JP for Governor.

[SoMDGirl42]

That's the first believable thing you've said in this whole thread, you are nothing but a broke a$$ biatch!

 

[Bay_Kat]

Did you provide for your child?

I have a feeling I know how he's going to answer this. Can't wait to see if I'm right.

 

[VoteJP]

Rock and roll.

JP, at some point you are going to have to tell us what it is that you are talking about with regard to how to 'fix' the system whereby separated parents support their children. You seem to keep saying that the way we address the issue now is bad, and that you would have us stop addressing it that way, but you haven't said how you would address the issue.

Hi T, that makes sense and I see it like I am trying to stop a runaway train and my BIG task is to stop the steamrolling of child support which is a huge challenge and it is hard to explain to people that to just stop the harassing of the parents and the children will instantly improve too.

I understand, you say it is best for the family unit to take care of the children, or decide how to take care of the children. Well, of course that's the case - but that doesn't have anything to do with how the government manages the conflicting interests that arise when families choose that they don't want to do that - that they don't want to act as a unit with regard to taking care of the children. That is one of the most important things that government does, it provides means of resolving situations in which citizens have conflicting interests.

That is an excellent point and that is the way it is viewed now under the present system, but that system is wrong.

When the parents are disputing and the parents do not want to cooperate even for the children, then it was very wrong for the State gov to butt in.

The parents simply must be left to work it out for them selves and any gov intervention is just destroying the family fabric of our society.

If we let them alone then the parents really will work it all out for them selves, and if we continue letting the gov interfere then we will destroy our own society if it is not already ruined.

That might appear to be a simple solution but it is not simple at all.

It almost seems like you want to make it illegal for people to separate. I'm guessing that's not the case, but your lack of even the most basic mechanistic plans for achieving your goals, leaves me unable to figure out what it is that you would like to do.

The two parents having a child means they are connected forever and then can not truly separate and it is a dysfunction to forcibly impose a separation.

What God has joined let no man put asunder.

But the present child support and custody laws do forcibly divide families and forcibly alienate children and the laws forcibly destroy the family units, and that needs to be stopped.

Effective governance is more than laying out goals or stating how things should be - it is implementing policies to help get to those goals and to help make things the way they should be.

That is fine when the State is building a road or constructing a building, but when the State is affronting common families then it requires a little more care and delicacies.

If we want to promote divorces and empower adultery then we got that down perfect, but if we want to promote marriage and empower families then we have got to turn this stuff around.

So, when parents do not want to be together anymore, and they can not agree among themselves how to financially support the children, what do you propose the government do? When those conditions aren't present, there isn't much need for the government to be involved. But when those conditions are present, then there has to be some sort of government involvement to resolve the conflict between the parents.

I want the gov to butt-out, and no - the gov does not have to get involved.

Basically, what you have said is you don't want those conditions to be present - you don't want there to be a conflict between the parents. Well, that's fine and dandy, but the reality is that there sometimes are conflicts between the parents, your wishes to the contrary notwithstanding.

I do not deny the conflicts at all, and instead I escalate that claim as I say there are always conflicts going on and the conflicts never end and in the case of separation and divorce the conflicts could be better worked out if the people work it out them selves and the gov stays completely out of it all.

Our big-daddy gov has no business getting between a father and mother arguing over their children.

Unless, of course, you are asserting that the government choosing to get involved and provide a child support mechanism is what causes all of the conflicts to begin with - that without that, there would be no incentive for parents to have a conflict, and thus they'd always be able to agree (or would just stay together). Good luck selling that notion.

I do not say the gov causes the conflicts but I do say that the gov escalates any conflict into a divorce and into broken families and into stealing child support and on and on.

So, again, when parents can't agree on how to financially support their children, what should government do? Nothing? Take the children from them? Fine them $20 a day until they agree on something? Lock them in a room until they agree? Take away their cookies and send them to bed without dinner?

It is none of the gov's business and the gov needs to do nothing.

Seriously, you've been saying you would fix this for a long time, if you could get in a position to do so. Surely by now you have some idea how you would go about doing that - other than that it would be different than what we do now.

Who knows, I might support your ideas - when you give me the slightest clue what those ideas actually are.

Hopefully I have answered it some what for you above.

 

[VoteJP]

Rock and roll.

Child Support Enforcement requires documentation showing how the money was spent.

That is not correct.

I have heard that there are in some few circumstances the law requires an accounting of the money but that is very few as the vast majority of child support is spent with no accounting at all.

Additionally, if you fire all of the CSE workers as you previously stated, that will drive the Unemployment rate even higher. How do you propose to deal with that increase?

I do not believe I could pull it off, but I say many of the CSE workers need to be prosecuted for crimes against our society.

So putting them out of a job does not seem as an imposition to me.

