Child support rant.

Forums › Off topic › Child support rant.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | ... | 12

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1253871 9-Mar-2015 11:19

networkn:
KiwiNZ:
networkn: jonathan time to get off your soapbox, bottom line is as someone pointed out, that as a student you get $175 a week, why is it supposed that at 18 you only need $175 but at 13 you need $300+?

I'd like someone who thinks a kid needs more than $300 a WEEK to tell me what they are spending that $300 on?

You are not taking into account all the costs of raising a child.

Well given I took two of my sisters teenagers in and have 2 kids of my own (though they are very young right now), I think I have a reasonable idea).

Obviously people can choose to raise their kids to different standards, and my kids don't bath in caviar twice a day are aren't feed lobster for school lunches, but I'd struggle to see >$300 a week in reasonable expenses personally.

Then you will know the costs calculated by the Govt is an average and there is of course regional skews, for example the cost is far greater in Auckland than say Whanganui or Greytown

Also a Sole custodial parents costs in a lot of circumstances is higher than a couples cost of raising a child

tdgeek

29659 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1253872 9-Mar-2015 11:20

networkn: jonathan time to get off your soapbox, bottom line is as someone pointed out, that as a student you get $175 a week, why is it supposed that at 18 you only need $175 but at 13 you need $300+?

I'd like someone who thinks a kid needs more than $300 a WEEK to tell me what they are spending that $300 on?

Reminder again, the $300 is the OP's half share, so its $600 per week for the child in total. So the point you are making is now twice the point, and I agree

Ask a solo mum with two kids who does not recieve CS as she is on DPB. The Govt gets it from the Dad. Shes already up for total childcare costs of $1200 per week, ignoring her own, and the housintg costs whuich she requires anyway. Thats not possible, so the numbers dont add up.

networkn

Networkn
32252 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1253875 9-Mar-2015 11:22

tdgeek:
networkn: jonathan time to get off your soapbox, bottom line is as someone pointed out, that as a student you get $175 a week, why is it supposed that at 18 you only need $175 but at 13 you need $300+?

I'd like someone who thinks a kid needs more than $300 a WEEK to tell me what they are spending that $300 on?

Reminder again, the $300 is the OP's half share, so its $600 per week for the child in total. So the point you are making is now twice the point, and I agree

Ask a solo mum with two kids who does not recieve CS as she is on DPB. The Govt gets it from the Dad. Shes already up for total childcare costs of $1200 per week, ignoring her own, and the housintg costs whuich she requires anyway. Thats not possible, so the numbers dont add up.

Yah I put the + beside my $300, I'd made the point about it being closer to $600 in an earlier post.

I have been on a benefit some many years ago, I was raised on one for many many years and some of my family have been on a benefit for a LONG time and raised multiple kids, I think I understand the $ reasonably well, and bottom line is that my sister doesn't get $300 a kid from the government when their deadbeat Dad didn't pay up.

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1253876 9-Mar-2015 11:22

tdgeek:
networkn: jonathan time to get off your soapbox, bottom line is as someone pointed out, that as a student you get $175 a week, why is it supposed that at 18 you only need $175 but at 13 you need $300+?

I'd like someone who thinks a kid needs more than $300 a WEEK to tell me what they are spending that $300 on?

Reminder again, the $300 is the OP's half share, so its $600 per week for the child in total. So the point you are making is now twice the point, and I agree

Ask a solo mum with two kids who does not recieve CS as she is on DPB. The Govt gets it from the Dad. Shes already up for total childcare costs of $1200 per week, ignoring her own, and the housintg costs whuich she requires anyway. Thats not possible, so the numbers dont add up.

The cost calculated is not necessarily calculated as half the cost, it is calculated as the non custodial parents contribution

jonathan18

7413 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1253883 9-Mar-2015 11:29

networkn: jonathan time to get off your soapbox, bottom line is as someone pointed out, that as a student you get $175 a week, why is it supposed that at 18 you only need $175 but at 13 you need $300+?

I'd like someone who thinks a kid needs more than $300 a WEEK to tell me what they are spending that $300 on?

The first flaw here is that you assume the living costs component of a Student Loan (I'm assuming this is where your $175 figure comes from) is set at a level to adequately cover a student's liviing costs, whereas that is clearly not the case, so you're not comparing apples with apples, so to speak.

