully violated the man code by insinuating you had been "fucked" over by the man. You led us to believe your hard earned money was being torn right out of your pockets by a leechourous and corrupt legal system, you of course helpless to do anything because the boot of Justice was crushing your windpipe and any air you where able to draw in, went to keeping you alive... But you knew you hadn't been fucked over by the man when you were cutting a check for $140 per child, didn't you? So you tried to come clean in the most humble of manner... Nope. Not looking for sympathy, just putting my stupid over the Internet. What price freedom? For me it is $1123 a month. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 12:12:23 PM EDT
[#32]
I pay for everything. I have sole custody of my two kids.
 |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 12:14:26 PM EDT
[#33]
I have one child with my second wife. She gets $521 a month for him. That was based off of a $40,000 a year job that I had at the time. Thank God she has no idea what I make now. The court/state enforces the payments by destroying your credit or sending you to jail if you fail to keep current BUT doesn't enforce any of the visitations set up in the court order. I tried to sue twice to have my visitation privileges enforced and the court tossed it both times.They don't want to deal with parents in two different states having a court battle in the courts state. I have no idea where my son lives now and haven't seen him in 8 years.
 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 12:18:28 PM EDT
[#34]
Poll fail. Non-child support paying people need a pie option so they can see the results without skewing them.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 12:18:31 PM EDT
[#35]
i get paid bi-weekly. every 2 weeks, $616 goes to my ex. out of my $1350 bi-weekly check. child support only, no allimony. 3 kids.
eta- she cheated. that was the reason for divorce. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 12:19:14 PM EDT
[#36]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Poll fail. Should be measured as a % of take-home or gross income. I have a theory. Personally I've read the statistic on raising a child. However, having 4 children of my own I can say that the cost of raising those children is substantially lower than what is published. Without children my housing cost would be the same, perhaps my home would be configured in a different way, or I might have different amenities. The cost for nutritional food is the same for big earners and low earners. There are all the other miscellaneous cost, but in my opinion there is a base $ amount needed. A father with an affluent income might provide expensive activities, private school tuition, and more expensive clothes and toys....but those are extras and not necessities. When the father is divorced, even with a good income. He has to provide at minimum another home and everything that goes with it, and stock a second pantry with food. A woman who receives "court ordered child support" benefits. Society says the children must be provided the lifestyle for which they are accustomed, which means the custodial parent enjoys that same environment. It is tantamount to hidden alimony. If the father wants the children, has a better income, and is a good father then in my opinion then he should get the children. If the mothers income potential is less, and she fights and wins the custody then her overhead cost should be adjusted to HER income. Child Support should then be calculated off of that amount. So the poll isn't a "fail". In my opinion child support should be standard, or capped. A custodial parent benefits from the custody payment. At the very least there should be a way to calculate this "excess" and the father be given a tax deduction. If you are at a 30% marginal Federal tax rate with state income tax thrown in, then you are paying a much higher percentage of your net after tax income than a father who is at an 18% marginal federal tax bracket. So in my opinion gross percentage of income is a travesty. I want hard dollars, not percentage of gross income. Most fathers don't want the children full time. Then what? Where in the hell are you getting this? Anecdotal? |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 12:21:19 PM EDT
[#37]
