"They have influenced the courts..."

[karmaseeker]

Don't delude yourself to think the game of family law is NOT set up to strip you of your resources and keep you distracted by the continual conflict.





Message To Humanity: The Time is Now - The Revolution Is Coming! - YouTube





DEBT = Slavery!

[karmaseeker]

Who are Canada's one per cent?



Hmmm.... and who is paying for the judges and Lawyers? YOU ARE!

and who is paying the politicians salaries that have created the system to drain you of your money? YOU ARE!

[karmaseeker]

Occupy Canada rallies spread in economic 'awakening' - Canada - CBC News

[karmaseeker]

Just the raw categories give a more effective display of the disparity in incomes between the few and the many.

Total number of Canadians reporting income in 2009: 24,964,290.
Income Range Individuals
in range % of total
under $5,000 ….................2,109,110 (8.45%)
$5,000 to $10,000 .............2,040,050 (8.17%)
$10,000 to $15,000 ...........2,458,930 (9.85%)
$15,000 to $20,000 ...........2,507,230 (10.04%)
$20,000 to $25,000 ...........2,007,100 (8.12%)
$25.000 to $35,000 ..........3,366,970 (13.49%)
$35,000 to $50,000 ...........3,995,960 (16.01%)
$50,000 to $75,000 ...........3,549,520 (14.22%)
$75,000 to $100,000 .........1,566,270 (6.27%)
$100.000 to $150,000..........869,750 (3.48%)
$150,000 to $200,000 ..........225,950 (0.91%)
$200,000 to $250,000 .......... 90,930 (0.36%)
$250.000 and above.............156,520 (0.63%)

Of the 24,964,290, some 11,142,420 reported incomes of $25,000 or less and a further 12,478,700 reported incomes between $25,000 and $100,000. These two groupings represent 94.6% of all Canadians reporting income in 2009, leaving only 5.4 % if Canadians reporting incomes above $100,000.

The first of these groupings is likely made up of minimum to low wage earners, part-time job holders and pensioners. The second grouping is the Canadian middle class.

The 1,343,150 Canadians who reported income of more that $100,000 is only about 4 % of the total Canadian population

And remember, these figures do not account for those even fewer Canadians who measure their wealth from sources that are something other than annual income.


If you are too busy bickering with your ex.... your not going to notice the ones driving off with your money!!! And what leverage is used ... your children!

'let's set up a system that lets people use the courts for greed and vindictive bulling, let them away with injustice and abuse so that they are forced into unnecessary and lengthy legal battles, thus draining them of power and $. They'll be too busy trying to protect their kids and deluded into believing in "justice" they'll never notice.

We'll drag it out as long as possible and call it Case Management. We'll pay the judges lots of money so they won't say anything and then the lawyers will busy themselves writing countless pointless letters - they'll be making money so they'll keep quite.

We'll create a table to use a means to get parents to fight over their children because we want to create disparity but tell them it is fair and an equal split of their resources. We'll let enough slide by with what is fair by the 40% rule and treat everyone under 40% like a dead beat so they will fight amongst themselves about how fair or not the system is. We'll allow them to give false allegations and let them try to strip each other of their natural right as a parent with no just cause. Mwa ha haa haa. It's an ingenious plan!"


Wake up!

[Tayken]

Hardening your argument recommendation:

1. It would be interesting if you could relate the % of the high-income earners that are solicitors.

2. More weight to the argument you are presenting would be added if a % of the high-income earners in the top were in fact solicitors.

3. Statistics on separation and divorce can then be layered on top to demonstrate how the bottom half of the income earners are dependent on the 1% in the cycle you describe.

4. If the numbers are cogent you could demonstrate that of the middle to low incomes what % of their disposable income is spent on Family Law, how much is given to the top % and how much is paid back into the system through Income Tax.

5. The numbers would demonstrate your theory in my opinion. The problem is finding the source for the statistics that are cogent and have weight.

Good Luck!
Tayken

[karmaseeker]

Tayken,

If you need more statistics and to have them overlaying other numbers - sounds like you have a project for yourself.

Great proposal. I will look forward to your results.

I don't need the numbers to know the truth nor do I need convincing. My role is simply to motivate more people to think outside the box and learn that they have more power than they think.

I am just the friendly motivator for change.

[shellshocked22]

To add a comment to Tayken's, if possible (which I suspect it isn't) you really want to define the solicitor issue to "family law" lawyers. That is, a real estate "lawyer" has no stake in maintaining the current evil and twisted system.

[Rioe]

Originally Posted by shellshocked22

To add a comment to Tayken's, if possible (which I suspect it isn't) you really want to define the solicitor issue to "family law" lawyers. That is, a real estate "lawyer" has no stake in maintaining the current evil and twisted system.

I wouldn't say they had no stake in it. How many separating couples have to deal with a real estate lawyer to handle the transfer of a matrimonial home?

I know I was dismayed to find out I would have to hire a whole new lawyer just to get my ex off the title to our house, when it seems as though it ought to be possible to just go to the land registry office and wave the relevant pages of the separation agreement around.

[Tayken]

Originally Posted by shellshocked22

To add a comment to Tayken's, if possible (which I suspect it isn't) you really want to define the solicitor issue to "family law" lawyers. That is, a real estate "lawyer" has no stake in maintaining the current evil and twisted system.

If only the statistic existed. But, excellent point.

[karmaseeker]

Originally Posted by shellshocked22

To add a comment to Tayken's, if possible (which I suspect it isn't) you really want to define the solicitor issue to "family law" lawyers. That is, a real estate "lawyer" has no stake in maintaining the current evil and twisted system.

I'm not sure why you think I have time to go on a statical hunt to prove that solicitors in general earn more income the longer the conflict. That is common sense.

It is not like these lawyers are saying "I won't get paid unless you win" or "here is the fixed fee for completing your case and I won't go above that."

Common!

I am not saying that Lawyers are the perpetrators of a defunct system I am saying they are part of a system created by the one 1% to create debt. If you are in debt you are controllable.

Solicitors happily go along with the system as it is because they get paid high salaries to do it.

If the system was really designed for conflict resolution they would be handled as swiftly as you would find in an arbitration setting.

Two parties walk in - state their cases. Debate a bit. Compromise a bit. and then Judge makes final decision. But nope, you have go to court for multiple appearances spanned out over years and years. Can you imagine if Union walk outs were handled like this?

Time is money. And as long as it is your money they couldn't care less how much time it takes. The longer the better - because time = more money for them!

But for those of you that want to go get piles of statistics to back up what to me is basic profits over people economics. Please feel free to go prove me wrong or prove me right. Let your curiousity guide you!