Everything here was supposed to disappear. Banned subreddits, deleted communities, cancelled blogs — much of what is archived here survives nowhere else.
It stays free — no paywall, no account — for the next man who comes looking, the way it was free for you.
I pay for the servers, the storage and the bandwidth myself. If you want this record still standing in ten years, become one of the people who keeps it online.
Support the archive
[–]vrblpolushin 6 points7 points8 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]factspissyouoff 2 points3 points4 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[+]ThrowHandGrenades points [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link
My two cents: child support has absolutely nothing to do with the cost of raising a child. Dad's income is all that matters. I've often pointed out that divorced celebrity dads, such as Tiger Woods, pay 20 times more in child support than I do. Does the milk his kids drink cost 20 times more than mine? Do their clothes cost 20 times more? If I work my ass off, and get a 25% raise, does it suddenly cost 25% more to raise my kids? According to Family Court logic, yes.
If I have business expenses, and want my boss to cover them, I need to show receipts. I've never seen any receipts for what it costs to raise my kids. If I get my kids for a month over the summer, Family Court logic dictates that I still pay my ex-wife child support for that month.
Naturally, some women will argue that kids need to live in a house, so child support should include rent and utilities. And kids need rides, so dad should, in the name of 'child support', make car payments, gas, insurance, and so on.
So, to answer your question: yes, absolutely, child support can be de facto 'free money' for mom.
[–]Futurist110 0 points1 point2 points (0 children) | Copy Link
[–]grasshopa 1 point2 points3 points (1 child) | Copy Link
[–]Futurist110 5 points6 points7 points (0 children) | Copy Link