Messages

> I never offered any opinions on the subject.  I don't know
>if the system is broke or it's not.  Funny thing about using
>figures, though.  Figures can lie, and liars can figure.  You

Then feel free to show what's wrong with the data I've presented.

>can take any set of figures and manipulate them to support
>your argument.  Until you poll every person  you will never
>truly know what the actual percentage is of people that think
>the system is broken.    

So your solution is to completely ignore all the facts and fall back on unverifiable rants from people posting anonymously on a complaint board?


>And for some, the system is broken.  It is unfair to them.


No one ever said the system was perfect.

>Like I said before people with nothing to hide will hide
>nothing.  I think it's pretty clear what you are trying to
>hide by refusing to submit child support laws and guidelines
>that ensure that the financial needs of the children will be
>met.  Heck you haven't even made any type of inteligent
>attempt to refute anything that I have said.  You can keep
>talking out your ass if you choose to, but I doubt anyone here
>is taking you seriously.  

And, yet, I'm the only one who has provided any real evidence - a study showing that the system is working in at least 89% of the cases. Where is your non-anecdotal data?

>
>I've wasted enough of my time presenting an inteligent
>response to your baseless rantings.  So for now I am done
>until you post something of substance to support your
>opinions.  


Funny. You have been whining constantly about how broken the system is - without providing evidence (other than a few anecdotal reports that can't be verified) while I'm the one providing statistical evidence - and you accuse me of baseless rantings. Cute.

>"I'm still waiting for you to:
>1. Provide evidence that the system fails to do its job in a
>significant number of cases.
>2. Provide a recommendation of what you consider to be a
>better system.
>3. Provide in clear English a statement of your position."
>
>
>If he did provide this information to you, you probably would
>simply ignore it.  

The fact is that he has never provided it. Anything else is speculation on your part.

Furthermore, I've provided evidence that the system works in the overwhelming majority of cases - which you keep ignoring.

>Results are in for the poll..
>
>Of the 12 people that responded, 9 of them agreed the system
>doesn't work...so that was 75%.
>
>Of the 12 people that responded, 2 of them felt the system
>worked well.  
>So what's that...about 17%.
>
>And one person felt it worked most of the time, so that was
>about 8%.
>
>I am sure if more posters would have voted the 90% would have
>been easily reached. 75% of the existing isn't too far
>either.

Take a course in statistics before you embarrass yourself further.

>
>So as you can see, most people on these boards find the
>current system DOES NOT work for them.
>

Well, gee. People who come to a board looking for help with custody and support problems see problems in the system. Do you really think that is representative of the population as a whole?

Furthermore, your poll was biased in its wording.

Even more importantly, every single person who posted that it doesn't work has proven that their mind is closed or they're blinded by their own opinion. Several others and I have posted that the system worked in our case - so a vote for 'the system never works' simply ignores the facts in front of people.

And, then, there's the fact that even in your biased poll of a biased population it didn't hit the 90% you claimed.

When you actually do the study correctly, the system is working properly at least 89% of the time - not 10% as you claim. See my other posts on the subject.

Sure. You're entitled to an opinion no matter how wrong it is.

The way you resolve that is with facts. So far, I'm the only one who has provided any facts that are representative of the population as a whole and the evidence is that the system works as designed at least 89% of the time.

Whining that it's horribly broken and evil and unfair is a valid opinion, but the facts just don't support it.

What you're forgetting is that people who post here are far more unlikely than the average to have problems.

Why can't you interview a large, representative population? In fact, it's been done:

Here, let me show you how it's done:
http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/07/assessing-CS-debt/execsum.htm

Just a few facts from this study:
-89% of child support obligations are being paid on time in CA.

-Of the 11% of obligations that are in arrears, 15% are erroneous (the parent doesn't owe anything). 11% of the 11% account for more than half of the arrears - which means that a very small number (1.2% of the total child support obligations) parents owe more than $30 K in arrears.

-57% of obligors owed less than $5 K in arrears.

-Only 22% of the obligors (2.4% of the entire population) had low or no income - but the study was unable to verify that all of them truly had low income since it had no mechanism to look for unreported income.

Yes, the system has problems. But the stuff you're complaining about is NOT that common. More importantly, if you stop worrying about yourself and think about the kids for a change, you'd see that 89% of the time, the system is doing what it's supposed to.

Oh, and I'd be interested in your explanation of how child support payments are going to improve if there are no penalties like loss of driving privileges, court appearances, 'hounding' by CSE, etc for not paying your child support. Even a moment's thought would say that the only thing this could do is reduce the number of children being supported.


The fact that a lot of people who come to a board seeking help for problems with child support and custody happen to have problems with child support and custody is not valid evidence that the system is broken. The above evidence says that it works most of the time - which is all I've said.

AND, I notice that no one has proposed a better system, either.

I'm an immature child because I ask you to back up your arguments with facts?

I'm still waiting for you to:
1. Provide evidence that the system fails to do its job in a significant number of cases.
2. Provide a recommendation of what you consider to be a better system.
3. Provide in clear English a statement of your position.

You post a lot, but you never seem to get around to doing any of those things.

Meanwhile:
Here, let me show you how it's done:
http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/07/assessing-CS-debt/execsum.htm

Just a few facts from this study:
-89% of child support obligations are being paid on time in CA.

-Of the 11% of obligations that are in arrears, 15% are erroneous (the parent doesn't owe anything). 11% of the 11% account for more than half of the arrears - which means that a very small number (1.2% of the total child support obligations) parents owe more than $30 K in arrears.

-57% of obligors owed less than $5 K in arrears.

-Only 22% of the obligors (2.4% of the entire population) had low or no income - but the study was unable to verify that all of them truly had low income since it had no mechanism to look for unreported income.

Yes, the system has problems. But the stuff you're complaining about is NOT that common. More importantly, if you stop worrying about yourself and think about the kids for a change, you'd see that 89% of the time, the system is doing what it's supposed to.

OK. So your point is that all the "the system is horribly broken and serves no useful purpose" opinions are completely unsubstantiated by fact.

That's exactly what I've been saying.

None of which supports the allegation that the system is badly broken.

All you've proven is that it's POSSIBLE for a CP to receive money and not spend it on the kids. That has never been in dispute.

What has been in dispute is the allegation that you and others keep making that this is a common occurrence.

YOU are the one arguing that the current system is broken beyond repair - you have the burden to support that claim. The status quo already exists.

I don't know the legality, but what I'd do is this:

1. File first. In general, she'd have to prove that you filed falsely.
2. Attach a copy of your divorce decree.
3. Attach copies of your support checks showing that you are paid up.

Technically, that might not meet their requirements, but it's probably the best you can do - and my guess is that it would probably work.

Other than that, you could take her to court to force her to sign. Perhaps the way to do that would be "Your honor, ex won't sign the form allowing me to receive the tax deduction as stated in your order of . Therefore, I'm asking you to change the agreement giving me the deduction every year since she won't cooperate with your previous order". Then ask the judge to award you legal fees.

Again, no guarantees, but my guess is that would get you a signed document. If she has any brains, just threatening to do that should get you a signed document, but of course, that's no guarantee, either.