D_Lion is offline D_Lion Post #121  November 5,2009, 5:05pm
D_Lion's Avatar

- Ladies want to wring my neck - you have been warned!

Sage

Joined: Aug 2008

NJ

Posts: 30,721

See profile

cardguy wrote :
You're going to have to elaborate here in order for this post to make any sort of sense...

I've tried too many times already.

I am unable to afford two houses. I am unable to afford housing, utilities, et.al., for another household. I checked my paycheck and it's just as true now as it was five minutes ago.

There are no circumstance in which buying a life of idle luxury for an ex-partner fits to my income. Her idleness means my homelessness. I do not accept any argument that that is a just outcome for any reason - let alone her abondoning me.
 
  Reply With Quote
chawks64 is offline chawks64 Post #122  November 5,2009, 5:10pm
chawks64's Avatar

is keeping warm with her Honey.

Power Poster

Joined: Jun 2008

Southern Nevada

Posts: 6,735

See profile

D_Lion wrote :
I've tried too many times already.

I am unable to afford two houses. I am unable to afford housing, utilities, et.al., for another household. I checked my paycheck and it's just as true now as it was five minutes ago.

There are no circumstance in which buying a life of idle luxury for an ex-partner fits to my income. Her idleness means my homelessness. I do not accept any argument that that is a just outcome for any reason - let alone her abondoning me.
Not once in that entire post did you mention your future son or daughter.

Your only concern was that your ex not be rewarded for leaving.
 
  Reply With Quote
neardc is offline neardc Post #123  November 5,2009, 5:13pm
neardc's Avatar

Kumbaya, people!

Power Poster

Joined: Jun 2008

Near DC (duh!)

Posts: 7,738

See profile

Where in the world are you getting the idea that you would have to buy two houses and support two households? (Nobody here is even remotely suggesting that -- and that is certainly not what child support is for, or could even do).

Or, that the alternative to not having children is having to support a faithless ex-wife in idle luxury? These thought patterns seem so completely illogical to me. They certainly aren't based on factual data (hmmm....although it does make me wonder about your past experiences with abandonment...).
Last edited by neardc; November 5,2009 at 5:16pm.
 
  Reply With Quote
D_Lion is offline D_Lion Post #124  November 5,2009, 5:21pm
D_Lion's Avatar

- Ladies want to wring my neck - you have been warned!

Sage

Joined: Aug 2008

NJ

Posts: 30,721

See profile

chawks64 wrote :
Your only concern was that your ex not be rewarded for leaving.

No, my equal concern, in every post, is that I do not have the income to pay for two households.
 
  Reply With Quote
peg099 is offline peg099 Post #125  November 5,2009, 5:25pm
peg099's Avatar

Sage

Joined: Sep 2008

Canada

Posts: 12,516

See profile

D_Lion wrote :
I've tried too many times already.

I am unable to afford two houses. I am unable to afford housing, utilities, et.al., for another household. I checked my paycheck and it's just as true now as it was five minutes ago.

There are no circumstance in which buying a life of idle luxury for an ex-partner fits to my income. Her idleness means my homelessness. I do not accept any argument that that is a just outcome for any reason - let alone her abondoning me.
Wow, so accepting child support automatically means the woman is going to be living in luxury? I think you better check your facts. Women fare worse economically than men do post-divorce.

And who says she will be idle? We're talking about child support, not alimony. That means she's still supporting herself. And, in most cases, even when they receive child support the cutodial parent continues to contribute to the raising of the child, both financially and through providing care for that child.
 
  Reply With Quote
chawks64 is offline chawks64 Post #126  November 5,2009, 5:26pm
chawks64's Avatar

is keeping warm with her Honey.

Power Poster

Joined: Jun 2008

Southern Nevada

Posts: 6,735

See profile

D_Lion wrote :
No, my equal concern, in every post, is that I do not have the income to pay for two households.
And so you would expect the kids to not eat so you could make your car payment?

It's not their fault and it shouldn't be their punishment.

The point you're missing is that this is not money for the an abandoning spouse, it's money that would have been used to pay for the kids' expenses. You would have been paying it whether they were living with both parents, with you, or with your ex.
 
  Reply With Quote
cardguy is offline cardguy Post #127  November 5,2009, 5:27pm
cardguy's Avatar

Veteran

Joined: Aug 2009

Oregon

Posts: 1,226

See profile

D_Lion wrote :
I've tried too many times already.

I am unable to afford two houses. I am unable to afford housing, utilities, et.al., for another household. I checked my paycheck and it's just as true now as it was five minutes ago.

There are no circumstance in which buying a life of idle luxury for an ex-partner fits to my income. Her idleness means my homelessness. I do not accept any argument that that is a just outcome for any reason - let alone her abondoning me.
Who said anything about a life of idle luxury? We're talking about child support...merely making sure that if $X are needed to raise a child, then $(X/2) are being contributed by either partner.

As has already been pointed out, that's the theory anyway, in reality whomever has majority custody of the kids usually ends up bearing more than half the financial cost of raising the child anyway. Marrying someone, divorcing them, getting custody of the kids, and getting child support is a losing proposition as far as wealth acquisition is concerned. Your repeated statements about "paying for two households" are a straw man argument, no one is suggesting that.

