On Friday 05 October 2007 08:49, Michael J. Babcock, MCP wrote: > I get pissed because I know she's not spending ($nnn times 2) > on the kids. > > Shouldn't it be a 50/50 thing, where she pays an equal amount on the kids? > > Also, I know that those monies go towards expenditures incurred because of > the kids--school expenses, groceries, heating (oil), electricity, water, > garbage, health insurance, clothing, etc. What I don't think should count > are expenses my n-s-e-e-w would incur had she NOT had the kids--like the > mortgage, car payment, auto insurance, etc. > > Would appreciate perspective from others, even if just to set me straight.
Hi Michael! There are two types of functions that you are paying for: Task funcitions and maintenance functions. The task is being a parent, the maintenance is being a person. She has to be a person before she can be a parent. The law and the courts recognize that she has to be maintained, hence the support has something in it for her, even if it isn't called that vicious a-word. In Florida there are "guidelines" which are so generous that women have a financial incentive to divorce to get the child support. The courts will leave the man without the money to even live and tell him to work a second or third job to meet the guidelines idealized levels. Be glad you aren't here. Now that 50/50 idea is some sort of equality. The feminists demand equality only when it is to their benefit, however, and are hypocritical about it the rest of the time. -- Regards, Pete http://www.pete-theisen.com/ _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
