From: yasu@ll.mit.edu (Alan Yasutovich)
Subject: Re: Itemized accounting of child support
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 17:09:57 GMT

In article <1993Jan4.065757.6405@desire.wright.edu> sbishop@desire.wright.edu writes:
>In article <1993Jan4.012311.17983@zooid.guild.org>, Will Steeves <goid@zooid.guild.org> writes:
>> This time, I decided that I'm just not going to let this one slide...
>> 
>> sbishop@desire.wright.edu writes...
>>>{_In article <1h0k4aINN32a@gap.caltech.edu>, peri@cco.caltech.edu (Michal Leah
>>>eri) writes:
>>>> This would not allow the CP to save any of the chilld support for college!
>>>> Actually, depending on how you define "immediately", it may disallow the
>>>> CP from salting away money for child-related emergencies, or Christmas
>>>> presents, or a bicycle, etc.
>>>>
>>>Ah, but Michal, both Alan and Bob consider anything except money paid for
>>>immediate basic minimal needs as luxury!  So, salting money away for a
>>>bicycle (an HUGE luxury item in their eyes), or *gasp* college is a waste
>>>of THEIR precious funds.
>> 
>> So, what is so WRONG with this, Susan?  After all, child support was only
>> INTENDED for "support" with respect to basic necessities, not bicycles,
>> ponies, and indeed, not even *college*.  These *are* all considered
>> privileges and luxuries, and I have no problem with Don or Alan believing
>> this way.  The fact that they DO feel this way, does NOT indicate any
>> resentment of women, and I rather take some umbrage at your attempt to
>> label these men in such a fashion.
>> 
>
>Sorry, but you really blew this one.  The MAIN reason for child support is
>to try to approximate that the child does not suffer a huge change (for the
>worse) in lifestyle due to the divorce.  THis means if the child was 
>provided a certain standard of living before the divorce, it should not
>then be dumped into total poverty after the divorce.  Evidently you really
>don't understand the logic behind child-support payments.
>Perhaps you should read about the recent court case where the millionaire
>father was forced to pay the court ordered HUGE amounts of child support,
>even though the mother had a very nice income, because the court said that
>the money had been provided the child before the divorce, it must still be
>provided after the divorce.
>Please note: I do think the child was living a totally ridiculous lifestyle..
>
>
>> If you want your daughter to have a pony or a bicycle, or to go to college,
>> what is so wrong with putting your nose to the grindstone and doing it
>> yourself?  My mother managed to do it herself, without support, so what's
>> stopping other women from not relying on child support for things other
>> than necessities?
>> 
>
>

	Sorry but *you* blew this one.  This attitude is probably
	the main reason that you experience resistance on this
	newsgroup.

	A "carte-blanc" attitude when it comes to NCP father support/
	spending.  You believe that a person should contribute
	a huge amount of money because they MAKE a huge amount.


	And you know, it gets tiring "beating a dead horse" (if I 
	can use that expression around you) by retracing old and
	obvious net issues.

	If *I* earned $1 million per year, I can't imagine spending
	huge amounts on my kid(s).  I wouldn't want to, and no one
	would make me.  It is hard for me to believe that you would
	believe a kid would not be living a rediculous life style
	being awarded a huge support order.  Of course a person
	who believes that every kid should have a pony might.
	It is also curious how much knowledge about this particular
	kids life you claim to have.  And it might also suprise you
	how much of that money is simply being absorbed by the
	mother.



>Well, some women don't have the skills or the training to do so.  And, why
>are you so dead set against the father contributing his fair share?


	Maybe because he thinks that  $1/3 million dollars is a bit
	more than a fair share.


-- 
	Alan Yasutovich
	"inquiring  (and nosey) minds WANT TO KNOW!!!"
	I can remember when "safe sex" meant having a padded headboard!!
	Tick Tock.....Tick Tock......Tick Tock .....Tick Tock......
Newsgroups: alt.dads-rights,alt.child-support,soc.men