How long do I stand?

[HuntingMan]

Fair enough.

My experience has been how my ex harps on about being a victim (when she is, in fat, a bully) when actually only the children suffer. Note I said DIVORCE, not marrage You seem to cite an example of a victim in marrage

I think I made my point well enough

Some women and MANY men (I am a man, btw) do play the 'victim' in marriage. My ex wife was a 'victim' of her own design and in her own mind. Even while she was using cocaine and abusing her own children she was the 'victim' that these children of 4,6 and 9 were somehow making her.

Regardless, I responded to your post which said that children are the victims in divorce. As Ive presented that is a false statement. In MANY cases the children are SAVED from being victims by a divorce...as my siblings and myself were...as many others are.

 

[FLANDIDLYANDERS]

Poh-tay-to...

 

[pepper1]

It cracks me up to read comments about single moms who habitually neglect their children and indulge themselves. Yes, those types of single moms exist, but they are the exception rather than the norm in the circle of single moms I know.

Primary physical custody (residency) here in the US typically goes to the mother unless she walks away from the children or the parents agree the father should have it - or she is proven an unfit parent. Joint parental custody is pretty standard, as well. That means that all decisions concerning/affecting the children are supposed to be made jointly by the parents.

50/50 custody is usually only awarded b/c both parents agree to and request it.

Child support is determined by a formula. Whoever pays childcare expenses is given a "credit" for that and so is whoever pays health insurance.

I can tell you my ears are numb to hearing my ex gripe about how he thinks his child support money is being spent when he routinely sends our children home dirty, hungry, and wearing clothes two sizes too small. Proper fitting clothes never get returned to me and I have to bring dinner for them on Sunday nights at 8PM b/c they have not been fed by then (they're 7 and 4).

So, when I hear men go on about how women exploit child support money, it makes me want to gag.

Thats probably because he is broke from the support payments he has to make, I have heard of support payments being so extreme that the child had to have visitation at dads tent becasue he was homeless and then the mom tried to take his visitation away because her support payments put him there. Its one thing for child support in the order of magnitude of 200-300$ but 2K a month you can not make a rational argument that the kid requires that level of payment for 50% of its expenses you would be trying to justify 4K a month to raise a kid for basic needs is absurd. I think guys who complain about 300$ a month dont have a leg to stand on but guys that are getting ripped off with 1-2K support orders have a right to gripe, its all about the magnitude of the support payments.

Also once the support payments force him into a position of homelessness job loss will shortly follow because you cant go to work looking like a bum and living out of a tent, then you will get an imputed amount based on minimum wage and its your own fault.

 

[BarelyBreathing]

Thats probably because he is broke from the support payments he has to make, I have heard of support payments being so extreme that the child had to have visitation at dads tent becasue he was homeless and then the mom tried to take his visitation away because her support payments put him there. Its one thing for child support in the order of magnitude of 200-300$ but 2K a month you can not make a rational argument that the kid requires that level of payment for 50% of its expenses you would be trying to justify 4K a month to raise a kid for basic needs is absurd. I think guys who complain about 300$ a month dont have a leg to stand on but guys that are getting ripped off with 1-2K support orders have a right to gripe, its all about the magnitude of the support payments.

Also once the support payments force him into a position of homelessness job loss will shortly follow because you cant go to work looking like a bum and living out of a tent, then you will get an imputed amount based on minimum wage and its your own fault.

See my post on page 3. Most men are not paying 50% of their net income. Most pay closer to 25% of their net, if that. States often look at not just net income, but also if the man is paying for health insurance for the children, how many children, and if he has other children to support. If a man is paying more than 50% it is usually because he owes back child support-- which is of no fault to the mother.

You can find support information here: State Child Support Enforcement Web Sites

I agree that $4,000 a month for child support is more than likely in excess. There are states that will reduce the percentage of child support if the payor makes beyond a certain level. I have never heard of anyone getting anywhere near this in all my life. Still, if the woman were getting $4,000 and that was 25% of his net, then he still has $12,000 to live on (net). Hardly "tent" material. That must be one helluva tent! Where do I sign up?

1-2K support may not be a bad figure depending on which state they live in and how many kids there are. Have you looked at the cost of child care recently? That alone could take up a huge chunk of that money depending on how many kids need it. Don't forget all the other expenses needed to raise a child..... or children.

