Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Unbelievable.... I nearly threw up!!!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Unbelievable.... I nearly threw up!!!

    Every man must read this....

    The simple truth about why the law is so harsh and
    biased against men... It finally makes sense ....

    And I nearly threw up when I read it.....

    Child support and Kickbacks

    And to think that men are okay with this system
    makes me really wonder how dumb we men really
    are.

    Bof....

  • #2
    ''Child Support Recipients do not receive anything from the court saying how the money should be spent, so they can do whatever they want with it. And since records do not have to be kept, they can legally destroy any evidence that could show the money really went to new cars, cosmetic surgery, jewelry, or was given to new boyfriends, while their children's needs were being ignored. And as long as the evidence to dispute it does not exist, the payor has no way to contest it, yet recipients and politicians can keep claiming that they need even more money from the fathers.''

    Oh please! This is BS of the worst kind - I know plenty of CS recipients and not one of them is living it up as claimed in this article - most are just getting by. Also your article is based on US statistics and legislature.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Concerned View Post
      Every man must read this....

      The simple truth about why the law is so harsh and
      biased against men... It finally makes sense ....

      And I nearly threw up when I read it.....

      Child support and Kickbacks

      And to think that men are okay with this system
      makes me really wonder how dumb we men really
      are.

      Bof....
      It doesn't surprise me

      Sent from my SGH-I717D using Tapatalk

      Comment


      • #4
        I believe the article is almost 10 yrs old is it not?

        It would take quite the stretch of one's imagination to believe that all US judges make child custody rulings simply to kickback money to the individual state and deny fathers rights across the board. This reads like pre-election propaganda.

        Comment


        • #5
          Before we knock this article people, you
          may do some investigation of your own.

          Why don't ye all do a google search
          With the following words:

          "Judges states kickbacks child support 2013"

          You will be surprised at how many recent
          articles/UTUBE videos you will find on
          the subject.

          This needs to he investigated...
          The following questions need to be answered
          with either a yes or a no.... And not with
          a "I doubt this happens".

          - Does the federal governments give
          monterey incentives to the state based
          on the amounts of child support
          being granted >> y/n

          -If the above is yes, then to whom and
          how is this money distributed ???

          -And finally does this money end up
          in added salaries (kickbacks) for
          judges, lawyers and child support
          officials? >> y/n

          Do you realize that if any of
          the above questions are true,
          this so called child support law is
          based on a scam that makes
          judges overlook and neglect the
          well being of the non custodial
          parent so long as they grant the
          highest child support payments
          possible in order to raise their
          own kickbacks.

          If it works in the US, I am pretty sure it
          works the same way world wide ....
          Lets not be gulable here.

          In any case, to me, all of this biased divorce
          law against men stuff was deemed as ridiculous.
          Think about it, why would the non
          custodial parent ( usually the father ) be expected
          to pay CS payments BASED on their earnings ???
          This never made sense until now.

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Concerned View Post
            Before we knock this article people, you
            may do some investigation of your own.

            Why don't ye all do a google search
            With the following words:

            "Judges states kickbacks child support"

            You will be surprised at how many recent
            articles/UTUBE videos you will find on
            the subject.

            This needs to he investigated...
            The following questions need to be answered
            with either a yes or a no.... And not with
            a "I doubt this happens".

            - Does the federal governments give
            monterey incentives to the state based
            on the amounts of child support
            being granted >> y/n

            -If the above is yes, then to whom and
            how is this money distributed ???

            -And finally does this money end up
            in added salaries (kickbacks) for
            judges, lawyers and child support
            officials? >> y/n

            Do you realize that if any of
            the above questions are true,
            this so called child support law is
            based on a scam that makes
            judges overlook and neglect the
            well being of the non custodial
            parent so long as they grant the
            highest child support payments
            possible in order to raise their
            own kickbacks.

            If it works in the US, I am pretty sure it
            works the same way world wide ....
            Lets not be gulable here.

            In any case, to me, all of this biased divorce
            law against men stuff pretty much makes
            sense now. Think about it, fathers are expected
            to pay very high CS payments based on their
            earnings which oronicly would be total acceptable
            to me if I were a Judge!!
            I think I know who in this thread is truly gullible.

            The salaries of judges and most public officials are very well known, and published. Getting kickbacks would violate all the codes of conduct that law societies and governments have.

