Families getting child support unhappy about new fee

Submitted by srandy on Thu, 2007-09-27 15:30

Article here. Excerpt:

'WASHINGTON — Millions of families that turned to federal and state governments for help in collecting child support payments will now have to pay more for the service.

Beginning Oct. 1, families will have to pay $25 annually when states have collected at least $500 on their behalf. Families that previously received public assistance will be exempted.

The $25 will help reduce the federal deficit and compensate the federal government and the states for providing a child support program. Two-thirds of the fee will go the federal government; one-third to the state.
...
For Claudia Fauntleroy of Petersburg, Va., the notice about the additional fee was akin to getting a $25 parking ticket in the mail. Her immediate reaction? “You’ve got to be kidding me.”'

Like0 Dislike0

Comments

For 'families' read 'the men getting fleeced', as they are the ones who are in fact supplying the $25 that is required of the 'families' that get this 'service'. Basically, the gov't is not content to nab $xx.xx from a man and give it to a woman, it is also taking $25.00 of it from him. The woman who would have gotten the $25.00 is griping how that is cutting into the entitlement.

This is like what you see on those nature specials. A lioness kills a gazelle and while she is eating it, a hyena arrives and they get into a hissing match over who gets the dead carcass. In the end, they both get some of it. Cast of characters:

Gazelle played by the man/father
Lioness played by the woman/mother
Hyena played by the government/legal-extortionist complex

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by mcc99 on Thu, 2007-09-27 22:30

$25 annually? So What? That's two dollars per month. Why is this scant fee getting so much press coverage?? That's a drop in the bucket, especially when most custodial parents (women) will get 700 or 800 dollars per month per child plus medical insurance and day care expenses for each $40,000 income that the father gets in income.

Let's talk about the hardship fathers go through if they are layed off and are told by the judge to get an additional job when they request their child support be lowered.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by tac0965 on Fri, 2007-09-28 13:33

I agree, and add that this has become big business for the government and their not even ashamed to let you know it. I mean taking the money to refurbish arenas? Are you kidding me?! Reduce the deficit? All in the name of "CHILD SUPPORT!" No one they're finding new ways to take money excesively from the non custodial parent.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by srandy on Fri, 2007-09-28 13:34

This is like what you see on those nature specials. A lioness kills a gazelle and while she is eating it, a hyena arrives and they get into a hissing match over who gets the dead carcass. In the end, they both get some of it. Cast of characters:

Gazelle played by the man/father
Lioness played by the government/legal-extortionist complex
Hyena played by the woman/mother

The mother doesn't ruin your life, she doesn't have that power. The government does it to you on her behalf.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Demonspawn on Fri, 2007-09-28 14:49

I thought "child support" was supposed to be for children? I see grown-ass people benefitting from that shit. Fucking bums and losers. Get a motherfucking job!

----------

The Women are at Fault by Matthias Matussek

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by MrReality on Sat, 2007-09-29 11:11

The mother doesn't ruin your life, she doesn't have that power. The government does it to you on her behalf.

That's like saying mob bosses aren't responsible for the hits they put out on people.

----------

The Women are at Fault by Matthias Matussek

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by MrReality on Sat, 2007-09-29 11:13

The mothers are still responsible for the damage they cause, but that damage can't be caused without the government culling men on their behalf.

That's like saying there is no reason to fear the mob bosses if hitmen won't work for them.

There is no reason to fear women without the government granted powers they have over us.

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by Demonspawn on Mon, 2007-10-01 15:38

I said: "That's like saying mob bosses aren't responsible for the hits they put out on people."

Mob bosses being women in this analogy.

You then said: "The mothers are still responsible for the damage they cause, but that damage can't be caused without the government culling men on their behalf."

Thus you have agreed that women ARE responsible for the damage they cause(As I stated) and at the same time disagree with your own statement.

You then conclude that it was a "bad analogy" afterwards. Quite odd to say the least.

Either way I have been down this route before -- and could care less what a chivalrous man believes -- and am now going to ignore your future posts as I can see that they pander to women and attempt to free them of any guilt. You have succeeded in being a chivalrous slave and severely old-fashioned. Kudos..

----------

The Women are at Fault by Matthias Matussek

Like0 Dislike0
Submitted by MrReality on Tue, 2007-10-02 20:56