Advice and Support from Thousands of Users Just Like You

About You Your healthy mind, body, and spirit play a vital role in all the important relationships of your life. Share your advice and insights here.

Reply
Page 22 of 25 « First 12 20 21 22 23 24 Last »
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
chawks64 chawks64 is offline
chawks64's Avatar

chawks64 is trying very hard to be patient. Definitely not my best talent.

Power Poster

Join Date: Jun 2008

Posts: 5,208

See profile

D_Lion wrote :
Not 40% of $400 k over 18 years! You're avoiding the debate!

When I moved to my current area, houses were 3 to 5 bedrooms. (Yes, there are condos in Manhattan, but that is not where I live.)

It is minimally more costly to house additional persons in a house - not anywhere near USDA PR implication.
In Nevada (as with most states), the amount a parent pays is based a percentage of income that also takes into account the number of kids they have. You could have up to 9 kids and still not be paying 40%. So I think that's not quite right.

As far as additional expenses being minimal, I disagree. If you can afford a 3-5 bedroom house, more power to you. I cannot. Up until a few months ago, I was spending $970 each month for a 2 bedroom apartment (it's an expensive town my ex dragged me to), which is the number of bedrooms the state required me to have and what is reasonable anyway. A few months ago, my son turned 18, graduated from school, got a great job and his own place. I switched to a 1 bedroom apartment and my rent is now $646. In other words, it cost me $324 more just to have a place where my son could legally sleep. Add in the extra things like the huge amount of electricity a teenager uses, the disturbing amount of food they consume, medical bills and constant additional school expenses. It's just plain expensive.
Last edited by chawks64; November 5th, 2009 at 10:46 pm.
- November 5th, 2009, 10:42 pm
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook

#211   Reply With Quote
bigfincat bigfincat is offline
bigfincat's Avatar

Virtuoso

Join Date: Nov 2008

Posts: 3,147

See profile

alissag wrote :
I do know that in California, if you are married longer than 10 years, a judge COULD order that the man pay spousal support for life, or until she remarries. 10 years is the benchmark (for some reason). If less than 10 years, spousal support would be for half the marriage (max is 4 years 5 months). I chose to decline spousal support, despite my +10 years of marriage.

Whatever! I'm done reading this thread, a bunch of people that LOVE to stereotype everyone.
A certain amount of alimony is definitely earned however it is settled. It can in many cases be necessary for life. A share of a partner's pension would be an example of that. If that was earned as a couple then it should be rewarded as a couple.

Fairness is what we would hope for & that is certainly done on a case by case basis. That settlement should depend on so many factors.

I know that in my family things were done very civilly.

My mother took no money... although all children were over 17 so CS was not a big issue.

My older brother paid alimony as well as WAY more for his children than was mandated. He willingly gave the overages directly to them... at least when they were old enough to handle it.

I know far more people that have dealt with divorce fairly than otherwise that I make no assumption whatsoever.
- November 5th, 2009, 10:48 pm
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook

#212   Reply With Quote
bigfincat bigfincat is offline
bigfincat's Avatar

Virtuoso

Join Date: Nov 2008

Posts: 3,147

See profile

I actually attempted to calculate how much money it would take to support a household.

It seemed that it came to approximately $15,000 per person per year. I am talking bare minimum.
(I know that it can & is done for less... amazed at how actually).

A family of 5 would need $75,000 per year to live.

So I would think that that $15k should go toward the children from the parents depending on percentage of combined income.

So $1100 per month per child would seem adequate.

I know that it would be difficult but if a man is the only one employed during the marriage then he should have to pay the $2200 per month to support his 2 children.

He should also be ready to spend more if necessary...voluntarily if his children need/want certain things.
- November 5th, 2009, 10:59 pm
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook

#213   Reply With Quote
Harvey7 Harvey7 is offline
Harvey7's Avatar

Veteran

Join Date: Mar 2009

Posts: 1,080

See profile

D_Lion wrote :
I'm not sure.

My initial answer is that this would depend heavily on my income, my partner's income, and unforeseeable expenses (such as number of relocations or changes in employment benefits, which altered my cash flow projections.)

I am not aligned with an idea of not supporting children, but I am also not aligned with providing to children luxuries which I can not afford for myself. Keeping in mind, that "sports, movies," etc are things I cannot afford, I do not consider them justified for a child.

