If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#561
|
|||
|
|||
Does anybody have any useful advice on how to collect a child support debt?
"Paula" wrote in message ... On Nov 20, 9:41 am, "teachrmama" wrote: "Banty" wrote in message ... In article , teachrmama says... Oh, so you think the 2 year old and the 5 year old should sit in on the negotiations? Because the parents would be likely trying to rip their children off, and the 2 year old and the 5 year old should be their to stand up for themselves? Wow--interesting concept. Of course not. That's why it is made certain that their interests are represented by someone *else*, and someone disinterested and competent in the relevent laws and practices of the situation. It is certainly fair to question the particulars of the laws and practices of the situation. But it's unwise to forget why they're there. Then we might as well all give up and let Big Daddy Government take over and tell us every move to make. Obviously, a father and a mother are too ignorant, selfish, and immature to look out for the best interests of their own children, so *other* adults, who do not know the children, the circumstances, or the situation are **far better able** to make any necessary decisions than the stupid parents are. Why don't we just change the age af adulthood to, say, 90, rather than 18. And the instant a child is conceived he becomes a ward of the court--and the parents supply the money--but only those who have passed some sort of government standardized test snd become mighty Government Workers make decisions about how the child is reared. Except for their own children, of course. A different Gvoernment Worker is assigned to their case. All Hail the Mighty Government. All Hail Big Brother. How would we survive without Him!! More emotion and extremeism ... which doesn't get anyone any closer to a workable solution, now does it?! But you know what else doesn't get us any closer to a solution? Insisting that PARENTS are so useless that they canno be trusted to act in the best interests of their children!! Saying that some paid lackey can look at a piece of paper and know better than the parents what the chuld needs. How does that help anything, Paula? How does putting somebody else in carge of your child's life help anything? Do you really think that parents *want* to make their kids miserable, Banty? Were you to divorce, would your husband go out of his way to make sure your child lived at poverty level just to put a few extra dollars in his pocket or to make you miserable? Again with argument that two parents with proven animosity toward each other, or at least insufficient cooperative relation to each other to get together to actually raise the child (what a concept), and their pocketbooks at stake to boot, are going to act with enlightened reasonableness and far sighted wisdom. And MIghty Government **always** acts with enlightened reasonableness and far sighted wisdom. That's why the bidget is balanced, and tehe country is at peace. I think, given the opportunity, the *vast majority* of parents could pull it off, Banty. And I disagree. I think you need to remove those rose-colored glasses and take a real look at the animosities between the parents to whom you refer. Perhaps the animosity comes, in part, from one parent being told "you're the good one," and the other being told "you're the deadbeat." Then being treated that way by the system. Then the system could work with only those that actually *need* the system--which is why it was set up to begin with. Which, IMHO, is a far greater percentage than you are willing to acknowledge. Oh, you will never get me to reinforce your feeling that most parents are incapable of parenting their own children. What a sad, sad life you must lead to believe such evil about others. And you stake the childhoods and well being of tens of thousands of children on that optimistic confidence of yours. YOU stake the childhoods of tens of thousands of children on a cold strangers following little numbers on a pices of paper withou regards to the real circumstances of a situation. Hmmmm...cold, uncaring government vs loving parents......hmmmm...who would I want making choices for my children....hmmmm..... Some of those parents are cold and uncaring when it comes to anything other than their own wants and needs ... hmmmm. And you parlay those *some" into everyone needing to be controlled by the system. Very, very sad. |
#562
|
|||
|
|||
Does anybody have any useful advice on how to collect a childsupport debt?