Quoted: Quoted: Poll fail. Should be measured as a % of take-home or gross income. I have a theory. Personally I've read the statistic on raising a child. However, having 4 children of my own I can say that the cost of raising those children is substantially lower than what is published. Without children my housing cost would be the same, perhaps my home would be configured in a different way, or I might have different amenities. The cost for nutritional food is the same for big earners and low earners. There are all the other miscellaneous cost, but in my opinion there is a base $ amount needed. A father with an affluent income might provide expensive activities, private school tuition, and more expensive clothes and toys....but those are extras and not necessities. When the father is divorced, even with a good income. He has to provide at minimum another home and everything that goes with it, and stock a second pantry with food. A woman who receives "court ordered child support" benefits. Society says the children must be provided the lifestyle for which they are accustomed, which means the custodial parent enjoys that same environment. It is tantamount to hidden alimony. If the father wants the children, has a better income, and is a good father then in my opinion then he should get the children. If the mothers income potential is less, and she fights and wins the custody then her overhead cost should be adjusted to HER income. Child Support should then be calculated off of that amount. So the poll isn't a "fail". In my opinion child support should be standard, or capped. A custodial parent benefits from the custody payment. At the very least there should be a way to calculate this "excess" and the father be given a tax deduction. If you are at a 30% marginal Federal tax rate with state income tax thrown in, then you are paying a much higher percentage of your net after tax income than a father who is at an 18% marginal federal tax bracket. So in my opinion gross percentage of income is a travesty. I want hard dollars, not percentage of gross income. The problem with this kind of reasoning is that reality is far more complicated. Things are not this simple. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 12:25:57 PM EDT
[#38]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Poll fail. Should be measured as a % of take-home or gross income. I have a theory. Personally I've read the statistic on raising a child. However, having 4 children of my own I can say that the cost of raising those children is substantially lower than what is published. Without children my housing cost would be the same, perhaps my home would be configured in a different way, or I might have different amenities. The cost for nutritional food is the same for big earners and low earners. There are all the other miscellaneous cost, but in my opinion there is a base $ amount needed. A father with an affluent income might provide expensive activities, private school tuition, and more expensive clothes and toys....but those are extras and not necessities. When the father is divorced, even with a good income. He has to provide at minimum another home and everything that goes with it, and stock a second pantry with food. A woman who receives "court ordered child support" benefits. Society says the children must be provided the lifestyle for which they are accustomed, which means the custodial parent enjoys that same environment. It is tantamount to hidden alimony. If the father wants the children, has a better income, and is a good father then in my opinion then he should get the children. If the mothers income potential is less, and she fights and wins the custody then her overhead cost should be adjusted to HER income. Child Support should then be calculated off of that amount. So the poll isn't a "fail". In my opinion child support should be standard, or capped. A custodial parent benefits from the custody payment. At the very least there should be a way to calculate this "excess" and the father be given a tax deduction. If you are at a 30% marginal Federal tax rate with state income tax thrown in, then you are paying a much higher percentage of your net after tax income than a father who is at an 18% marginal federal tax bracket. So in my opinion gross percentage of income is a travesty. I want hard dollars, not percentage of gross income. Most fathers don't want the children full time. Then what? Where in the hell are you getting this? Anecdotal? I'm a family law/divorce attorney. She's correct. Most of my male clients that actually want physical custody (as in, really go for it, not just talk about it) have it, believe it or not. I've had many who would probably have gotten it, but chose not to. Hell, one guy I have now is about to get physical custody of his son - and he had to be talked into even pursuing custody by his new girlfriend. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 12:29:44 PM EDT
[#39]
Jesus...that's $324,000 from birth to 18, doesn't even include the 60% of all expenses.