            We live in a democracy where parties fight it out to win popularity. If what you suggest was actually the case, some politician would have run it up the flag pole and pushed to get legislation in place to stop it.

            Comment


            • #7
              So here's another article with a link which demonstrates how the incentive payments are distributed:

              State incentive to collect child support : Bigger piece of Federal funds pie | Leon Koziol.Com

              And besides the point, how do we really know what's going on behind closed doors... Are you a judge, are you a lawyer, are you part of the court house financial management team, and even if you were, would someone holding these occupations really tell the truth. I could be wrong, but something tells me otherwise. There is too many complaints, too many lob sided and unexplained divorce law judgments which simply point to these articles holding the motive for their malicious intentions against men.

              Comment


              • #8
                I am in that field. There is no such thing. Judges do not, in any way shape or form, receive ANY benefit from ordering child support. In fact, they have a lot to lose should they ever receive a kick-back for issuing an order, like their job and criminal charges.

                A kick-back by definition, is a bribe. Bribing a public official is illegal.

                The government requires c/s to be paid as it is in the child's best interests, and the interests of society as a whole. It puts the responsibility on those it rightly should be, the parents, and not the general public who would likely otherwise have to bear the costs through subsidies, welfare and increased taxes.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Concerned View Post
                  So here's another article with a link which demonstrates how the incentive payments are distributed:

                  State incentive to collect child support : Bigger piece of Federal funds pie | Leon Koziol.Com

                  And besides the point, how do we really know what's going on behind closed doors... Are you a judge, are you a lawyer, are you part of the court house financial management team, and even if you were, would someone holding these occupations really tell the truth. I could be wrong, but something tells me otherwise. There is too many complaints, too many lob sided and unexplained divorce law judgments which simply point to these articles holding the motive for their malicious intentions against men.
                  ... and don't forget CAS, OCL, interim places/shelters are all part of the same biased system.

                  Sent from my SGH-I717D using Tapatalk

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    A few things to note. Direct Kickbacks are stupid that doesn't happen. There is an indirect kickback though.
                    -33% of court cases in Canada are family law cases (i.e: work for judges)
                    -historically, judges are pretty much untouchable (i.e: they DONT have a lot to lose)
                    -the whole taxation, child support, spousal support scheme is made to:
                    a) ensure nobody is on welfare (costing state money)
                    b) maximizing tax collection
                    c) has no regards for the payor

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Concerned View Post
                      So here's another article with a link which demonstrates how the incentive payments are distributed:

                      State incentive to collect child support : Bigger piece of Federal funds pie | Leon Koziol.Com

                      And besides the point, how do we really know what's going on behind closed doors... Are you a judge, are you a lawyer, are you part of the court house financial management team, and even if you were, would someone holding these occupations really tell the truth. I could be wrong, but something tells me otherwise. There is too many complaints, too many lob sided and unexplained divorce law judgments which simply point to these articles holding the motive for their malicious intentions against men.
                      First off, that link demonstrates performance payouts for states, not payoffs for judges.

                      Secondly, that is a US link, and there isn't any proof of anything like that for Canada. As a poli sci student I did much research on Federal Provincial transfers, and never saw any kind of "incentive based payment" let alone one like you suggest may exist.

                      Am I a lawyer? No. Do I know lawyers, sure I do. I know the Dean of a law school, as well as many other lawyers in many fields. My ex worked at the second largest law firm in the country. I was heavily involved in politics and you couldn't swing a cat at a political meeting without hitting a lawyer.

                      I'm going to point out that lawyers are on opposing sides during divorce court, and losing lawyers would very quickly complain if there was a kickback scheme that made them lose on a consistent basis.

                      Finally I will leave you this: Extraordinary claims (as this is) require extraordinary proofs, which you have not provided. All I see is wild eyed speculation.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        I am in that field. There is no such thing. Judges do not, in any way shape or form, receive ANY benefit from ordering child support. In fact, they have a lot to lose should they ever receive a kick-back for issuing an order, like their job and criminal charges.

                        A kick-back by definition, is a bribe. Bribing a public official is illegal.

