Congress Tags Child Support as Luxury Income; Collection System an Economic Failure

MensNewsDaily.com ^ | August 16, 2008 | Roger F. Gay

[RogerFGay]

Fathers' rights activists have complained about arbitrarily high child support orders for almost two decades. Class action suits were filed, the fathers' rights movement grew, debates broke out in academic journals, a few social scientists demonstrated with calculations and documentation, some men have committed suicide because they were unable to support themselves, and a few serious investigative journalists analyzed in depth.

Congress finally decided to act – with a flat luxury tax on child support income.

[RogerFGay]

The majority of ncps are split into two groups - those who do support their children - and those who are not able to financially support their children. There is a whole other area of non-financial "support" that many believe just as important for men than women, but that's apparently not the subject we're on.

Those are the facts, and almost two decades into the federal child support scam, the majority seems to know from personal experience - or the experiences of family and friends - that there's a problem in the system.

That problem - or at least a major part of it - is the subject of the article.

[nobama08]

The kids lived with you 100% of the time yet you still had to pay child support to your ex? I have never heard of that before! Your ex should have been paying you.

[Little Bill]

You are beginning to attract the every man is at fault crowd, asbestos suit time, my FRiend.

[nobama08]

Divorce is final. You obviously can’t get un-divorced. I am talking about child support and ED. Geesh, this is getting tiring.

[RogerFGay]

Yes, I am absolutely on the side of parents being responsible for their own children. Do you agree that being crushed by a corrupt bureacracy is the opposite of taking personal responsibility?

[RogerFGay]

It’s not bad. I’ve definitely seen worse.

[nobama08]

I have to admit that I am not familiar with the “corrupt bureacracy” you are talking about, so I don’t have an opinion as to that. I just see local families dealing with local judges.

[nobama08]

I have to admit that I am not familiar with the “corrupt bureacracy” you are talking about, so I don’t have an opinion as to that. I just see local families dealing with local judges.

[MileHi]

I am talking about child support and ED

So was I. Don't be coy.

[nobama08]

I have absolutely no reason to try to be coy. I state my opinions straight up.

[Phinanceguy]

yeah, no s***t.I was making 300-400 M per year. The dyke judge thought I was being unfair.

[RogerFGay]

The article takes a much broader perspective, and is directly related to the enormous bureacracy that’s been built up in relation to the relatively new federal role in family law. The new “luxury tax” in child support income is the result of federal law. Local judges have nothing to do with the decision.

[tiki]

Another thing about the collection agency is that it then becomes a debt for the person who is supposed to be paying and can then be charged off in a bankruptcy where child support can’t.

My DIL’s mother is collecting child support now and my DIL is 35 and the baby of the family. The ex is going to be paying until he dies or go to jail. He wouldn’t pay when the kids were little and when the kids were grown and Mom could afford a lawyer, she went after him and she won.

[Clemenza]

Child support should be structured so that the amount in determined via AFTER-tax income, and that the amount is funneled into a fund for the child's living expenses, which should be justified via the mother providing an expense report from time to time.

I have less of a problem with child support than I do with alimony. If a woman is able bodied and can work, why should she continue to draw money from her ex?

Our family court system is a gynocracy, although I have seen signs of this changing (thanks, interestingly enough, to some fair FEMALE judges in the state courts as of late).

[RogerFGay]

Yeah seriously nobama08. I don’t think you can make the blanket statement that judges are generally fair. They had the chance - in their defined role as protectors of the Constition - to keep all this from happening. But they went along - and there is plenty of evidence that (perhaps especially family law judges) tend to be more political than judicial; and have their own little con-games to play with ncps. After all - part of that “incentive” money discussed in the article goes to court administration - including retirement accounts for judges.

[tiki]

Oh yeah, like they don’t do that now? The kind of women they preyed on are still around, those who need a man, period, quality doesn’t matter.

[Pan_Yans Wife]

An expense report just may not work.

When my brother was paying child support his ex-wife would take the kids shopping for all of their school clothes. She would turn in the receipt.

The next morning she would return all of the purchases to the stores, claiming she had lost the receipts. The stores would refund her the money and she would pocket the cash for herself.

The evil woman would then throw a party with her drinking and drugging friends.

[RogerFGay]

Good points:

The Alimony Hidden in Child Support

Tutorials in Child Support Decision Theory

[GOPJ]

I mean come on, how does a tax on child support help the mom? Or the dad? Or the child? Who DOES benefit? Cui bono?

Ummmmm, it helps the taxpayer - the person paying for the system. We can either help pay for collection - or like in days past, we can support all these millions of women and children on welfare.

For me, it's a no-brainer. Parents should support their own children.

[GOPJ]

Sicko's look for broken women - and fatherless children. I have no intention of helping the creeps. The worst thing that happened to pedophiles was child support collection. And that's one more reason to support it.