I'm at $380 per month for 1 kid, I have three years left. eta...damn it, didn't hit the quote. Numbers refer to bama-shooters child support. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 12:33:04 PM EDT
[#40]
Quoted: Poll fail. Non-child support paying people need a pie option so they can see the results without skewing them. You can just click on vote to see the results. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 12:36:22 PM EDT
[#41]
Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Poll fail. Should be measured as a % of take-home or gross income. I have a theory. Personally I've read the statistic on raising a child. However, having 4 children of my own I can say that the cost of raising those children is substantially lower than what is published. Without children my housing cost would be the same, perhaps my home would be configured in a different way, or I might have different amenities. The cost for nutritional food is the same for big earners and low earners. There are all the other miscellaneous cost, but in my opinion there is a base $ amount needed. A father with an affluent income might provide expensive activities, private school tuition, and more expensive clothes and toys....but those are extras and not necessities. When the father is divorced, even with a good income. He has to provide at minimum another home and everything that goes with it, and stock a second pantry with food. A woman who receives "court ordered child support" benefits. Society says the children must be provided the lifestyle for which they are accustomed, which means the custodial parent enjoys that same environment. It is tantamount to hidden alimony. If the father wants the children, has a better income, and is a good father then in my opinion then he should get the children. If the mothers income potential is less, and she fights and wins the custody then her overhead cost should be adjusted to HER income. Child Support should then be calculated off of that amount. So the poll isn't a "fail". In my opinion child support should be standard, or capped. A custodial parent benefits from the custody payment. At the very least there should be a way to calculate this "excess" and the father be given a tax deduction. If you are at a 30% marginal Federal tax rate with state income tax thrown in, then you are paying a much higher percentage of your net after tax income than a father who is at an 18% marginal federal tax bracket. So in my opinion gross percentage of income is a travesty. I want hard dollars, not percentage of gross income. The problem with this kind of reasoning is that reality is far more complicated. Things are not this simple. No, it really IS that simple to the parents who don't really want to support their children, or who see child support as an unfair "fucking" they get from their ex. If left to them, no woman (or man) who stayed home to raise the children would ever get custody. Ironically, if that were really to happen, they'd be crying another tune pretty quickly.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 12:38:43 PM EDT
[#42]
State to state is different. Here in NC, its based on BOTH parents' incomes. There is a set formula. Here's a situation to think about...
My wife's ex was paying $500 a month for one child. He petitioned to have it reduced after five or so years due to less income on his end. The courts reduced it to $350. Five or so years later (four months ago), he got laid off and is collecting unemployment. He petitioned to have it reduced again. The courts reduced it to the minimum of $50 a month. If he was not collecting unemployment, it would've remained unchanged. I don't judge. As a dad (I'm one too), you have to do what you think is best for your child. I can understand not wanting to throw money at an ex-wife so she can get her hair and nails done. I can also understand how tough it is to make it as a single mom without child support. You have to live with the decisions you make based on how it will affect YOUR CHILD. I put my kids FIRST over everything. Just sayin... |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 12:42:58 PM EDT
[#43]
I have full custody of my son. She pays nothing and never has because as the courts said "She doesn't work so its not like you would ever get anything anway".
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 12:46:51 PM EDT
[#44]
Mine was $118 a week until I got full custody. She had to pay $89 a week [nurse]. Every dime went into his college fund. He will walk out debt free with a 5 year degree. [he also got a scholarship]
However, I also had to pay the majority of day care and health insurance which was around another $100 a week. She didn't. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 12:50:45 PM EDT
[#45]
Quoted: I have full custody of my son. She pays nothing and never has because as the courts said "She doesn't work so its not like you would ever get anything anway". Most states have a statutory minimum, even if the noncustodial parent has zero income. It's something pathetic like $30 a month here. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 1:11:51 PM EDT
[#46]
$975 for one child. Started out as 120/mo when I got divorced in 1986. The agency jacked it up when I was making about 3k from $450 tp the 975. It was a person in the support agency that was of a different race and called me a "typical honky white cracker" and she was going to "stick it to me good." Made a complaint but was dismissed by the director as unfounded.