Survival expenses associated with a resident child, I do not see an upper cut-off age. Entertainments, I do nto see funding at any age, unless I were rather well off indeed.
You do not have a choice as to how the child support is spent by the child or your ex-mate. As a general rule they will award 25% of your gross income plus Health Insurance & Life. The factors will be the last three years of your income taxes. So if your kid likes you, they might treat you to a movie and a bag of Pop Corn and a soda.

Harvey7.
- November 5th, 2009, 10:59 pm
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook

#214   Reply With Quote
nightling nightling is offline
nightling's Avatar

Veteran

Join Date: Sep 2009

Posts: 2,448

See profile

alissag wrote :
I do know that in California, if you are married longer than 10 years, a judge COULD order that the man pay spousal support for life, or until she remarries. 10 years is the benchmark (for some reason). If less than 10 years, spousal support would be for half the marriage (max is 4 years 5 months). I chose to decline spousal support, despite my +10 years of marriage.

Whatever! I'm done reading this thread, a bunch of people that LOVE to stereotype everyone.
Well the books still read that you can be awarded alimony after 7 years here in Misery ... but the court doesn't have to award it. I'm told the current situation is that if the woman can't support herself, but can go back to school and get training to support herself, that's the direction they tend to go. My friend just got a divorce in Illinois and was told a similar thing.
- November 5th, 2009, 11:02 pm
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook

#215   Reply With Quote

ADVERTISEMENT

Harvey7 Harvey7 is offline
Harvey7's Avatar

Veteran

Join Date: Mar 2009

Posts: 1,080

See profile

bigfincat wrote :
I actually attempted to calculate how much money it would take to support a household.

It seemed that it came to approximately $15,000 per person per year. I am talking bare minimum.
(I know that it can & is done for less... amazed at how actually).

A family of 5 would need $75,000 per year to live.

So I would think that that $15k should go toward the children from the parents depending on percentage of combined income.

So $1100 per month per child would seem adequate.

I know that it would be difficult but if a man is the only one employed during the marriage then he should have to pay the $2200 per month to support his 2 children.

He should also be ready to spend more if necessary...voluntarily if his children need/want certain things.
Both parents should be contributing equal amounts for the upkeep of the kids, but if the ex-wife goes back to work what does "Day Care" cost per kid? $200 to $300 per week/per child and in baby sitters. So if you way all of the options no one is living off the fat of the land.
The dollar is with much less example the cost of food at the super market. Both parents have to contribute to the cost of living.

Harvey7.
Last edited by Harvey7; November 5th, 2009 at 11:14 pm.
- November 5th, 2009, 11:11 pm
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook

#216   Reply With Quote
peg099 peg099 is offline
peg099's Avatar

peg099 has fallen and he landed beside me :)

Sage

Join Date: Sep 2008

Posts: 11,943

See profile

bigfincat wrote :
I know far more people that have dealt with divorce fairly than otherwise that I make no assumption whatsoever.
I would have to agree with that. Unfortunately, the horror stories are what people talk about most, so people's perception of reality gets distorted.
- November 5th, 2009, 11:16 pm
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook

#217   Reply With Quote
bigfincat bigfincat is offline
bigfincat's Avatar

Virtuoso

Join Date: Nov 2008

Posts: 3,147

See profile

Harvey7 wrote :
Both parents should contributing equal amounts for the upkeep of the kids, but if the ex-wife goes back to work what does "Day Care" cost per kid? $200 to $300 per week/per child and in baby sitters. So if you way all of the options no one is living off the fat of the land. The dollar is with much less example the cost of food at the supper market. Both parents have to contribute.

Harvey7.
Yeah, the non-working partner should always try to maximize their contribution. Hopefully wages would offset daycare but their are many ways to contribute to that situation.

Most families of 4 struggle when they are together... so being apart... well that is even harder to manage. That is a lot of responsibility & takes a lot of work & energy.

It would be great if both partners were willing to put up the same amount of energy & total resources... whatever they may be.
- November 5th, 2009, 11:20 pm
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook

#218   Reply With Quote
LizziePooh LizziePooh is offline
LizziePooh's Avatar

LizziePooh would enjoy a song.

Power Poster

Join Date: May 2008

Posts: 5,172

See profile

mari3434 wrote :
... I am not even going to bother rebutting his logic anymore.
I dunno - you did really well!

