Newsgroups: alt.child-support
Subject: Re: Indiana Welfare
From: lisa@oneb2.almanac.bc.ca
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 93 16:54:24 PST
Distribution: na
Organization: Lebenty-Screech's Almanac, Nanaimo, B.C. CANADA

beaver@castor.cs.psu.edu (Don Beaver) writes:

> lisa@oneb2.almanac.bc.ca writes:
> >garrod@dynamo.ecn.purdue.edu (David Garrod) writes:
> >
Some deleted...

> >Does anyone HONESTLY believe that $432/month is enough for one adult
> >and one child to live on???  The other figures seem ridiculously,
> >unrealistically LOW, too!
> 
> In my hometown, one can get a 2-br apartment for $200, which takes
> a higher fraction of a total $432 than the typical rule of thumb
> (1/4-1/3).  In graduate school, I lived on barely more than that,
> alone, without a child, but with a more-than-poverty standard of living.
> But I had to pay for medical/dental, as well.  Yes, I preferred not
> to live that way forever (a motivation to improve my job skills -- as
> things should be), but it is certainly possible without becoming homeless.
> 
> It sounds low, but not "ridiculously;" in fact, basic costs 
> shouldn't be high.
>
More deleted.

> >two children...$396 more!  I can assure you that even in 1990, $974/mo. didn
> >go very far...
> 
> Are you talking about US Dollars?

No, I wasn't.  The differences have already been discussed.

> >
> >I guess $148/mo. should be adequate for food costs.  But what about clothes,
> >school supplies, shelter, braces and (God forbid!) baseball gloves or birthd
> >Easter and Christmas gifts?  What about enough for the CP to pay for Life
> >Insurance so that there's something left to raise the kids on should the
> >unthinkable happen?  I just can't believe that anyone living in the real
> >world could honestly believe that $432/mo. is adequate for a parent and chil
> >to live on.  How many of you live on that for just yourself, month after mon
> >and year after year? (Sure as hell won't pay your University tuition for lon
> >not everyone can get scholarships, you know).
> 
> As far as life insurance, what makes you feel that the "unthinkable"
> would be:   CP dies, NCP raises children.
> 
That thought never even occurred to me.  Perhaps I have some bias that I am
not conscious of at present, but I'd hardly think it "unthinkable" that the
NCP would raise the children, should that be the NCP's desire (and assuming that
there is no evidence to indicate that the NCP is abusive, whether male or
female).

More deleted...

> >> While one cannot from these data separate out the cost of the first
> >> child from the cost of the mother;
> >> the second child cost is $580 - $432  =  $148
> >> the third child cost is $720 - $580   =  $140   per month.
> >> 
> >> Medicaid (or is it medicare?) picks up medical and dental on top of 
> >> this.
> >> 
> >> Based on my experience with economic models for child costs it would
> >> appear to me that a reasonable estimate based on the above numbers
> >> for the first child is about $160/month.
> >> 
> >> David Garrod
> >> 
> >A "reasonable estimate"?  I'm appalled.
> 
> Lisa, it would help a lot if you'd avoid the tirades against NCP's
> and against anyone who thinks that "child" support is too high.

I don't consider my post a "tirade" against NCPs.  I am very dismayed, appalled,
or whatever, that such figures would be considered reasonable.

> Sometimes, you seem rational -- but then comes a post full of anger
> and hate (here, you have five !'s, a couple of ???'s, plus a "God
> forbid" and a "sure as hell" to lash out against people who have
> different opinions).  The point being, regardless of whether you are
> justified or not, you show little respect for people who don't share
> your opinion.

Excuse me, Don.  My post was not full of hate, nor even anger really.
Frustration and astonishment would be more apt a description.  I meant no
disrespect to David...sometimes I get the impression that I'm only
deemed rational if I agree with the popular opinions of this group.  I see
a lot of various emotions being expressed through posts on this net, and
naturally so.  I'm not a robot.  I do form my own opinions (which are quite
often very supportive of NCP concerns).  I feel my own feelings.  I felt
"appalled."

> I am one of those people, and I would like to discuss child support
> rationally.  Unlike the lurkers that Sue Bishop mentioned, I'm not
> afraid of your negativity, but I would still like to hear agreeing
> and opposing views, without personal attacks.
>
Mine was an opposing view.  If it came across as a personal attack against
David, then David, I most sincerely apologize.

> I was starting to think that your support group's goals were
> reasonably balanced -- but I'm a bit worried that it's like
> gender-neutral laws:  the bias can be read between the lines.
> 
> Don

I have a meeting tomorrow with an NCP who has been financially and emotionally
devastated by recent court actions taken against him.  I have called several
counsellors in town here who work primarily with men's issues, trying to
find some support for the NCP dads I hear from.  I'm working on helping them
get something going either as an independent group, or with PERCS.  Some in
PERCS are strongly opposed to my efforts on the behalf of NCPs.  Its not an
easy position to be in, but its one I will maintain, regardless.

Lisa


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Lisa Lambeth                             lisa@oneb2.almanac.bc.ca

Founder, P.E.R.C.S. (Parents for Enforcing Regular Child Support)
Vancouver Island, B.C., Canada // Courtesy of the old coot hisse'f!
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------


Xref: sparky alt.child-support:4686 soc.men:23201 soc.women:23015