Nice reply, The injustices that are reported in this newagroup leaves
me feeling outraged.  I think that the best service that the Internet
provides is the ability to expose what is really being done. 

On Thu, 22 Feb 1996 05:01:18 -0500, you wrote:


>	Rex Ballard - Director of Electronic Distribution
>	http://cnj.digex.net/~rballard
>On Wed, 21 Feb 1996, bright wrote:
>> Rex Ballard wrote:
>> > > stevldge@bright.net wrote:
>> > > >There is only one thing needs to be said.
>> > > >
>> > > > There are those who pay, and there are those who recieve.
>> > > >Which would you rather do? duh! Child support is nothing
>> > > >but a damn lottery. Wish I could get pregnant.
>> > >
>> > > I wish you could too, cause you would get a real wake-up call real
>> > > quick.
>> > 
>> 
>> > There's a real ugly suprise for both parties isn't there.  When you 
>> >were talking 20%, you didn't realize that your taxes would be going up 
>> >10-20%, that you would now have to pay two rent bills, two utility 
>> >bills, two car bills, and pay for two meal preparations every day.
>> > If two can live as cheaply as one, and a third is only a little more, 
>> >how come the NCP gets to pay for Lion's share of both households?
>> > 
>> > There are some solutions for CPs:
>> > 
>> >Get a job (the most strategic time for a divorce is just before the
>> >youngest starts school, this way you get maximum child support, maximum
>> >day-care, and you're income can be minimum wage for 10 hours/week, 
>> >after the decree, the kids start school, you can find some stud on 
>> >disability who will "sit for sex", and pocket 100% of the income on a 
>> >REAL job.
>> > 
>> >Get a man (the new husband's income isn't figured into the
>> >child-support equation at all - talk about "Dead-Beats").
>> 
>> ************************************************************************
>>You are SAD...  I suppose that ALL CP's are Female in your little mind 
>> aren't they!  The SPOUSE'S income of the NCP as well as the CP is never 
>> equaled into the CS payments...  that is fair.

>For whatever reason, women don't get gouged nearly as bad as a man.  A 
>man gets hit for about 20% of his gross income or 50% of his net income.
>A woman often pays as little as 5% of her gross or 20% of her net.

>> ************************************************************************ 
>> >Get a disabled man (he has a secure disability income, can baby-sit
>> >while you'e at work, and you can throw him out if he gets ugly or
>> >abusive - the ultimate "Dead-Beat").
>> > 
>> >Warning - some of these "Sitters for Sex" are also child molesters.
>> > 
>> > Sleep well!
>> 
>> ************************************************************************
>> You're implamations that disabled individuals are good to our society 
>> for Substatue parents, Baby Sitters, Abusive Relations, Sex Objects, Sex 
>> Offenders, Dead Beats and a base for Free Income for CP's who get no 
>> support from the NCP is derived from where?!?!?  You should be 
>> completely ashamed of your-self, but I highly doubt that you are.

>My ex is married to a nice disabled dead-beat.  He had a math degree when 
>they got married, he has been going to college for his B.A. for 5 years 
>(using my day-care money to do it).

>This was just a nice way of supplementing the child support.  I agreed to 
>pay $300/month for day-care in addition to the child support so that she 
>could work.  She decided to go to college instead of go to work, she 
>decided to "Pay" her husband instead of putting them in licenced 
>day-care.  And I couldn't report my payments to him because it would 
>"mess up his disability".  She injured her shoulder and started 
>collecting workman's comp and SSI disability.  They are both on medicaid 
>but I pay $500/month for HMO insurance for the kids.

>> This Male VS Female attitude is purely juvenile and is predominat in 
>> most of the articles posted here.  

>> The Childs Welfare is the subject, not sexuality, gender or which parent 
>> grosses the largest income.

>The goverment has a highly vested interest in making sure that the person 
>who gets the largest income does not get the children.  The higher income 
>can be taxed at the single rate.  The higher income will result in higher 
>child support.  If "Social Services" gets into the picture, they can 
>pocket a substantial percentage for "collection fees" and "escrow".  They 
>pay the mother the same amount they would pay under AFDC but the father 
>can pay 2 or 3 times that amount.