The killer is that this $975 went on for the two and a half years that I was unemployed. So I got stuck with a arrears amount of like 35K when I finally got a job, making $250 per week as a security guard. And a bunch of times they took my whole paycheck leaving me with $250 a month to live on. And DCSE drained my checking account when it reached $500 more than a few times. The money was for rent. Those were hard times. I have it worked out with dcse now. BTW, all the above happened after my daughter turned 18. I'm down to less than 15K owed now. Oh, and I wasn't able to see my daughter her whole life because my ex kept moving and keeping her from me. No visitation whatsoever. It's good now as I have found her and we see and talk every week now. I found her on facebook. I saw my ex a few months ago and she said she wishes I were dead. She's pissed I have a relationship with my daughter. Good, sweet revenge. Although it cost me a shit-ton of money.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 4:34:01 PM EDT
[#47]
Quoted:
I receive $104 a month from her and she carries the health insurance as well. My ex-wife lives in WV. When the kids head out there for 6 weeks in the summer, she goes on food stamps. The rest of the time, she parties so she doesn't have to pay child support. |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 4:36:50 PM EDT
[#48]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Poll fail. Should be measured as a % of take-home or gross income. I have a theory. Personally I've read the statistic on raising a child. However, having 4 children of my own I can say that the cost of raising those children is substantially lower than what is published. Without children my housing cost would be the same, perhaps my home would be configured in a different way, or I might have different amenities. The cost for nutritional food is the same for big earners and low earners. There are all the other miscellaneous cost, but in my opinion there is a base $ amount needed. A father with an affluent income might provide expensive activities, private school tuition, and more expensive clothes and toys....but those are extras and not necessities. When the father is divorced, even with a good income. He has to provide at minimum another home and everything that goes with it, and stock a second pantry with food. A woman who receives "court ordered child support" benefits. Society says the children must be provided the lifestyle for which they are accustomed, which means the custodial parent enjoys that same environment. It is tantamount to hidden alimony. If the father wants the children, has a better income, and is a good father then in my opinion then he should get the children. If the mothers income potential is less, and she fights and wins the custody then her overhead cost should be adjusted to HER income. Child Support should then be calculated off of that amount. So the poll isn't a "fail". In my opinion child support should be standard, or capped. A custodial parent benefits from the custody payment. At the very least there should be a way to calculate this "excess" and the father be given a tax deduction. If you are at a 30% marginal Federal tax rate with state income tax thrown in, then you are paying a much higher percentage of your net after tax income than a father who is at an 18% marginal federal tax bracket. So in my opinion gross percentage of income is a travesty. I want hard dollars, not percentage of gross income. Most fathers don't want the children full time. Then what? that's not true |
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 4:37:45 PM EDT
[#49]
I screwed up, I thought it was weekly.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 7/21/2010 4:43:06 PM EDT
[#50]
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Poll fail. Should be measured as a % of take-home or gross income. I have a theory. Personally I've read the statistic on raising a child. However, having 4 children of my own I can say that the cost of raising those children is substantially lower than what is published. Without children my housing cost would be the same, perhaps my home would be configured in a different way, or I might have different amenities. The cost for nutritional food is the same for big earners and low earners. There are all the other miscellaneous cost, but in my opinion there is a base $ amount needed. A father with an affluent income might provide expensive activities, private school tuition, and more expensive clothes and toys....but those are extras and not necessities. When the father is divorced, even with a good income. He has to provide at minimum another home and everything that goes with it, and stock a second pantry with food. A woman who receives "court ordered child support" benefits. Society says the children must be provided the lifestyle for which they are accustomed, which means the custodial parent enjoys that same environment. It is tantamount to hidden alimony. If the father wants the children, has a better income, and is a good father then in my opinion then he should get the children. If the mothers income potential is less, and she fights and wins the custody then her overhead cost should be adjusted to HER income. Child Support should then be calculated off of that amount. So the poll isn't a "fail". In my opinion child support should be standard, or capped. A custodial parent benefits from the custody payment. At the very least there should be a way to calculate this "excess" and the father be given a tax deduction. If you are at a 30% marginal Federal tax rate with state income tax thrown in, then you are paying a much higher percentage of your net after tax income than a father who is at an 18% marginal federal tax bracket. So in my opinion gross percentage of income is a travesty. I want hard dollars, not percentage of gross income. Most fathers don't want the children full time. Then what? Where in the hell are you getting this? Anecdotal? I'm a family law/divorce attorney. She's correct. Most of my male clients that actually want physical custody (as in, really go for it, not just talk about it) have it, believe it or not. I've had many who would probably have gotten it, but chose not to. Hell, one guy I have now is about to get physical custody of his son - and he had to be talked into even pursuing custody by his new girlfriend. This is true in PA as well. Most men who want custody get it, like me. I did not go for any child support though. I should have but things worked out well in the end. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
.jpg)