Who says lawyers can't have their uses?? (Surely, not me ** said, looking around innocently. ** lol)
- November 5th, 2009, 11:40 pm
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook

#219   Reply With Quote
LizziePooh LizziePooh is offline
LizziePooh's Avatar

LizziePooh would enjoy a song.

Power Poster

Join Date: May 2008

Posts: 5,172

See profile

Ok, let's stop talking about money...and child support...and stuff!

One thing I completely adored about my ex...he was devoted to his son. But not in a creepy, destructive way - quite the opposite. He was/is an incredible dad. I would tease him that he would have to find friends when his son became a teen. But somehow he has managed, even with a popular son that now has a girlfriend, he still manages to spend quality time with his son (and his friends! which is even more of an accomplishment, I think - but I digress.)

With his ex and him, no one paid alimony or child support (maybe there is something about having nothing at the time of divorce??) and they shared 50/50 custody.

But what I loved about my ex was that he loved that 50% he got. So much so, that when he knew his ex was hiring a sitter during her 50% that he just called and said, "I know you have been getting a sitter. But why do that? Call me - I would love to have more time with my son." And she being a good mom, did. She called him and my ex had his son for more than 50% of the time. Of course, now that he is a teen and his girlfriend lives by school and his mom's, his son wants to spend more time at his mom's. But still, my ex takes his son and his friends (and girlfriend) for runs and hikes...sometimes backpacking trips and somehow they still have that kept that bond. My ex is a friend but not a friend, always a parent - you know, that balance that not a lot of people can pull off, he could though and and still does.

But here is the thing, I think a lot of people are like my ex. I think that is what being a great parent is all about. And from where I am sitting, from what I read in here - there seems to be an awful lot of good parents out there...that get it.

I had that once, I want that again and I for one, don't think it is unreasonable or impossible to have that again - quite the opposite - I expect it.
- November 6th, 2009, 12:08 am
Digg this Post!Add Post to del.icio.usBookmark Post in TechnoratiFurl this Post!Share on Facebook

#220   Reply With Quote

ADVERTISEMENT

Reply
Page 22 of 25 « First 12 20 21 22 23 24 Last »

Bookmarks

« What talent do you WISH you had? | Array | The Three Cs of Great Sex »
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
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 On

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Shall I call, email, or not? funnyengineergal Dating 65 October 6th, 2009 09:56 pm
To Call or Not to Call islandrain80 Dating 9 September 15th, 2009 03:38 pm
Secure call is worthless to buy passat1 Using eHarmony 0 August 16th, 2009 11:44 am

Latest on our Dating Advice Discussion Boards

“As a follow up to BEA's post this topic is NOT about each others posting style. If you feel that someone/anyone is being attacked please click the report button. If someone pushes your buttons then ... ” – yoga_gal

Join the “Getting Over My Girlfriend's Past Lovers?” discussion

“"wife material" but not necessarily "girlfriend material" ... It sounds like a compliment to me!! But a veiled insult? Hmmm? Because you've got to be a gf before you can be a wife, right?? ... ” – hankscorpio

Join the “That WAS a compliment... I think?!” discussion

“Hey! Me too!! Yay POF ” – peg099

Join the “Monday, February 8th weekend and date roundup!” discussion

“It is really difficult to get over him. I did delete his phone number from my cell phone so I won't continue to text him, but I think it may take a while before I can really move on. I still think ... ” – scaredhimaway

Join the “Did I scare him away?” discussion

“I can't find good links for reporting bugs in eHarmony. Also, there used to be a link to report a problem with someone's profile. I have what appears to be a match with a broken profile and I can't ... ” – ami1uwant

Join the “Reporting Problems” discussion

“I dont think it works that way obviously. ” – Nanette

Join the “Who Makes The 1st Move” discussion

“lol....the psychologists are referring to a real life face to face meeting. Some research says that it's even shorter than 30 seconds and more like the blink of an eye. I do think there is some ... ” – DancingFool

Join the “Ladies, do you decide in the first 30 seconds if you're interetsed? And, what are you looking for in a first impression?” discussion

“You don't. That would be rude and cruel. You thank them for the lovely/interesting/whatever conversations that you've had the past couple of weeks, but you're focusing on another match. Then wish ... ” – nunayabizness

Join the “New pics and not attracted” discussion



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:27 pm.

Discussion Boards Archive

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.3.0