On Nov 20, 5:27 pm, "teachrmama" wrote:
"Paula" wrote in message ... On Nov 20, 9:41 am, "teachrmama" wrote: "Banty" wrote in message ... In article , teachrmama says... Oh, so you think the 2 year old and the 5 year old should sit in on the negotiations? Because the parents would be likely trying to rip their children off, and the 2 year old and the 5 year old should be their to stand up for themselves? Wow--interesting concept. Of course not. That's why it is made certain that their interests are represented by someone *else*, and someone disinterested and competent in the relevent laws and practices of the situation. It is certainly fair to question the particulars of the laws and practices of the situation. But it's unwise to forget why they're there. Then we might as well all give up and let Big Daddy Government take over and tell us every move to make. Obviously, a father and a mother are too ignorant, selfish, and immature to look out for the best interests of their own children, so *other* adults, who do not know the children, the circumstances, or the situation are **far better able** to make any necessary decisions than the stupid parents are. Why don't we just change the age af adulthood to, say, 90, rather than 18. And the instant a child is conceived he becomes a ward of the court--and the parents supply the money--but only those who have passed some sort of government standardized test snd become mighty Government Workers make decisions about how the child is reared. Except for their own children, of course. A different Gvoernment Worker is assigned to their case. All Hail the Mighty Government. All Hail Big Brother. How would we survive without Him!! More emotion and extremeism ... which doesn't get anyone any closer to a workable solution, now does it?! But you know what else doesn't get us any closer to a solution? Insisting that PARENTS are so useless that they canno be trusted to act in the best interests of their children!! Saying that some paid lackey can look at a piece of paper and know better than the parents what the chuld needs. How does that help anything, Paula? How does putting somebody else in carge of your child's life help anything? You are the one calling parents "scum", "ignorant", "selfish", and "immature", teachrmama ... let's cut with the projection and stick to the issues. What I said was that *some* parents cannot see past their own pain, anger, and frustration to get to the important issues of what's best for their child(ren). These parents need the intervention of the state to safeguard the child(ren). Do all parents require intervention? Certainly not! Should intervention be preemptive? Certainly not! That "paid lackey" *should* be an unbiased, objective perspective on the needs of the child(ren) -- which is necessary when the parents can't see past themselves. Do you really think that parents *want* to make their kids miserable, Banty? Were you to divorce, would your husband go out of his way to make sure your child lived at poverty level just to put a few extra dollars in his pocket or to make you miserable? Again with argument that two parents with proven animosity toward each other, or at least insufficient cooperative relation to each other to get together to actually raise the child (what a concept), and their pocketbooks at stake to boot, are going to act with enlightened reasonableness and far sighted wisdom. And MIghty Government **always** acts with enlightened reasonableness and far sighted wisdom. That's why the bidget is balanced, and tehe country is at peace. I think, given the opportunity, the *vast majority* of parents could pull it off, Banty. And I disagree. I think you need to remove those rose-colored glasses and take a real look at the animosities between the parents to whom you refer. Perhaps the animosity comes, in part, from one parent being told "you're the good one," and the other being told "you're the deadbeat." Then being treated that way by the system. Your situation is an extreme, as is mine. But if you really think that the animosity that occurs when a relationship breaks down is due to the system holding bias toward one parent over the other, you need to further educate yourself on the topic of human behaviour and psychology because you are WAY off the mark. Then the system could work with only those that actually *need* the system--which is why it was set up to begin with. Which, IMHO, is a far greater percentage than you are willing to acknowledge. Oh, you will never get me to reinforce your feeling that most parents are incapable of parenting their own children. What a sad, sad life you must lead to believe such evil about others. I never said that ... please STOP putting words in my mouth. You speak for you, I'll speak for me, and we'll get along just fine. I do not lead a "sad, sad life" ... in addition to DD there are many, many things that bring happiness and joy to my world ... but I've also seen enough to know that there *is* evil in the world and sometimes it's resident in those wunnerful parents that you think will always do the right thing by their child(ren) without having to be told to do so. And you stake the childhoods and well being of tens of thousands of children on that optimistic confidence of yours. YOU stake the childhoods of tens of thousands of children on a cold strangers following little numbers on a pices of paper withou regards to the real circumstances of a situation. Hmmmm...cold, uncaring government vs loving parents......hmmmm...who would I want making choices for my children....hmmmm..... Some of those parents are cold and uncaring when it comes to anything other than their own wants and needs ... hmmmm. And you parlay those *some" into everyone needing to be controlled by the system. Very, very sad. More mind-reading and emotion. Ya know, up until now, I always thought that you had your head on straight and had just been screwed over by the system. I still think that you've been screwed by the system ... but as for the rest, I'm not so sure anymore. |
#563
|
|||
|
|||
Does anybody have any useful advice on how to collect a child support debt?
