Child support rant.

Forums › Off topic › Child support rant.

1 | ... | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1256921 12-Mar-2015 11:02

Geektastic:

Probably leaving home at 7 and a half for boarding school 36 weeks a year develops a different sort of character and relationship than staying at home.

Sounds like my Father in Law he left England in the 50's and his brothers are spread around the globe, he too went to boarding school which looked more like Colditz but this is all a different story

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

networkn

Networkn
32866 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15456

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1256922 12-Mar-2015 11:03

Geektastic:
KiwiNZ:
Geektastic:
KiwiNZ: Having three sons has been the best thing we have ever done, they are my best friends.

That's...an interesting idea. My parents are in a box labelled "Parents" where they fulfil a specific set of roles, being my friend is not one of them though! Mentor, supporter, last line of defence etc possibly, but not friends.

As the saying goes, choose your friends carefully, because you can't choose your family!

I guess we have a great relationship with our sons as I did with my folks.

I guess so. My brothers all live on different continents from each other and from our parents!!

Probably leaving home at 7 and a half for boarding school 36 weeks a year develops a different sort of character and relationship than staying at home.

Well logic would dictate that to be the case. I don't think your situation is typical of the others being represented.

Wade

2225 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 373

#1256976 12-Mar-2015 11:42

Geektastic:
Wade: Life without kids would be boring and unrewarding by comparison

Or...peaceful, financially more rewarding, more flexible with immense freedom of action.

Oh - and dogs are more useful! They fetch what you shoot, guard the house, keep you fit and cost a lot less to run. And they do as they are told...!

My comment still stands, I have lived pre-kids then and I am living with kids so I am in quite a good position to make a comparison, nothing is more rewarding then having that unconditional love of one's child

My 2yo is well on her way to toilet training, how does that dog get on cleaning up its own mess? :P

networkn

Networkn
32866 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15456

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1256979 12-Mar-2015 11:45

Wade:
Geektastic:
Wade: Life without kids would be boring and unrewarding by comparison

Or...peaceful, financially more rewarding, more flexible with immense freedom of action.

Oh - and dogs are more useful! They fetch what you shoot, guard the house, keep you fit and cost a lot less to run. And they do as they are told...!

My comment still stands, I have lived pre-kids then and I am living with kids so I am in quite a good position to make a comparison, nothing is more rewarding then having that unconditional love of one's child

My 2yo is well on her way to toilet training, how does that dog get on cleaning up its own mess? :P

I have to say I enjoyed my prekids life a LOT, and I'd say the enjoyment of kids is more, but it's very different. Ours is toilet training now (turns 3 this week), but it's been a long and messy process. My son by comparison was a dream for it.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1256982 12-Mar-2015 11:49

networkn:
I have to say I enjoyed my prekids life a LOT, and I'd say the enjoyment of kids is more, but it's very different. Ours is toilet training now (turns 3 this week), but it's been a long and messy process. My son by comparison was a dream for it.

Our sons are all adults and have left the nest (31, 28, 25) luckily now that they are all back here, tours of duty over, they visit us at least 4 times per week and I get constant text messages and phone calls. I have enjoyed all aspects, life before kids, life with them at home and now life as it is now.
With Grand children it has now all got that much better.

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

Geektastic

18009 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8465

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1257017 12-Mar-2015 12:17

Wade:
Geektastic:
Wade: Life without kids would be boring and unrewarding by comparison

Or...peaceful, financially more rewarding, more flexible with immense freedom of action.

Oh - and dogs are more useful! They fetch what you shoot, guard the house, keep you fit and cost a lot less to run. And they do as they are told...!

My comment still stands, I have lived pre-kids then and I am living with kids so I am in quite a good position to make a comparison, nothing is more rewarding then having that unconditional love of one's child

My 2yo is well on her way to toilet training, how does that dog get on cleaning up its own mess? :P

We have 18 acres, so it just leaves it's mess next to what the sheep leave...!