I doubt you'll find anyone to suggest that this will adequately cover most students' living costs, unless that person is living at home or similar. Student loan living costs remained static (at $150sh I think?) for many years; even once they started indexing them annually I believe it was just from that level, ie there was no attempt to 'reset' the amount taking into account increases in the cost of living during the period the rate wasn't adjustedI doubt that $150 a week was even adequate when the SL system was introduced.

The reality is most students are forced to source money fom elsewhere, whether it be employment during the termtime and fulltime employment during the holidays, or get help from parentD.

geoffwnz

1559 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

#1253884 9-Mar-2015 11:30

KiwiNZ:
tdgeek:
networkn: jonathan time to get off your soapbox, bottom line is as someone pointed out, that as a student you get $175 a week, why is it supposed that at 18 you only need $175 but at 13 you need $300+?

I'd like someone who thinks a kid needs more than $300 a WEEK to tell me what they are spending that $300 on?

Reminder again, the $300 is the OP's half share, so its $600 per week for the child in total. So the point you are making is now twice the point, and I agree

Ask a solo mum with two kids who does not recieve CS as she is on DPB. The Govt gets it from the Dad. Shes already up for total childcare costs of $1200 per week, ignoring her own, and the housintg costs whuich she requires anyway. Thats not possible, so the numbers dont add up.

The cost calculated is not necessarily calculated as half the cost, it is calculated as the non custodial parents contribution

This.
It's 18% (for the first child) of the paying parents income less a living expense allowance.
I noted that the living allowance that is given is less than I ended up having to pay. So why is my living allowance deemed to be less than what the child is expected to cost?
The problem I end up with is that the amount I have to pay uses up basically everything that isn't going on mortgage of living expenses.
The so called aim of the review is to balance up both households.
So it's certainly done that. The childs mother can't, due to her choice not to work, afford to do any activities with the child, and now, nor can I.

MotorDrive Rallying

tdgeek

29659 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1253886 9-Mar-2015 11:33

KiwiNZ:
tdgeek:
networkn: jonathan time to get off your soapbox, bottom line is as someone pointed out, that as a student you get $175 a week, why is it supposed that at 18 you only need $175 but at 13 you need $300+?

I'd like someone who thinks a kid needs more than $300 a WEEK to tell me what they are spending that $300 on?

Reminder again, the $300 is the OP's half share, so its $600 per week for the child in total. So the point you are making is now twice the point, and I agree

Ask a solo mum with two kids who does not recieve CS as she is on DPB. The Govt gets it from the Dad. Shes already up for total childcare costs of $1200 per week, ignoring her own, and the housintg costs whuich she requires anyway. Thats not possible, so the numbers dont add up.

The cost calculated is not necessarily calculated as half the cost, it is calculated as the non custodial parents contribution

So if I am the non custodial parent, and I am on $14-25 per hour, and my ex works she will have plenty to suppoprt the child? I make that $54 a week I will pay.
Say I was on $150k, thats $470 a week I pay. How do my example jobs map to a child's care costs. And these are my own contribuitons, not the ex's who also has to take responsibility, less her time involved.

AliExpress

Shop now on AliExpress (affiliate link).

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1253891 9-Mar-2015 11:39

one thing not being taken into account here is if the noncustodial parent suffers a change in financial circumstance and or hardship they can apply for a reduction in Child support down to as low as the minimum $10 per week, the custodial parent cannot get their costs dropped to $10 per week.

JaseNZ

2576 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Lifetime subscriber

#1253892 9-Mar-2015 11:40

Thanks for all your reply's , I guess some things about my own life and income so that everything is put in perspective.

My son lives 400kms away and comes and stays every school holidays , I pay for his flights down as my ex won't and I want to see and spend time with my son. He is 14 1/2.

My ex is not interested in coming to an arrangement between us as she prefers its all done through IRD.

My partner does not work and is unable to due to a health issue so I am the main income provider, under the new guidelines she is not taken into account like it used to be.

I earn 80k (gross) a year but if you take into account chch current rent ect we pretty much live week to week on my income.

Ding Ding Ding Ding Ding : Ice cream man , Ice cream man

kiwitrc

4123 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1253894 9-Mar-2015 11:41

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.

Do you get to see your kid(s) on a regular basis?

