SS Again

[billiechic]

There is a HUGE difference in their wages, and one of them made sacrifices in their career to advance the career of the other. I STRONGLY believe he has a case for SS. If he was a woman, there would be no question about it. GO FOR IT!

[LostFather]

Originally Posted by billiechic

There is a HUGE difference in their wages, and one of them made sacrifices in their career to advance the career of the other. I STRONGLY believe he has a case for SS. If he was a woman, there would be no question about it. GO FOR IT!

I'm with you on this one, there is a huge difference in income, and there were sacrifices made.

But again, as in my earlier post, where does it all end, and maybe not in this specific case, but what about when concideration for SS and (I know where not talking about it but) CS, puts the other (payor) in the disadvantage?

I think that when it comes to entitlement and need, these factors need to be considered, if I may go as far to say, the system is in dire need of revamping.

As Mess stated and I am not in agreement, the system that "we have is a system where the law applies equally....". I am not sure that the system is equally applied, and there are a number of experts out there that have more experience/education on the subject than I.

There has been certainly a lot of opinions thrown around on this topic, and I started to bring in the CS aspects of need vs entitlement which hindsight maybe I shouldn't left that one for another topic.

Hey maybe that can be the new topic! CS and SS Need vs Entitlement

[ONdad]

I'm concerned about a few things with regards to the income differential. I know that I make decent money, but I won't be able to do the things with my daughter that my STBX can do. Almost yearly trips to Europe are out of the question for me with my salary. She can afford a much nicer house than I'll be able to, will be able to take my daughter to any attractions, overnight stays around Ontario, buy her new furniture, etc.

On the other hand, I'll be on a strict budget with about $1200 a year for vacations, and that's if I can stick to my budget. My step-daughter can do whatever she wants to at her dad's place, but she spends all her time at our house because it's much nicer than his, we have a lot more stuff like games and Wii, and she gets to go away a lot with my STBX. That makes me worried that, in the shallow teenage years, I could end up with very little time with my daughter. That's what's not fair.

I also worry that I'll be hauled into court a lot down the road for stupid, frivolous stuff. I will have a hard time paying for all of the legal fees while she'll have no problem at all.

I really don't think that a payor should be impoverished by payments, but even with the offset CS and SS she'd still be much better off than me. With all of it, I would still only be at 45% of her NDI and that doesn't take into account that she could easily make $30-50k or more in bonuses every year.

[asnf]

With STBX annual income, she is to pay $1,402 monthly for each child as CS. This is the table amount as calculated on the link below:

http://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/pi/fcy-...t=Reset#Lookup.

[ONdad]

Originally Posted by asnf

With STBX annual income, she is to pay $1,402 monthly for each child as CS. This is the table amount as calculated on the link below:

Public Legal Education and Information Organizations Across Canada.

Yep, but then I offset that amount and it comes down to around $680, according to last year's income for her.

[CISTEAD]

Give it a shot, sounds to me like you have a chance for sure. Good luck, I hope you get it.