How Much Money Does it Cost to Raise a Child? - Finance - CBN News - Christian News 24-7 - CBN.com

 

[ido]

Thats probably because he is broke from the support payments he has to make, I have heard of support payments being so extreme that the child had to have visitation at dads tent becasue he was homeless and then the mom tried to take his visitation away because her support payments put him there. Its one thing for child support in the order of magnitude of 200-300$ but 2K a month you can not make a rational argument that the kid requires that level of payment for 50% of its expenses you would be trying to justify 4K a month to raise a kid for basic needs is absurd. I think guys who complain about 300$ a month dont have a leg to stand on but guys that are getting ripped off with 1-2K support orders have a right to gripe, its all about the magnitude of the support payments.

Also once the support payments force him into a position of homelessness job loss will shortly follow because you cant go to work looking like a bum and living out of a tent, then you will get an imputed amount based on minimum wage and its your own fault.

My ex-husband is a trust fund baby. He owns two homes (a 4 bedroom home and a 6 bedroom home) and makes close to 6 figures. I get less than $2K/month in support. I don't think he has any right to gripe. Just sayin...

 

[pepper1]

My ex-husband is a trust fund baby. He owns two homes (a 4 bedroom home and a 6 bedroom home) and makes close to 6 figures. I get less than $2K/month in support. I don't think he has any right to gripe. Just sayin...

I make "almost" 6 figures (a little over 80K) and I can barely pay my student loans after uncle sam gets his fingers in my cookie jar and health insurance and 3% towards my 401K. I live in a small condo and drive a truck with over 100K miles because I cant afford to buy something else. 80K a year is a net of just around 4K a month so if you are getting between 1 and 2K thats like 1/3 of his income thats a huge amount of income. If I had 1/3 of my net income disappearing I woudl have to choose between a home and paying student loans and if I defaulted on my student loans it would go back on my parents which is not acceptable and I would have 0 money to spend on a kid even when I had visitation, it would be macaroni and cheese. Also why dont you get your mom or a friend to watch the kid part of the time to take some of the slack off his dad and yourself. If he is a trust fund baby he is wise not to spend it because he would probably be in a tent if he did not have thoes 2 homes paid for and I dont blame him for not going out and lavishly buying the kid things when he is paying out that much, living in a tent is probably not much fun so you cant blame him for covering his butt.

Also his child support is only suppose to be paying for half, so if child care is X amount he should only be paying half that, its your kid too you should be paying half, its not alimony its child support and the kid is half yours, however the court supports all sorts of absurd things so you can get away with taking 1/3 of his income (even though thats way more than it takes to support a kid if you were being smart about it, having mom watch the kid, etc) also if the kid is in school the day care should be nominal if anything, keep in mind depending on the situation it will cost you in the next life if you are not doing all you can to aliviate some pressure on him.

BTW I pretty much stopped watching the news or the mass media because its all a bunch of balony, a big part of that number in raising a kid is housing and everyone lives in the house so you are going to be paying a mortgage if you are single or if you have the kid. Also inflation is sky rocketing and wages are stagnating so "6 figures" is going to mean less and less in the next 3 years when it costs me almost 2K for a mortgage, 300$ for a pair of boots, over 1K every time my check engine light comes on, I can go on and on.

 

[ido]

I make "almost" 6 figures (a little over 80K) and I can barely pay my student loans after uncle sam gets his fingers in my cookie jar and health insurance and 3% towards my 401K. I live in a small condo and drive a truck with over 100K miles because I cant afford to buy something else. 80K a year is a net of just around 4K a month so if you are getting between 1 and 2K thats like 1/3 of his income thats a huge amount of income. If I had 1/3 of my net income disappearing I woudl have to choose between a home and paying student loans and if I defaulted on my student loans it would go back on my parents which is not acceptable and I would have 0 money to spend on a kid even when I had visitation, it would be macaroni and cheese. Also why dont you get your mom or a friend to watch the kid part of the time to take some of the slack off his dad and yourself. If he is a trust fund baby he is wise not to spend it because he would probably be in a tent if he did not have thoes 2 homes paid for and I dont blame him for not going out and lavishly buying the kid things when he is paying out that much, living in a tent is probably not much fun so you cant blame him for covering his butt.

Also his child support is only suppose to be paying for half, so if child care is X amount he should only be paying half that, its your kid too you should be paying half, its not alimony its child support and the kid is half yours, however the court supports all sorts of absurd things so you can get away with taking 1/3 of his income (even though thats way more than it takes to support a kid if you were being smart about it, having mom watch the kid, etc) also if the kid is in school the day care should be nominal if anything, keep in mind depending on the situation it will cost you in the next life if you are not doing all you can to aliviate some pressure on him.