Athlonite

1828 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1253895 9-Mar-2015 11:42

KiwiNZ:
networkn: jonathan time to get off your soapbox, bottom line is as someone pointed out, that as a student you get $175 a week, why is it supposed that at 18 you only need $175 but at 13 you need $300+?

I'd like someone who thinks a kid needs more than $300 a WEEK to tell me what they are spending that $300 on?

You are not taking into account all the costs of raising a child.

And what costs would they be I have an 15 year old son who doesn't cost $300 a week to feed, cloth and so on and so forth

sidefx

3706 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted

#1253896 9-Mar-2015 11:42

Sounds like a number of people are pretty intent on make their children live on the absolute minimum possible?

My own "back-of-napkin" calculations went something like:

Rent - $130 (Need a house with an extra room - yeah in my experience an extra room adds a decent wack to rent)
Food - $50 (Yeah, kids eat a lot)
Transport - $25
School - $25
Household bills - $15 (Yes kids use power\water\phone\etc)
Clothing\Shoes - $25
Entertainment\Pocket Money - $15

Adding up to $285. Add in stuff I've forgotte, unexpected costs and some variation I don't think $300 is unreasonable... Don't start with the whole 50/50 thing please because I'd guess 5:2 or less is the most common split for caring for said child.

/me dons fireproof suit

"I was born not knowing and have had only a little time to change that here and there." | Octopus Energy | Sharesies
- Richard Feynman

MikeB4

18435 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified

Trusted

#1253898 9-Mar-2015 11:45

This is a difficult and emotive subject. There are no easy answers, however I believe that the system NZ has developed is a fair and equitable solution to a hard problem. Is it 100% correct, probably not and it will never meet 100% of all requirements. I have worked with both sides of the fence
and with the system before the current and the current. What we have now is by far the best.
What i kept in mind all the time of dealing with this was the most important part of the equation, the welfare of the child(ren) concerned.

Athlonite

1828 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1253899 9-Mar-2015 11:46

sidefx: Sounds like a number of people are pretty intent on make their children live on the absolute minimum possible?

My own "back-of-napkin" calculations went something like:

Rent - $130 (Need a house with an extra room - yeah in my experience an extra room adds a decent wack to rent)
Food - $50 (Yeah, kids eat a lot)
Transport - $25
School - $25
Household bills - $15 (Yes kids use power\water\phone\etc)
Clothing\Shoes - $25
Entertainment\Pocket Money - $15

Adding up to $285. Add in stuff I've forgotte, unexpected costs and some variation I don't think $300 is unreasonable... Don't start with the whole 50/50 thing please because I'd guess 5:2 or less is the most common split for caring for said child.

/me dons fireproof suit

why would you be paying a school $25 a week and clothing and shoes another $25 a week that's ridiculous what do you buy crap cloths/shoes that fall apart in a day and $15 dollars for pocket money I hope your making them work for it ie: dishes lawns tidy their room etc etc and each job not done see's an amount for that job deducted

kiwitrc

4123 posts

Uber Geek
Inactive user

#1253902 9-Mar-2015 11:51

sidefx: Sounds like a number of people are pretty intent on make their children live on the absolute minimum possible?

My own "back-of-napkin" calculations went something like:

Rent - $130 (Need a house with an extra room - yeah in my experience an extra room adds a decent wack to rent)
Food - $50 (Yeah, kids eat a lot)
Transport - $25
School - $25
Household bills - $15 (Yes kids use power\water\phone\etc)
Clothing\Shoes - $25
Entertainment\Pocket Money - $15

Adding up to $285. Add in stuff I've forgotte, unexpected costs and some variation I don't think $300 is unreasonable... Don't start with the whole 50/50 thing please because I'd guess 5:2 or less is the most common split for caring for said child.

/me dons fireproof suit

I think whats being missed in this is that rounding your figures up to an even $300 for example means that the OP is paying for ALL the cost of raising the kid. Why doesnt Mum ( or Dad in rare cases) not pay half of the $300?.

If you take the sharing argument of 5:2 it makes it even worse, try renting that extra room for the weekend only or asking Mum to send young Nigel along with 2 days worth of food/power/internet/phone. I would say its probably more like 12:2 ratio but the argument remains.

On top of this no non custodial parent wants to say no when the kid asks for this and that while spending time with Dad.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | ... | 12