Ottawa Divorce .com Forums


User CP

New posts

Advertising

  Ottawa Divorce .com Forums > Main Category > Political Issues

Political Issues This forum is for discussing the political aspects of divorce: reform to divorce laws, men's rights, women's rights, injustices in the divorce system, etc.

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2013, 03:54 PM
Janus's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,339
Janus will become famous soon enough
Default CS as an hourly wage

In another thread, somebody was saying (as a recipient) that she would be better off financially if she didn't have custody. The following is a random thought experiment:

Mom: Would have to pay table support of $1500/month if a NCP
Dad: Would have to pay table support of $700/month if NCP.

Mom Victory Custody Schedule: (MV)

Dad gets every Wed and alternating Fri/Sat/Sun.
36% overnights therefore full table CS
Dad pays Mom $700/month

Dad Victory Custody Schedule: (MV)

Mom gets every Wed and alternating Fri/Sat/Sun.
36% overnights therefore full table CS
Mom pays Dad $1500/month

Shared Custody: (SC)

Alternating weeks, or some other 50/50 arrangement
Mom pays Dad $800/month

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

So, how much do you earn per hour going between custody schedules?

Well, assuming that a parent works until 5pm, picks up the kids at 5:30pm, and has them asleep by 9:00pm, that is 3.5 hours of "work" per overnight, plus we'll say another 30 minutes in the morning. So, 4 hours of work per extra overnight.

Assume we start at MV. Moving from that to shared custody is an extra 2 days every 2 weeks, or about 4 days a month, so 16 hours of work. Dad gets an extra $1500 for making that move (instead of paying $700 he gets $800), which works out to about $93/hour. Not a bad gig for taking care of your own children!

Moving from shared custody to full custody takes another 16 hours of work a month, and garners an extra $700, which is "only" about $44 per hour.

Now, if we go the other way, and start off with the Dad having full custody, the numbers are actually the same (reversed of course). Going for DV to Shared earns the mom $44/hour, and going from shared to full custody earns $93/hour.

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$

I don't know about you people, but I would have a hard time spending even $44/hour on my children unless we were playing baseball with crystal vases on a daily basis.

Obviously, I made some assumptions. Some children go to bed at 8pm, which dramatically increases the amount you get paid per hour with your child. Incomes could be different as well, but if you are earning so little that you are only collecting about $25/hour for your child, then that $25/hour probably represents a very high wage.

Also, remember that the money I have described above is actually tax free, so the $93/hour is more like $155/hour gross, and the $44/hour is more like $73/hour gross.

For that much money, I'll take care of your kids too.
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2013, 03:59 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,448
Mess is a jewel in the roughMess is a jewel in the roughMess is a jewel in the roughMess is a jewel in the rough
Default

Can you convince my landlord that I only have to pay rent for the 3.5 hours we are awake at home please? Thanks.
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 02-27-2013, 04:04 PM
Janus's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,339
Janus will become famous soon enough
Default

If your landlord charges you higher rent when your kids are around, then you have a pretty interesting rental agreement.
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 02-28-2013, 12:09 AM
NBDad's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: New Brunswick
Posts: 2,734
NBDad is on a distinguished road
Default

Mess makes a valid point.

In an EOW scenario with 2 kids, you can get away with a 1 bedroom apartment and a pull out couch or folding cot. Going rate around here is around 600 all inclusive.

With a shared or full custody arrangements, you'd need at least 2-3 bedrooms.

That alone would increase your rent by 400-600 as an absolute requirement.

Now...this doesn't include the cost of food, clothing, utilities, having to take time off work because the kids are sick, the increased cost of gas/wear and tear on the vehicle to take them to appointments, back to school crap, winter gear, extra curriculars, driving them to their friends places, part time jobs, cell phone plans, etc, etc.

Financially speaking, for most people it is more cost effective to take the EOW screwjob, live in a 1-2 bedroom apartment, instead of a 3-5 bedroom one, and pay full table.

Most people that find their way to this forum are not fighting for monetary reasons. While I agree that the table amounts are ridiculous, unfortunately Janus, your logic in this instance is inherently flawed.
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 02-28-2013, 12:29 AM
Janus's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,339
Janus will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NBDad View Post
Mess makes a valid point.

In an EOW scenario with 2 kids, you can get away with a 1 bedroom apartment and a pull out couch or folding cot. Going rate around here is around 600 all inclusive.
So, if you have 5 days every 2 weeks, you can do that, but if you have 7 days every two weeks, you cannot? What is so special about the two days over the two weeks that suddenly changes the housing requirements?

Quote:
With a shared or full custody arrangements, you'd need at least 2-3 bedrooms.
Well, there is a nice bonus that comes with going from shared custody to 65% full custody, with no extra cost for housing.

Quote:
Now...this doesn't include the cost of food, clothing, utilities, having to take time off work because the kids are sick, the increased cost of gas/wear and tear on the vehicle to take them to appointments, back to school crap, winter gear, extra curriculars, driving them to their friends places, part time jobs, cell phone plans, etc, etc.
I'm not sure what you guys feed your kids, but it costs me something less than $200/night

Quote:
Financially speaking, for most people it is more cost effective to take the EOW screwjob, live in a 1-2 bedroom apartment, instead of a 3-5 bedroom one, and pay full table.
It is most cost effective to never see the children again. Once you are above 0% access, you are already looking at serious financial losses.

Quote:
Most people that find their way to this forum are not fighting for monetary reasons. While I agree that the table amounts are ridiculous, unfortunately Janus, your logic in this instance is inherently flawed.
I don't see how you have refuted my argument at all. You need to come up with a reason why 50% custody needs twice as much shelter costs as 35%, but even then you fall apart because 65% does not require any extra over 50%.