Apple TV

Stream your favourite shows now on Apple TV (affiliate link).

thecatsgoolies

414 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 228

Trusted

#1257092 12-Mar-2015 13:20

Presso: So I do not know how many of you the new changes affect but for me the new changes pretty much suck.

To start with I have no problems paying child support and have been doing so for the past 14 1/2 years , What I do find troubling is that my child support now with the new changes will go up $60 per week to $300.00 per week for one child.

The new changes do not take into account any partners or thier children if you provide for them etc.

The new changes were supposed to make it fairer however I do not feel this is the case.

Do you think it costs $300 a week to raise a child ??.

We are not rich by any means and there is nothing I would not do for my son , I just however feel like I am being taken by a ride by ird.

Wow. I'm lucky to get $100.00 a week from my Ex. Private arrangement, Maybe I need to look into this further!

Dratsab

3964 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1728

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1257149 12-Mar-2015 13:47

Running some calculations over a few scenarios I get some interesting figures. My current scenario is this:
- I have 2 children aged over 13 who live with my ex full time.
- I have one dependent child under 12 who lives with my wife and I full time.
- [under the new scheme] My annual liability is calculated at $13,015.20 ($2,644.00 PA more than I currently pay)

If I remove my dependent from the calculator my annual liability goes up to $15,244.80. This is a difference of $2,229.60.

But if I happened to be paying support for that child too, according to the calculator I would be paying $16,254.00 which is a difference of $3,238.80.

So my youngest has a variable value - she's worth less if she lives within a 2 parent house.

EDIT: Clarity added to bullet point 3.

BTR

1527 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 449

#1257274 12-Mar-2015 15:45

surfisup1000:
BTR: This is another reason why I am not having kids.

Who'll visit you when you're old?

My friends and the rest of my family.

pctek

807 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 157
Inactive user

#1257280 12-Mar-2015 15:54

Friend was telling me. Her husband paid $4800 a year for 2 kids.
Now, its $10,000.

They take his pay - deduct single man allowance, his exs pay ($0 because she's on a benefit) and they get the new price.

In fact she (illegally) has a partner.

She does not actually have one of the kids living there anyway, one is living with the fathers sister.

Now my friend has a child too - not her current husbands.
Her support does not increase cause she works 20 hrs a eek ($15 per hr).

Husband is single man because this child - living with him, is not his.

mad way to calculate it all I think.

pctek

807 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 157
Inactive user

#1257285 12-Mar-2015 16:01

Pity people couldn't be grownups about it really.
You can make your own support payment arrangements.

Naturally that would mean both parties having to be fair and mature and not greedy or stingy.

As the payment doesn't go to the kid (but should be FOR the kid), too many fights and it ends up being administered by IRD.

If one parent is wealthy, well so? Perhaps child could choose to live with that parent. Perhaps they could have a (fair) agreement themselves.

Apple TV

Stream your favourite shows now on Apple TV (affiliate link).

SepticSceptic

2263 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 779

Trusted

#1258030 13-Mar-2015 16:58

pctek:

In fact she (illegally) has a partner.

Actually living with her, or does he have an actual place of residence ?

If the former, dob them in - IRD. Have no time for leeches like this.

MikeB4

MikeB4
18775 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 12766

ID Verified

Trusted

Subscriber

#1258032 13-Mar-2015 17:07

SepticSceptic:
pctek:

In fact she (illegally) has a partner.

Actually living with her, or does he have an actual place of residence ?

If the former, dob them in - IRD. Have no time for leeches like this.

If the custodial parent is receiving Sole Parent support it is Work and Income that needs to know, but think carefully before doing that

Here is a crazy notion, lets give peace a chance.

mudguard

2327 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1250

#1258046 13-Mar-2015 17:47

surfisup1000:
BTR: This is another reason why I am not having kids.

Who'll visit you when you're old?

His bank manager? I have a friend on reasonable income who is expecting their second child in June (their wee boy is almost two) and I've never seen him so tired or miserable. I think people gloss over how hard it is mentally, physically and financially having children.

I really ought to get a snip. Or keep my work phone in my other pants pocket... Cook them balls!

1 | ... | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12