                        The government requires c/s to be paid as it is in the child's best interests, and the interests of society as a whole. It puts the responsibility on those it rightly should be, the parents, and not the general public who would likely otherwise have to bear the costs through subsidies, welfare and increased taxes.
                        First and foremost in the next paragraph, I would like to point out that I am NOT talking about those custodial parents that don't receive any child support from their exe's. I sympathize if you should be in such a situation! However, I am talking about greed here... I am talking about the non-custodial parent that invested a lot of personal energy to get to a stage where they have a good living going for them but when in divorce, the courts pull it right out under their feet.

                        Having said this, then can you explain to me why is it that a child support payment is based on the non-custodial parent's salary without a maximum cap? You hear judgments like a custodial parent receiving 3,4 even 5K a month in child support. Why the abusive payments?

                        Judges are intelligent individuals and they know that a whole family can be supported with 10K/year or less!!! Why would a single mom/dad want an EXTRA 36 to 60K$ (tax free) to live and support a child ?

                        There has to be some sort of incentive for a judge to prescribe such a brutal payment. And don't get back to me an tell me that its because the custodial parent's life style needs to be preserved !!! That is total BS put forwards by judges again!!

                        The government requires c/s to be paid as it is in the child's best interests, and the interests of society as a whole. ....
                        Naaaaaaa that's too easy, there's more to it than that....

                        You know what hammerdad, I run two corps, I know what accounting books are supposed to look like, I know what in and out entries look like in financial book keeping. I know how advances to shareholder and dividends entries look like and more.

                        And if you are in this field, let me ask you a question, have you seen all the checks that go out from the federal government... have you seen all the checks that come into the state's bank accounts? All the judge's salaries may be made public alright, but frankly, I would love to sit down with a government accountant and look over federal government's bank account's general ledger and see all the entries that depict to whom, why and where alllllllll checks are going ---one by one.

                        Then I would like the expense report from all the states receiving any money from the federal government and see exactly where this money goes.

                        Lots can happen in the dark!

                        I am sorry hammerdad, I just don't buy it.

                        Something beneath you and I and everyone else is going on here.

                        Everything is backed up by the same excuses:

                        - Best interest of the child... its like as if we want to feed all our children with Champaign and caviar !!!! Anyone man or women can bring up a healthy child while going to work plus getting a reasonable child support payment! There are plenty of day cares around and collaborative help towards day to day life chores involving the child form the non-custodial parent should always be available.

                        -The same lifestyle needs to be maintained.... sorry, that's what a divorce is.... break up, torn apart, broken, split-up, division, separation are all words that mean divorce.... why would judges increase the child support so much that it would contribute to maintain the other "divorced" half to the same life style.... It makes no sense!!! The only sense I see in this intent is kickbacks! If you don't agree, show me the books!

                        -A man is stronger than a woman and therefore if a man hits a women he should be jailed, but if a women hits a man we let it go because a man is much stronger than a women... I say BS. This too points to kickbacks, the more the law punishes men (but not women) for violence, the more the marriage takes a tendency towards divorce... the more divorces the more kickbacks. Don't believe it? Prove me wrong!

                        Everything in this divorce field has an excuse to elude the probable dark kickback system that may have, may be and may always be in place !

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Concerned View Post
                          First and foremost in the next paragraph, I would like to point out that I am NOT talking about those custodial parents that don't receive any child support from their exe's. I sympathize if you should be in such a situation! However, I am talking about greed here... I am talking about the non-custodial parent that invested a lot of personal energy to get to a stage where they have a good living going for them but when in divorce, the courts pull it right out under their feet.

                          Having said this, then can you explain to me why is it that a child support payment is based on the non-custodial parent's salary without a maximum cap? You hear judgments like a custodial parent receiving 3,4 even 5K a month in child support. Why the abusive payments?

                          Judges are intelligent individuals and they know that a whole family can be supported with 10K/year or less!!! Why would a single mom/dad want an EXTRA 36 to 60K$ (tax free) to live and support a child ?

                          There has to be some sort of incentive for a judge to prescribe such a brutal payment. And don't get back to me an tell me that its because the custodial parent's life style needs to be preserved !!! That is total BS put forwards by judges again!!

                          Naaaaaaa that's too easy, there's more to it than that....

                          You know what hammerdad, I run two corps, I know what accounting books are supposed to look like, I know what in and out entries look like in financial book keeping. I know how advances to shareholder and dividends entries look like and more.

                          And if you are in this field, let me ask you a question, have you seen all the checks that go out from the federal government... have you seen all the checks that come into the state's bank accounts? All the judge's salaries may be made public alright, but frankly, I would love to sit down with a government accountant and look over federal government's bank account's general ledger and see all the entries that depict to whom, why and where alllllllll checks are going ---one by one.