Your attempts to paint this in such unrealistically stark terms....well, they certainly aren't the result and a dispassionate analysis from data.
Last edited by cardguy; November 5,2009 at 5:32pm.
 
  Reply With Quote
peg099 is offline peg099 Post #128  November 5,2009, 5:29pm
peg099's Avatar

Sage

Joined: Sep 2008

Canada

Posts: 12,516

See profile

D_Lion wrote :
No, my equal concern, in every post, is that I do not have the income to pay for two households.
You would only be paying for two households if you had children with someone who has never worked and never plans on working. Since one of your dating criteria is economic parity, you will never be in that situation. You would simply go back to having separate housing costs as you did prior to co-habitation. The only difference would be that you'd be splitting the cost of raising any child(ren) you had together.
 
  Reply With Quote
D_Lion is offline D_Lion Post #129  November 5,2009, 5:31pm
D_Lion's Avatar

- Ladies want to wring my neck - you have been warned!

Sage

Joined: Aug 2008

NJ

Posts: 30,721

See profile

neardc wrote :
Where in the world are you getting the idea that you would have to buy two houses and support two households? (Nobody here is even remotely suggesting that -- and that is certainly not what child support is for, or could even do).

Paying thousands of dollars per month to an ex-partner, nonimally as "child support," is in fact paying for her house. (Usually his house, while he is left depending on daddy or living in inappropriate, sub-standard housing.)

Since I do not have anybody to subsidize me, I would be homeless if any portion of my pay were taken. I consider this unjust.

Further, I continue to maintain that transfers should not take place to an ex-partner.

***

This thread has really made me mad. I work hard, for very little; all of it is needed for my own, tenuous, survival. There is nothing left - let alone the majority of it - for paying an idle woman!

***

Everyone who has attacked me, you have added to my conclusion, not undermined it.
 
  Reply With Quote
peg099 is offline peg099 Post #130  November 5,2009, 5:33pm
peg099's Avatar

Sage

Joined: Sep 2008

Canada

Posts: 12,516

See profile

chawks64 wrote :
The point you're missing is that this is not money for the an abandoning spouse, it's money that would have been used to pay for the kids' expenses. You would have been paying it whether they were living with both parents, with you, or with your ex.
Actually, the point he's missing is that children are human beings and not possessions. The way he sees it, if his ex gets the porsche, he feels he shouldn't be responsible for the gas and maintenance of the vehicle he doesn't get to drive because they are no longer living together.
 
  Reply With Quote
Reply


« What talent do you WISH you had? | About You | Drama Queens and Crisis Kings »
Topic Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new topics
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off

Similar Topics
Topic Topic Starter Board Replies Last Post
Secure call is worthless to buy passat1 Using eHarmony 13 February 3,2011 12:24pm
Shall I call, email, or not? funnyengineergal Dating 65 October 6,2009 8:56pm
To Call or Not to Call islandrain80 Dating 9 September 15,2009 2:38pm
Do I go on the date or trust my gut? Seriousminded 40 plus singles 18 September 5,2009 8:44pm
Wait for him to call or just call them? jeeknx 40 Something 7 August 13,2009 12:57pm

Looking for a Great Relationship?

Get started now. Fill out this form and take the questionnaire to receive your matches.

First Name:

I'm a:
seeking

Postal Code:

Country:

Email:

Confirm Email:

Password:


How did you hear about us?


Latest on our Dating Advice Discussion Boards

“The tennis ball story is a good analogy, RD, and that's how I interpret "gut feeling" -- a conclusion/sense of something that's a thought, not a feeling; though it will have feelings associated with ... ” –  Sassafras54

Join the “Is Your Gut Leading - or Misleading You?” discussion

“Agree. Given where you are emotionally, I would cease all communication with Mr. Trade Show. You're vulnerable. He's up for a challenge. It's playing with fire. You'll be in a bad place in the ... ” –  emma_hazards

Join the “Received lovely email from former poofer” discussion

“How about phone calls, then?” –  barbarella_42

Join the “Advice on Response time” discussion

“I have never spoken to a woman like he has. Yeah, I have never spoken to a woman like that either. It is a hard call to whether he is just as jerk, or whether he is a player. Both are feasible ... ” –  ScottK

Join the “So, men. Explain this to me, please!” discussion

“I have come to this same conclusion. Thank you.” –  bibittyboo

Join the “Confused about date #2” discussion

“Harmonygirl, I do not usually make up my mind on blanket situations but instead would examine each one on it's own merits, so I cannot answer your question. However, just in the going about of daily ... ” –  Ephemera

Join the “Atheism, Religion and Tolerance” discussion

“I was ok until the kiss on the cheek part....That doesn't sound like your defenses were up at all... It's one thing for a guy to walk up and start with the cheesy lines....But as soon as I say, "no ... ” –  Ingytravel

Join the “So this guy walks into a bar . . .” discussion

“ No. It is not wise. You have to throw all your eggs into one basket for love to work at all. Relationships are inherently riskier than careers. You can't use the same rules. You might lose ... ” –  harnomygirl

Join the “Becoming Exclusive” discussion



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 11:38pm.

Discussion Boards Archive

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2012, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0