As for the food/clothing charges, I agree that it is a cost, but it is something substantially less than $44 to $93 per hour.

Also, at the core, I think everyone is fighting for financial reasons. Custodial parents want custody because of the cash. Get rid of the cash incentive, and suddenly shared custody is a break from the kids instead of a financial disaster. Almost all custodial parents accept access, because it doesn't hit them financially. They only get pissy when the NCP pushes for shared custody.
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 02-28-2013, 12:50 AM
wretchedotis's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: ON
Posts: 2,317
wretchedotis is on a distinguished road
Default

This is a ridiculous train of thought.

Completely based on false logic.

How often do you have your kid? If you honestly believe there is simply another 3.5 hours per day added to your work day - you got another thing coming.
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 02-28-2013, 06:08 PM
baldclub's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 456
baldclub is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NBDad View Post
Mess makes a valid point.

In an EOW scenario with 2 kids, you can get away with a 1 bedroom apartment and a pull out couch or folding cot. Going rate around here is around 600 all inclusive.
Well let's just say that is not the going rate in most of the country, at least where most of the population lives. I understand NB is like that though.

And I would like to add that having those kind of living arrangements is a surefire way of obtaining/maintaining the infamous EOW screwjob.

Have you put thought into a scenario where your children would comprise teenagers, and females at that who would need separate spaces?


Quote:
Originally Posted by NBDad View Post
Now this doesn't include the cost of food, clothing, utilities, having to take time off work because the kids are sick, the increased cost of gas/wear and tear on the vehicle to take them to appointments, back to school crap, winter gear, extra curriculars, driving them to their friends places, part time jobs, cell phone plans, etc, etc.
Actually this is already a lot covered for in my own regular costs. I could afford most of the above on my own, but as soon as I'm paying CS I have a tough time supporting for the necessities as the NCP. Shower me in CS and I'm laughing all the way to the bank. It doesn't take that much to make me laugh but I could finally put money away for the kids, not rack up huge credit card bills, buy even healthier food and maybe even take the kids to the movies once in a while. Holy crap, maybe a holiday like the ex is planning out of the continent.

WITH THE BIGGEST BENEFIT OF ALL: SPENDING HALF THE TIME WITH MY KIDS.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NBDad View Post
Financially speaking, for most people it is more cost effective to take the EOW screwjob, live in a 1-2 bedroom apartment, instead of a 3-5 bedroom one, and pay full table.
That is insane, with all due respect, if you want to take part fully in your children's lives. I could pay that kind of mortgage keeping my $1200/mth versus living in a one bedroom apartment with no room for my kids.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NBDad View Post
Most people that find their way to this forum are not fighting for monetary reasons. While I agree that the table amounts are ridiculous, unfortunately Janus, your logic in this instance is inherently flawed.
There is no way my ex is fighting me tooth and nail against 50/50 for anything else than the sheer power that money gives her in terms of control over me by way of the children. What is flawed is creating imbalances in families against the best interest of the children to enjoy a healthy standard of living in both parents' households.
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 02-28-2013, 06:13 PM
baldclub's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Ottawa
Posts: 456
baldclub is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wretchedotis View Post
This is a ridiculous train of thought.

Completely based on false logic.

How often do you have your kid? If you honestly believe there is simply another 3.5 hours per day added to your work day - you got another thing coming.
I have three kids. They are a handful, as they should be at that age. Yet many, many things they can do on their own, now it's more about guidance than direct hands on. I get the gist of his logic.
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 02-28-2013, 10:09 PM
Janus's Avatar
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2012
Posts: 1,339
Janus will become famous soon enough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by wretchedotis View Post
This is a ridiculous train of thought.
Again, it was based on another thread where somebody said that receiving CS was somehow more expensive than paying it.

That was a ridiculous statement. I figured that some concrete numbers would be more effective at showing that rather than vague statements.

Quote:
Completely based on false logic.
You are more than welcome to argue the logic.

Quote:
How often do you have your kid? If you honestly believe there is simply another 3.5 hours per day added to your work day - you got another thing coming.
I've had fully shared custody for a while, I'm single, and my living parent and the rest of my family does not live in the city. I think I have a pretty solid idea of what it takes to raise a child. Better luck on the next ad hominem attack.

Taking care of kids is easy and cheap. Food is only expensive in restaurants, and clothing is only expensive if it has a brand name on it. People who whine about getting insufficient support just need to shut up and learn how to cook, they are already being grossly overcompensated for the little that they do.
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 02-28-2013, 11:40 PM
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 407
mom2three is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Janus View Post
Again, it was based on another thread where somebody said that receiving CS was somehow more expensive than paying it.

That was a ridiculous statement. I figured that some concrete numbers would be more effective at showing that rather than vague statements.
Janus, if you are going to challenge someones statement, then please make sure that you get it correct. I never stated that receiving child support is more expensive than paying child support.

Everyone's situation is different so one cannot compare my circumstances with that of another. In my situation, my net income after expenses (including a payment of child support) would be MORE than it presently is, which includes child support, CCTB less child expenses. Essentially, the children's expenses presently grossly exceed child support paid and CCTB; the why of this is quite frankly, none of your business.
Closed Thread


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
wage garnishment question Motorhead168 Financial Issues 13 08-22-2012 12:30 PM
Wage Garnishment E-Gal Financial Issues 2 05-08-2012 07:55 AM
Inputing a wage nmhanlon Financial Issues 2 10-28-2010 03:50 PM
Wage Garnishment unfair courts nmhanlon Financial Issues 8 10-22-2010 12:03 AM
Wage Garnishment, Federal Garnishment... IronMama Financial Issues 12 09-08-2009 09:11 PM


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:33 PM.