                          Then I would like the expense report from all the states receiving any money from the federal government and see exactly where this money goes.

                          Lots can happen in the dark!

                          I am sorry hammerdad, I just don't buy it.

                          Something beneath you and I and everyone else is going on here.

                          Everything is backed up by the same excuses:

                          - Best interest of the child... its like as if we want to feed all our children with Champaign and caviar !!!! Anyone man or women can bring up a healthy child while going to work plus getting a reasonable child support payment! There are plenty of day cares around and collaborative help towards day to day life chores involving the child form the non-custodial parent should always be available.

                          -The same lifestyle needs to be maintained.... sorry, that's what a divorce is.... break up, torn apart, broken, split-up, division, separation are all words that mean divorce.... why would judges increase the child support so much that it would contribute to maintain the other "divorced" half to the same life style.... It makes no sense!!! The only sense I see in this intent is kickbacks! If you don't agree, show me the books!

                          -A man is stronger than a woman and therefore if a man hits a women he should be jailed, but if a women hits a man we let it go because a man is much stronger than a women... I say BS. This too points to kickbacks, the more the law punishes men (but not women) for violence, the more the marriage takes a tendency towards divorce... the more divorces the more kickbacks. Don't believe it? Prove me wrong!

                          Everything in this divorce field has an excuse to elude the probable dark kickback system that may have, may be and may always be in place !
                          Concerned, it's all business here, best interest of the kids?! BS... maybe in their best interest yes, splitting families apart it's their job, and everyone has a job to do, CAS, OCL, cops, shelters...good life, go fatherlessness go, that's the reality, face it or not!

                          Sent from my SGH-I717D using Tapatalk

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            First off, that link demonstrates performance payouts for states, not payoffs for judges.
                            Okay, so where does the money go? If you are very involved you must know where this money goes right... asides from fixing the streets and parks, I am sure some of it goes to the court house maintenances etc... ! right? give me a few examples...

                            As a poli sci student I did much research on Federal Provincial transfers, and never saw any kind of "incentive based payment" let alone one like you suggest may exist.
                            And YOU and many others including ME may never see one !

                            Am I a lawyer? No. Do I know lawyers, sure I do. I know the Dean of a law school, as well as many other lawyers in many fields. My ex worked at the second largest law firm in the country. I was heavily involved in politics and you couldn't swing a cat at a political meeting without hitting a lawyer.
                            And who's to say that those lawyers that you and I know, would know exactly where all the money goes huh? In my own companies, I have thousands of checks being issued, ask me if I know where aaaalllll these checks go. Imagine how many loose ends there can be in the government and state administration that layers wouldn't be aware of. C'mon guys, we are all assuming these governments are 100% sincere... corruption is everywhere, even in a judges backyard.

                            I'm going to point out that lawyers are on opposing sides during divorce court, and losing lawyers would very quickly complain if there was a kickback scheme that made them lose on a consistent basis.
                            again, how, how, how would they know?

                            Finally I will leave you this: Extraordinary claims (as this is) require extraordinary proofs, which you have not provided. All I see is wild eyed speculation.
                            [/QUOTE]

                            Sooooooo, we agree that an open investigation is required to produce an in depth analyses of the governments (US, Canadian etc...) financial books and trace all payments! Yes its a big task, but if they are doing this, this would be the most unethical fraud that would be committed. No one should be able to get away with this.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Concerned, it's all business here, best interest of the kids?! BS... maybe in their best interest yes, splitting families apart it's their job, and everyone has a job to do, CAS, OCL, cops, shelters...good life, go fatherlessness go, that's the reality, face it or not!
                              aaahggr! There's just too much agony on men's part for this to be that simple!!! It's deep, dark, out of reach and unethical. If we all choose not to believe this kickback stuff is one thing, but why not prove it.

                              I have seen the faces on judges giving out these child support judgments, their faces aren't sincere, they have greed written all over them!

                              Look no one knows me here, but when I smell a rat, I am rarely wrong!

                              Concerned!

                              Comment

                              Our Divorce Forums
                              Forums dedicated to helping people all across Canada get through the separation and divorce process, with discussions about legal issues, parenting issues, financial issues and more.
                              Working...
                              X