BTW I pretty much stopped watching the news or the mass media because its all a bunch of balony, a big part of that number in raising a kid is housing and everyone lives in the house so you are going to be paying a mortgage if you are single or if you have the kid. Also inflation is sky rocketing and wages are stagnating so "6 figures" is going to mean less and less in the next 3 years when it costs me almost 2K for a mortgage, 300$ for a pair of boots, over 1K every time my check engine light comes on, I can go on and on.

Assumptions are a dangerous thing. You can't project terms of your situation onto mine and think that you have an accurate picture of my situation at all.

If you want to ask me questions to gain a better understanding, I will be happy to answer them. If you are going to make blanket generalizations, then I won't be responding anymore.

The parts I've bolded are the parts you have oh-so-wrong about my situation.

 

[pepper1]

Assumptions are a dangerous thing. You can't project terms of your situation onto mine and think that you have an accurate picture of my situation at all.

If you want to ask me questions to gain a better understanding, I will be happy to answer them. If you are going to make blanket generalizations, then I won't be responding anymore.

The parts I've bolded are the parts you have oh-so-wrong about my situation.

im not making any assumptions im just stating facts, if you want to get nasty with me becasue you dont like the facts then thats on you. If you make around 80K a year the federal gov will take about 1/3 of that (including insurance and 401K which may vary a small amount) and if you have state tax that would be even more (unless he is evading taxes). He may live in an area where the cost of living is a little lower but it is highly unlikely you can get a mortgage for less than 1K anywhere unless you live in the sticks of north dakota, then you have all your utilities and odds are one has either student loans a car payment or some combination, food, gas, etc. That does not leave one with alot of extra money even making "almost 6 figures" and with another 1/3 of his net gone he will be in the hole.

I dont know how a situation could ever warrent taking between 1 and 2K to support a kid, if you need that much for half the kids expenses (not yours but the kids) then I have to question if you are doing everything you can to cut costs and take some pressure off his dad, this is a tough economy and your kid may not get the J paul getty treatment thats life. If im wrong tell me why im wrong, dont just bold statements of fact.

 

[Macx]

You are wrong because a child should be kept at the highest standard of living both parents can afford. If the couple was together, they'd be giving the kid the highest standard of living they can afford, just because the couple isn't together, doesn't mean the kid's standard of living should go down. It isn't the kid's fault they aren't together!

Ish Pepper, it isn't like you even have kids . . . you don't have the relevant knowledge to speak on the topic.

 

[BarelyBreathing]

I make "almost" 6 figures (a little over 80K) and I can barely pay my student loans after uncle sam gets his fingers in my cookie jar and health insurance and 3% towards my 401K. I live in a small condo and drive a truck with over 100K miles because I cant afford to buy something else. 80K a year is a net of just around 4K a month so if you are getting between 1 and 2K thats like 1/3 of his income thats a huge amount of income. If I had 1/3 of my net income disappearing I woudl have to choose between a home and paying student loans and if I defaulted on my student loans it would go back on my parents which is not acceptable and I would have 0 money to spend on a kid even when I had visitation, it would be macaroni and cheese. Also why dont you get your mom or a friend to watch the kid part of the time to take some of the slack off his dad and yourself.

Also his child support is only suppose to be paying for half, so if child care is X amount he should only be paying half that, its your kid too you should be paying half, its not alimony its child support and the kid is half yours, however the court supports all sorts of absurd things so you can get away with taking 1/3 of his income (even though thats way more than it takes to support a kid if you were being smart about it, having mom watch the kid, etc) also if the kid is in school the day care should be nominal if anything, keep in mind depending on the situation it will cost you in the next life if you are not doing all you can to aliviate some pressure on him.

BTW I pretty much stopped watching the news or the mass media because its all a bunch of balony, a big part of that number in raising a kid is housing and everyone lives in the house so you are going to be paying a mortgage if you are single or if you have the kid.

im not making any assumptions im just stating facts, if you want to get nasty with me becasue you dont like the facts then thats on you. If you make around 80K a year the federal gov will take about 1/3 of that (including insurance and 401K which may vary a small amount) and if you have state tax that would be even more (unless he is evading taxes). He may live in an area where the cost of living is a little lower but it is highly unlikely you can get a mortgage for less than 1K anywhere unless you live in the sticks of north dakota, then you have all your utilities and odds are one has either student loans a car payment or some combination, food, gas, etc. That does not leave one with alot of extra money even making "almost 6 figures" and with another 1/3 of his net gone he will be in the hole.