"Paula" wrote in message ... On Nov 20, 5:27 pm, "teachrmama" wrote: "Paula" wrote in message ... On Nov 20, 9:41 am, "teachrmama" wrote: "Banty" wrote in message ... In article , teachrmama says... Oh, so you think the 2 year old and the 5 year old should sit in on the negotiations? Because the parents would be likely trying to rip their children off, and the 2 year old and the 5 year old should be their to stand up for themselves? Wow--interesting concept. Of course not. That's why it is made certain that their interests are represented by someone *else*, and someone disinterested and competent in the relevent laws and practices of the situation. It is certainly fair to question the particulars of the laws and practices of the situation. But it's unwise to forget why they're there. Then we might as well all give up and let Big Daddy Government take over and tell us every move to make. Obviously, a father and a mother are too ignorant, selfish, and immature to look out for the best interests of their own children, so *other* adults, who do not know the children, the circumstances, or the situation are **far better able** to make any necessary decisions than the stupid parents are. Why don't we just change the age af adulthood to, say, 90, rather than 18. And the instant a child is conceived he becomes a ward of the court--and the parents supply the money--but only those who have passed some sort of government standardized test snd become mighty Government Workers make decisions about how the child is reared. Except for their own children, of course. A different Gvoernment Worker is assigned to their case. All Hail the Mighty Government. All Hail Big Brother. How would we survive without Him!! More emotion and extremeism ... which doesn't get anyone any closer to a workable solution, now does it?! But you know what else doesn't get us any closer to a solution? Insisting that PARENTS are so useless that they canno be trusted to act in the best interests of their children!! Saying that some paid lackey can look at a piece of paper and know better than the parents what the chuld needs. How does that help anything, Paula? How does putting somebody else in carge of your child's life help anything? You are the one calling parents "scum", "ignorant", "selfish", and "immature", teachrmama ... let's cut with the projection and stick to the issues. I didn't call them any such thing. I am the one saying that, given the opportunity (and the freedoms this country was founded on) the vast majority will step up to the plate and do the right thing. There will always be a need to step in for the few that don't feel they have any obligation to anyone. But the majority of people are NOT like that. What I said was that *some* parents cannot see past their own pain, anger, and frustration to get to the important issues of what's best for their child(ren). These parents need the intervention of the state to safeguard the child(ren). But the system is not for ***SOME*** parents, Paula. It is for ***all*** parents who get caugt in its web. It is punitive. It is narrow. It sees only the money that is brought in for the few, and to h*ll with the rest! Do all parents require intervention? Certainly not! Should intervention be preemptive? Certainly not! *******BUT IT IS!!! Like it or not, IT IS!!!!******* That "paid lackey" *should* be an unbiased, objective perspective on the needs of the child(ren) -- which is necessary when the parents can't see past themselves. **But the paid lackeys can's see past their little pieces of paper that say "This is how it should be." They are NOT umboased, and are trained to look ONLY at the children of the order, and the $$$ that can be brought in.*** Do you really think that parents *want* to make their kids miserable, Banty? Were you to divorce, would your husband go out of his way to make sure your child lived at poverty level just to put a few extra dollars in his pocket or to make you miserable? Again with argument that two parents with proven animosity toward each other, or at least insufficient cooperative relation to each other to get together to actually raise the child (what a concept), and their pocketbooks at stake to boot, are going to act with enlightened reasonableness and far sighted wisdom. And MIghty Government **always** acts with enlightened reasonableness and far sighted wisdom. That's why the bidget is balanced, and tehe country is at peace. I think, given the opportunity, the *vast majority* of parents could pull it off, Banty. And I disagree. I think you need to remove those rose-colored glasses and take a real look at the animosities between the parents to whom you refer. Perhaps the animosity comes, in part, from one parent being told "you're the good one," and