>> There tremendous numbers of NCPs who are 
>> OVER CHARGED and/or kept from their children those CPs do not care,
>The current laws ENCOURAGE this type of alienation.  The less the father 
>sees the kids, the more he has to pay.  The CP has to be much more 
>careful about how she raises the kid if the NCP is breathing fire, just 
>waiting for a hint of abuse than can be substantiated to the authorities.

>The law pits parent against parent, turns the children into pawns, and 
>then collects as much as 3 times revenue that it would from parents who 
>remarry.  This system penalizes remarriage of the NCP and rewards 
>irresponsible marriages of the CP.  The CP loses notheing if she 
>remarries.  The NCP gets no reduction if he marries a woman with children.

>> or there would be alot of re-assessments made,

>> But, there are the NCPs hwo 
>> do not pay a dime or even want to be reminded of the child...

>Children conceived by:  prostitutes?  women taking birth control pills 
>along with their cocaine?  Women who pick a nice responsible guy for a 
>"one night stand" that gets him nailed for 20 years?  Women who milk the 
>condom and inseminate themselves when they take the condom to the 
>bathroom?  Women who have learned to tighten their vaginal muscles in 
>such a way that the condom breaks without being felt?

>>  This is a  dead-beat!

>The man who begs his lover to have his child, brags to the whole 
>neighborhood that he's a "real man" now that he's a poppa, and then 
>dissappears from the face of the earth to convince another woman to have 
>his baby - THAT'S a dead-beat!

>The 5 guys who went to bed with this woman, and 15 others without using a 
>condom and just "got lucky" in the baby lottery.  THOSE are DEAD-BEATS.

>The guy who rapes a woman when she's 15 or 16 and leaves a woman with 
>emotional scars that must be endured by her emotionally castrated 
>subsequent husband.  HE is a DEAD-BEAT!

>> A CP who will any excuse not work or go back to school and 
>> uses the chil(ren) as a crutch for their defecit is a dead-beat!  

>How about the step-father or boyfriend trades "sitting for sex, room, and 
>board" paid for by the NCP?  How about the "step-daddy" who uses the 
>child-support to supplement his 6 figure income while the NCP lives in a 
>"room" in a "slum".

>> Leave your delusions at the door.   

>All it is is delusions isn't it?  When the judge hears the case, there 
>are all those little tidbits of information you aren't allowed to present 
>that would be mitigating and aggrevating circumstances in a criminal 
>trial.  The judge just assumes that he knows everything there is to know 
>about the entire marriage, and ruins the lives of 3 or more people for 20 
>or more years.

>What's really great is that men are being arrested, jailed, and even 
>killed, for not fulfilling a contract which isn't being honored, 
>based on a hearing that violated the constituion AND the Bill of Rights, 
>and then.

>Let's face it.  It's much more "profitable" to go after "Nice Guys" who 
>make "Good Money" and force them to pay through the "Social Services 
>funnel" than to go after the REAL Deadbeats.

>I was a virgin until I was 21.
>I was faithful to my wife for the duration of the relationship.
>She remarried within two weeks of the divorce (I caught the garter in my 
>folded arms).
>She wanted $400/month.  The Judge demanded $500 plus $600 in 
>miscellanious benefits.
>I am paid in full (I pay $700 + $500 in benefits).
>I also pay an extra 10% in taxes.
>At my ex's request - I have seen my kids for 12 hours in 3 years.  The 
>order says I can see them for 48 hours every 2 weeks.

>These are my REALITIES.

>> ************************************************************************> > --'Mina--
>> > > sent from the sands of the Chesapeake Bay
>> > > http://www.cris.com/~Armina
>> > Rex

>> CONGRESS.SYS corrupted; Re-Format WASH_DC (Y/N)? Y

>Rex





From rballard@cnj.digex.net Mon Mar  4 11:30:48 1996