I dont know how a situation could ever warrent taking between 1 and 2K to support a kid, if you need that much for half the kids expenses (not yours but the kids) then I have to question if you are doing everything you can to cut costs and take some pressure off his dad, this is a tough economy and your kid may not get the J paul getty treatment thats life. If im wrong tell me why im wrong, dont just bold statements of fact.

I do not know her situation, but even I can tell that you are making assumptions based upon your own situation. There is absolutely no way you could estimate that her ex is paying 1/3 of his salary or that the payment is any burden on him. Do you think 2k would be excessive support for a multimillionaire? I mean, seriously. You have absolutely no clue how much her ex is making or has, or how much of it is being given to the support of his children. It could be no more than 10% for all we know. Is that excessive?

You have no clue what a person is doing to cut costs in raising their children. You are making assumptions. Also, "have mom watch the kids".... again, are you serious? Why should grandma be a free babysitting service just so that "daddy" doesn't have to support his kids? They aren't grandma's kids. To be honest, I think it is asinine to think that a woman can fully support multiple children on 25-30% of a man's net income, yet he is unable to support 1 person. You claim that the money is to support the kids, not the mom, but really.... she is fully able to support a family on (under 2K) + her own income, barely, while he lives in a tent making more than that? Again, are you serious? His student loans are not her problem anymore than hers are his problem. No one is expecting him to pay her loans or any of her expenses. It is about providing for the children. You are right, it is not alimony, and no one has ever insinuated that it is except for you males who think 25% is excessive. If he is in the poor house it is not because of the 25% he is giving for his children. It is because he is not able to manage the remaining 75% that he lives off of.

Mortgage must be figured into expenses to raise a child. Do you expect her to live in a one bedroom, one bath studio apartment? Again....... are you serious? You don't think he should help pay the extra mortgage it costs for her to have a place large enough so the child(ren) can have their own room? Maybe you can give her one of your $12,000 a month tents.

If you want to nickel and dime what expenses come solely form the kids, that is fine, take the difference in mortgage, divide by two, and include that figure is his obligations. Don't forget utilities for the bigger place..... again, take the difference and divide by 2. Don't forget to add in half the gas for all her carpooling that she does for their activities. Oh, and activity costs, silly me, how could I forget that? Half. How about clothes for school? Half. School lunches? Half. School supplies? Half. Food? Well.... take the total it costs, subtract out her portion, then half it. We already mentioned day care. How about all those birthday parties the child attends and need to buy a gift for? Half. Doctors appointments? Half. (Often both are obligated for half of any out of pocket expenses, co-payments, etc.) Toiletries? Half. The list goes on.

You do not have to believe the media (or research rather) on how much it takes to raise a child. (The above website, for the record, only estimated $180 a month towards the housing portion of the child...... but then, you think that is excessive. Stick them in a one-bedroom studio. ) You do not have to believe the research that shows it is women who suffer financially after divorce, not men. You do not have to believe anyone or anything, but it still does not make anything you say right. You can not show one thing to back up any of your claims..... and if you did find something it would be a single case study-- nothing more.

I am aghast that a man claims he is barely able to survive on $80,000+. We support a family of 7 on less than that, and we live very comfortably and lack for nothing.

 

[ido]

You are wrong because a child should be kept at the highest standard of living both parents can afford. If the couple was together, they'd be giving the kid the highest standard of living they can afford, just because the couple isn't together, doesn't mean the kid's standard of living should go down. It isn't the kid's fault they aren't together!

True, so true.

Ish Pepper, it isn't like you even have kids . . . you don't have the relevant knowledge to speak on the topic.

ha. It makes more sense now. I was wondering.

 

[pepper1]

I do not know her situation, but even I can tell that you are making assumptions based upon your own situation. There is absolutely no way you could estimate that her ex is paying 1/3 of his salary or that the payment is any burden on him. Do you think 2k would be excessive support for a multimillionaire? I mean, seriously. You have absolutely no clue how much her ex is making or has, or how much of it is being given to the support of his children. It could be no more than 10% for all we know. Is that excessive?