the other being told "you're the deadbeat." Then being treated that way by the system. Your situation is an extreme, as is mine. But if you really think that the animosity that occurs when a relationship breaks down is due to the system holding bias toward one parent over the other, you need to further educate yourself on the topic of human behaviour and psychology because you are WAY off the mark. There is, naturally, animosity when a realtionship breaks down. However, the animosity is rarely toward the children. Many parents can, and do, work out parenting plans, sometimes together, sometimes through a mediator. My point is that the system today favors the woman. If one party walks into a negotiation already knowing she will win, and the other side walks in pretty certain he will lose, it isn't an even playing field. If both walk in on even ground, with a truly unbiased mediator, there is a far greater liklihood of a successful conclusion. And again, there will always be the few that need the system. Then the system could work with only those that actually *need* the system--which is why it was set up to begin with. Which, IMHO, is a far greater percentage than you are willing to acknowledge. Oh, you will never get me to reinforce your feeling that most parents are incapable of parenting their own children. What a sad, sad life you must lead to believe such evil about others. I never said that ... please STOP putting words in my mouth. You speak for you, I'll speak for me, and we'll get along just fine. I do not lead a "sad, sad life" ... in addition to DD there are many, many things that bring happiness and joy to my world ... but I've also seen enough to know that there *is* evil in the world and sometimes it's resident in those wunnerful parents that you think will always do the right thing by their child(ren) without having to be told to do so. Now you are misquoting me. I have said repeatedly, and will continue to say, that most people,** when given the opportunity,** will rise to the occasion. Right now, they are not given the opportunity. The script is alreasdy written--and they are forced to go along with it. There is no room for rising to the occasion--they are forced to do what somebody else has already dteremined to be "the right thing to do." The hurt of a broken relationship and "evil" are 2 very different things. Most people are not evil. And you stake the childhoods and well being of tens of thousands of children on that optimistic confidence of yours. YOU stake the childhoods of tens of thousands of children on a cold strangers following little numbers on a pices of paper withou regards to the real circumstances of a situation. Hmmmm...cold, uncaring government vs loving parents......hmmmm...who would I want making choices for my children....hmmmm..... Some of those parents are cold and uncaring when it comes to anything other than their own wants and needs ... hmmmm. And you parlay those *some" into everyone needing to be controlled by the system. Very, very sad. More mind-reading and emotion. Ya know, up until now, I always thought that you had your head on straight and had just been screwed over by the system. I still think that you've been screwed by the system ... but as for the rest, I'm not so sure anymore. Let the system be for the **few that actually need it!** NOT the many who do NOT need it! I have absolutely no doubt that some sort of system is needed--just as we need a criminal justice system for the few who choose not to abide by the law. But not for everyone! The same system that screwed over my family screws over many many families, simply because of its nature. And the system is no great shakes in helping those who *really* need the help because it is too busy going after the easy money from those who would cooperate anyway to help those really in need of help. I am not in any way saying to completely get rid of any safety net for those who really need it--I am saying to save it *only* for those who really need it. I have nothing against you, Paula. I just think that you are overboard in your idea of how much this system can really accomplish compared to what most loving parents can accomplish givin the opportunity to do so. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
how to collect more child support | fathersrights | Child Support | 4 | September 6th 07 05:30 AM |
HOW TO COLLECT MORE SUPPORT | dadslawyer | Child Support | 0 | August 21st 06 03:40 PM |
Question on Child Support Debt | xyz | Child Support | 8 | October 20th 05 06:07 PM |
Phantom debt creation by child support bureaucrats | Edmund Esterbauer | Child Support | 0 | January 23rd 04 10:42 AM |
Outrage Over Plan To Wipe Child Support Debt | Greg | Child Support | 4 | December 10th 03 02:48 AM |