You have no clue what a person is doing to cut costs in raising their children. You are making assumptions. Also, "have mom watch the kids".... again, are you serious? Why should grandma be a free babysitting service just so that "daddy" doesn't have to support his kids? They aren't grandma's kids. To be honest, I think it is asinine to think that a woman can fully support multiple children on 25-30% of a man's net income, yet he is unable to support 1 person. You claim that the money is to support the kids, not the mom, but really.... she is fully able to support a family on (under 2K) + her own income, barely, while he lives in a tent making more than that? Again, are you serious? His student loans are not her problem anymore than hers are his problem. No one is expecting him to pay her loans or any of her expenses. It is about providing for the children. You are right, it is not alimony, and no one has ever insinuated that it is except for you males who think 25% is excessive. If he is in the poor house it is not because of the 25% he is giving for his children. It is because he is not able to manage the remaining 75% that he lives off of.

Mortgage must be figured into expenses to raise a child. Do you expect her to live in a one bedroom, one bath studio apartment? Again....... are you serious? You don't think he should help pay the extra mortgage it costs for her to have a place large enough so the child(ren) can have their own room? Maybe you can give her one of your $12,000 a month tents.

If you want to nickel and dime what expenses come solely form the kids, that is fine, take the difference in mortgage, divide by two, and include that figure is his obligations. Don't forget utilities for the bigger place..... again, take the difference and divide by 2. Don't forget to add in half the gas for all her carpooling that she does for their activities. Oh, and activity costs, silly me, how could I forget that? Half. How about clothes for school? Half. School lunches? Half. School supplies? Half. Food? Well.... take the total it costs, subtract out her portion, then half it. We already mentioned day care. How about all those birthday parties the child attends and need to buy a gift for? Half. Doctors appointments? Half. (Often both are obligated for half of any out of pocket expenses, co-payments, etc.) Toiletries? Half. The list goes on.

You do not have to believe the media (or research rather) on how much it takes to raise a child. (The above website, for the record, only estimated $180 a month towards the housing portion of the child...... but then, you think that is excessive. Stick them in a one-bedroom studio. ) You do not have to believe the research that shows it is women who suffer financially after divorce, not men. You do not have to believe anyone or anything, but it still does not make anything you say right. You can not show one thing to back up any of your claims..... and if you did find something it would be a single case study-- nothing more.

I am aghast that a man claims he is barely able to survive on $80,000+. We support a family of 7 on less than that, and we live very comfortably and lack for nothing.

If you want to make up random numbers and throw around random numbers that does not help your credibility, I make 80K a year, I know exactly how much I pay in fed tax, I know generally how much medical insurance costs, I know what mortgages cost, I have a ballance sheet for my income and expenses and if 1/4 or 1/3 of my income were taken out I would sink, 80K is not all that anymore these days, its not like im out buying lamborginis on 80K a year, people that work at mcdonalds and live with mom and dad or grandma have it in there head that 80K is a millionare but when you are paying on a mortgage and student loans and potentially a car payment that 4K in net income goes quick, if you dont want to work with teh father and he gets forclosed on and looses visitation and then looses his job and then you get an imputed income at minimum wage thats on you for being greedy, maybe you do need to live in a studio if he is getting forclosed on because you wont cut him any slack on his child support (but it sounds like he has 2 homes paid for, either way I cant blame him for protecting his assets, life is not all about mortgage and student loans if I dont have the money to buy a snowmachine or something nice once in a while then whats the point of it all, just to work and die thats lame and would make me a lame parent and very cinical toward my kid). I agree kids get a greater benifit when the parents are together becuase there is only one mortgage one set of bills, now that mommy and daddy have to have separate residences the kid is going to suffer thats life. I simply reply to the posts previos, if I am assuming something that was not in a previous post please point it out otherwise you should not reply if you are not going to read the previous posts and just jump into a thread and start ranting and throwing around random numbers. I keep careful track of my money and know what things cost and just becuse you go to your job and throw your bills on the table and do nothing more than ballance your check book does not make you an expert. The 80K was based on a previous post and it just so happens thats what I make so I know the details of what it costs to live on that income, and my debts and bills are not out of the ordinary. NCP get a raw deal and thats all there is to it and there will be alot of answering to do for it in the next life.

when you can participate in a credible civil discussion please post.

 

[Macx]

when you can participate in a credible civil discussion please post.

Says the guy that makes up . . . . well, pretty much everything.

YouTube - Annie - It's A Hard Knock Life (1982)
A special song for those barely scraping by on 80K, must be all that living above one's means, paying interest on everything you "own" and the like. Actions have consequences. A man who has a child should take care of that child equally regardless of the man's status with the mother. If a man has to do without a toy or two in order to afford his responsibilities . . . that is life.

now that mommy and daddy have to have separate residences the kid is going to suffer thats life.

is misguided vindictiveness at best.

 

[ido]

if you dont want to work with teh father and he gets forclosed on and looses visitation and then looses his job and then you get an imputed income at minimum wage thats on you for being greedy,

My ex husband closed our joint bank account and cleared out the funds when I decided to leave him, leaving me virtually penniless. I was a SAHM, working part time for our church making very little money. I left him b/c he was cheating on me, was abusive, and finally became physically abusive. He has repeatedly threatened me and harrassed me since I left, which has escalated a few times to the police having to be called. He doesn't neglect to feed and clothe our children on his weekends b/c he is too poor, he does it b/c he "doesn't want to waste what little time he has with them bathing them and feeding them (those were his words to me when we first separated). I didn't leave b/c I wanted to - I left for my safety and the safety of my children. You want to keep judging me on how I am or am not "willing to work with the father"? Knock yourself out.

maybe you do need to live in a studio if he is getting forclosed on because you wont cut him any slack on his child support (but it sounds like he has 2 homes paid for, either way I cant blame him for protecting his assets,

He bought the second home after our divorce. Why? Because his now-wife didn't want to live in the home he and I had owned together. If he chose to invest in a second home before selling the first one, that is absolutely not my problem. Neither home is paid for, actually. He has a second mortgage on the first one and fully financed the second one. He's not protecting his assets, he's being irresponsible with his money, IMO.

life is not all about mortgage and student loans if I dont have the money to buy a snowmachine or something nice once in a while then whats the point of it all, just to work and die thats lame and would make me a lame parent and very cinical toward my kid).

If you feel this way, then I recommend you don't procreate. Having children most definitely means making sacrifices unless you are ridiculously wealthy. But, budgeting and being frugal can still allow a person to enjoy some luxuries once in a while. If not, it's not the child's fault - the parents are the ones who brought them into this world. If it makes you cynical towards your child if money gets tight, then you don't have any place being a parent, IMO.

NCP get a raw deal and thats all there is to it and there will be alot of answering to do for it in the next life.

I'm glad you think my cheating, abusive ex-husband got a raw deal. I suppose you also think it's my fault he refused to end the adulterous relationship (despite our own healthy sex life) and refused counseling for both the adultery and the abusiveness. BTW - my ex is now married to one of the women he cheated on me with. I'm pretty sure he is the one that will be doing a lot of answering in the next life.

when you can participate in a credible civil discussion please post.

You might want to heed your own advice.

 

[BarelyBreathing]

If you want to make up random numbers and throw around random numbers that does not help your credibility,

Random numbers?

I make 80K a year, I know exactly how much I pay in fed tax, I know generally how much medical insurance costs, I know what mortgages cost, I have a ballance sheet for my income and expenses and if 1/4 or 1/3 of my income were taken out I would sink, 80K is not all that anymore these days, its not like im out buying lamborginis on 80K a year, people that work at mcdonalds and live with mom and dad or grandma have it in there head that 80K is a millionare but when you are paying on a mortgage and student loans and potentially a car payment that 4K in net income goes quick,

More assumptions? You have no clue how I live, what my bills are, etc. $80,000 is good money. Go take a look at the economy and what the average American family lives on. Oh, I forgot, you dislike research and figures.

If 1/4 of your income would sink you, then you really need better money management skills. I will say it again...... we support a family of 7 on less than that, live quite comfortably, and have need for nothing.

if you dont want to work with teh father and he gets forclosed on and looses visitation and then looses his job and then you get an imputed income at minimum wage thats on you for being greedy, maybe you do need to live in a studio if he is getting forclosed on because you wont cut him any slack on his child support (but it sounds like he has 2 homes paid for, either way I cant blame him for protecting his assets, life is not all about mortgage and student loans if I dont have the money to buy a snowmachine or something nice once in a while then whats the point of it all, just to work and die thats lame and would make me a lame parent and very cinical toward my kid).

It's state mandated. It isn't about the woman cutting him slack. If you do not like the standards, go take it up with the gov't..... the same gov't taking out your income taxes.

The man losing his job has nothign to do with how much child support he is paying. Sorry to break it to you. Also, child support isn't calculated based upon minimum wage when a woman is "greedy" in expecting her ex to support the kids. If a man worked a job making $80k (your figure) for 15 years, got a divorce, quit his job (yes, I said quit) went to miniumum wage, I hate to inform you, but his CS would not be calculated on the minimum wage. It potentially could be calculated on his earning potential. The gov't likes to have safeguards against men who are dead-beats and shirk repsonsibility.

I keep careful track of my money and know what things cost

Right, like your estimated $300 boots with inflation. I paid $16 for my last pair of shoes.

and just becuse you go to your job and throw your bills on the table and do nothing more than ballance your check book does not make you an expert.

At least mine is balanced, and I'm not worried about falling apart for supporting children that I brought into this world.

The 80K was based on a previous post and it just so happens thats what I make so I know the details of what it costs to live on that income, and my debts and bills are not out of the ordinary.

If they are not out of the ordinary, then you should be well able to pay the ordinary 25% CS amount to support children you bring into the world.

when you can participate in a credible civil discussion please post.

 

[pepper1]

My ex husband closed our joint bank account and cleared out the funds when I decided to leave him, leaving me virtually penniless. I was a SAHM, working part time for our church making very little money. I left him b/c he was cheating on me, was abusive, and finally became physically abusive. He has repeatedly threatened me and harrassed me since I left, which has escalated a few times to the police having to be called. He doesn't neglect to feed and clothe our children on his weekends b/c he is too poor, he does it b/c he "doesn't want to waste what little time he has with them bathing them and feeding them (those were his words to me when we first separated). I didn't leave b/c I wanted to - I left for my safety and the safety of my children. You want to keep judging me on how I am or am not "willing to work with the father"? Knock yourself out.



He bought the second home after our divorce. Why? Because his now-wife didn't want to live in the home he and I had owned together. If he chose to invest in a second home before selling the first one, that is absolutely not my problem. Neither home is paid for, actually. He has a second mortgage on the first one and fully financed the second one. He's not protecting his assets, he's being irresponsible with his money, IMO.



If you feel this way, then I recommend you don't procreate. Having children most definitely means making sacrifices unless you are ridiculously wealthy. But, budgeting and being frugal can still allow a person to enjoy some luxuries once in a while. If not, it's not the child's fault - the parents are the ones who brought them into this world. If it makes you cynical towards your child if money gets tight, then you don't have any place being a parent, IMO.



I'm glad you think my cheating, abusive ex-husband got a raw deal. I suppose you also think it's my fault he refused to end the adulterous relationship (despite our own healthy sex life) and refused counseling for both the adultery and the abusiveness. BTW - my ex is now married to one of the women he cheated on me with. I'm pretty sure he is the one that will be doing a lot of answering in the next life.



You might want to heed your own advice.

I do believe I owe you an appology then. I still think CS orders in the magnitude of thousands of dollars is over the top though.

 

[pepper1]

Random numbers?



More assumptions? You have no clue how I live, what my bills are, etc. $80,000 is good money. Go take a look at the economy and what the average American family lives on. Oh, I forgot, you dislike research and figures.

If 1/4 of your income would sink you, then you really need better money management skills. I will say it again...... we support a family of 7 on less than that, live quite comfortably, and have need for nothing.



It's state mandated. It isn't about the woman cutting him slack. If you do not like the standards, go take it up with the gov't..... the same gov't taking out your income taxes.

The man losing his job has nothign to do with how much child support he is paying. Sorry to break it to you. Also, child support isn't calculated based upon minimum wage when a woman is "greedy" in expecting her ex to support the kids. If a man worked a job making $80k (your figure) for 15 years, got a divorce, quit his job (yes, I said quit) went to miniumum wage, I hate to inform you, but his CS would not be calculated on the minimum wage. It potentially could be calculated on his earning potential. The gov't likes to have safeguards against men who are dead-beats and shirk repsonsibility.



Right, like your estimated $300 boots with inflation. I paid $16 for my last pair of shoes.



At least mine is balanced, and I'm not worried about falling apart for supporting children that I brought into this world.



If they are not out of the ordinary, then you should be well able to pay the ordinary 25% CS amount to support children you bring into the world.

I agree if he quits his job he will be imputed what ever he made before, if he is fired or laid off (becasue he comes to work and stinks and looks like a bum because he was evicted from his home) thats an entirely different story so if he goes into forclosure becasue he cant afford the CS order you might want to work with dont you think. I live in harsh arctic conditions so 200-300 for boots is not unreasonable, if you go outside during the wrong time of year without the right gear you could very easily die. 80K a year is not really good money, it would be if uncle sam were not takeing 1/3 of it but after tax its not all that and my finances are not out of control I just cant afford to have 1/4 to 1/3 of my money taken away without getting rid of my small condo and moving into a run down area of town or gov housing then you could have your son go visit daddy in gang land so I guess thats always an option, after 1000 is taken out for CS and student loans and 300$ a month in rent in gang land you would be good to go and not have to live in a tent then you could drive through gang land every weekend to drop your son off for visitation, no judge would suspend visitation because the father lives in a rough area unless he were extremely liberal or biased.

So I guess you are right, finances can be managed to that end.

 

[BarelyBreathing]

80K a year is not really good money, it would be if uncle sam were not takeing 1/3 of it but after tax its not all that and my finances are not out of control I just cant afford to have 1/4 to 1/3 of my money taken away without getting rid of my small condo and moving into a run down area of town or gov housing then you could have your son go visit daddy in gang land so I guess thats always an option, after 1000 is taken out for CS and student loans and 300$ a month in rent in gang land you would be good to go and not have to live in a tent then you could drive through gang land every weekend to drop your son off for visitation, no judge would suspend visitation because the father lives in a rough area unless he were extremely liberal or biased.

So I guess you are right, finances can be managed to that end.

So, you'd rather have your child(ren) and his mother live in "gangland" because you refuse to pay a mere 25% of your net? Then the children can go visit you in your nice cushy home? I hate to say it, but the reality is THAT is often the way it ends up working out. The sad fact is that divorced single mother's are not living in nice homes while "dad" is out in the cold. The sad fact is that divorced single mother's are the ones scarping by trying to make ends meet while "dad" gives up nothing of his former lifestyle. I hate to break it to you, but this is reality, not mythology. If you think paying 25% CS is too much, then I suggest you never have children.

You said your net is around 4K a month.....and you think paying 1K is too much? Do you really think that 3K will force you to live in gangland? Her 1K CS plus another 1K net income is much below your 3K still..... you as a one person household are going to complain while she supports a minimum of two on that income? And you think it is too much.....

Again, your student loans are not her fault. Why is she forced to give up CS to support you going to school? Will you financially support her through school so that she can get a better job (above minimum wage) and be able to better support the children?

 

[pepper1]

So, you'd rather have your child(ren) and his mother live in "gangland" because you refuse to pay a mere 25% of your net? Then the children can go visit you in your nice cushy home? I hate to say it, but the reality is THAT is often the way it ends up working out. The sad fact is that divorced single mother's are not living in nice homes while "dad" is out in the cold. The sad fact is that divorced single mother's are the ones scarping by trying to make ends meet while "dad" gives up nothing of his former lifestyle. I hate to break it to you, but this is reality, not mythology. If you think paying 25% CS is too much, then I suggest you never have children.

You said your net is around 4K a month.....and you think paying 1K is too much? Do you really think that 3K will force you to live in gangland? Her 1K CS plus another 1K net income is much below your 3K still..... you as a one person household are going to complain while she supports a minimum of two on that income? And you think it is too much.....

Again, your student loans are not her fault. Why is she forced to give up CS to support you going to school? Will you financially support her through school so that she can get a better job (above minimum wage) and be able to better support the children?

I think you misunderstood what I said, I did not say to live in gang land to get out of paying 25%, I said the father could live in gang land so that he CAN pay the 25%. I never said student loans were her problem but that does not mean the father should default on them they still have to be paid and can be substantial in some cases so adjustments would need to be made so he could still pay 1K in CS and pay his loans which means living in a rough area, that way he could still have 1-2K in disposable income in case he wanted to buy a snowmachine or an air plane.

When I say student loans im not talking about going to school im talking about debt that is owed from going to school long ago in which you already have a degree for it which is how you are making 4K a month net.

 

[ido]

I do believe I owe you an appology then. I still think CS orders in the magnitude of thousands of dollars is over the top though.

Much appreciated. I accept your apology.

FWIW - I am not saying that there aren't women out there who take advantage of their situation/ex-husband. I have a dear friend who is like a brother who is going through a divorce and his estranged wife is treating it like it's a game to see who can "win" the most. It is with attitudes like that that children really are the losers, IMO.