President Obama is not prosecuting the criminal Bush administration so it is not an easy thing to seek justice in the USA.

 

[VoteJP]

Rock and roll.

Did you provide for your child?

I left the child with the mother so everything was provided.

 

[Bay_Kat]

I left the child with the mother so everything was provided.

and of course you gave the mother nothing, did the mother have to rely on other family or state assistance? Here is my question, how did you get away with not paying child support? I didn't think child support arrears went away, not matter how old the child got.

 

[bcp]

I left the child with the mother so everything was provided.

Ill just take that as a no.
you did nothing.

In that mind of yours do you even realize that the very laws you think are unjust, were made necessary and implemented because of people like you?

 

[bcp]

and of course you gave the mother nothing, did the mother have to rely on other family or state assistance? Here is my question, how did you get away with not paying child support? I didn't think child support arrears went away, not matter how old the child got.

To his great joy, the mother (his ex-wife) died. then her new husband dropped all charges and waved the back payments.

I think that is how his story goes.

 

[bcp]

If for some reason a man really can not work at all, I can understand some leeway on the payments for support.
However, since he chose not to produce any income even though he could have, I have no respect or concern for him.

 

[oldman]

People, if you all turn your chair around 180 and talk to the wall you'll probably get more logical answers. This thread belongs in the joke section as much as I have to laugh throughout it.

 

[bcp]

but look how he is bringing people together here.

not to mention that as foolish as it is, he IS actually going to try and secure the job of governor, so it does belong here.

enjoy the laugh.

 

[daisycreek]

His idea is to let the non custodial parent decide what if anything to give to the custodial parent without interference from the courts.

I'm surprised, he is really getting a rather large following on other sites that he is posting this on.
I guess it just has to do with location.

And the number of readers... who do not want to pay child support...

 

[bcp]

And the number of readers... who do not want to pay child support...

I was joking about the support that he is getting over there.
People on the other forum dont even try to hide what they are thinking. They make me look like a saint.

 

[VoteJP]

Rock and roll.

and of course you gave the mother nothing, did the mother have to rely on other family or state assistance?

It is my understanding that at the very beginning she got public assistance but that did not last long as she had plenty of other resources.

And then later at the end when she was dying of cancer she had to get medical assistance and less than a year later she died of the cancer.

So both of those times brought the child support collectors after me but providing for the child had nothing to do with what was really going on because my son had all of his needs filled to over flowing.

Here is my question, how did you get away with not paying child support?

I did not really get away with it at all.

I did pay it at some times unless I could not afford it, and I did get put into jail twice by the c/s thieves, and lots of other consequences too.

If parents really got away with not paying the thieves then there would not be much of a reason for me to reform it now.

I didn't think child support arrears went away, not matter how old the child got.

The arrears can be written off in most case, except for the poorest of the poor parents where the State gov steals the child support and the State keeps the loot and it never goes to any children, and my own case was some 27,000 in arrears and the case was closed with the money unpaid and unforgiven.

When I become Governor then I will improve all of this.

 

[VoteJP]

Rock and roll.

So, you think his plan is simply to foreclose custodial parents' rights to ask courts to order child support? That's it, no other plan? Interesting.

It was correct in that one time, but you must understand that nobody else ever speaks for me - and especially that booming idiot "bcp" does not speak for me.

What other posters say is different than what I say.

So then, people would have the right to ask the courts to resolve most financial disputes, but they wouldn't have that right if the dispute related to the support of children?

Other financial disputes like in business or accidents are a far different thing than child support.

I would like to see some real Tort reform if I could over-see the process and veto the issues to get it done right, but otherwise Tort reform will only make the thieves more effective in their stealing.

Is that what you are proposing JP? Or, are you just proposing that the failure to pay court ordered child support not be a criminal offense for which someone could be jailed?

The child support as it is now is a modern version of a "Debtor's Prison" and this was a big reason that the USA founders fought against the injustices of the British empire.

So I certainly resent the Debtor's Prison being mis-used now against parents.

And I do know that the Maryland Annotated Code specifically claims it is not a "Debtor's Prison system", but when I get into the Governor's Office then that lie will be thrown out along with the thieving c/s.

Because, I have to tell you, if what bcp suggests is correct, you are going to need to do more than get yourself elected governor to meaningful effectuate your plan. You are going to have to get yourself elected President of the U.S., and get some friends elected to the U.S. Senate - because you are going to need to get control over who sits on the U.S. Supreme Court. What I'm saying is, even if you could get Maryland to pass a law that denies custodial parents the right to seek judicial resolution of a financial dispute, I think there is very little chance that such a law would hold up under federal challenges.

It is okay if I have to continue the fight on to the maximum.

And I truly do want to influence or even direct the reform of the child support and custody laws all the way across the USA and not just for Maryland.

But I am only one person and I do have to start some where and I am here so I start here.

 

[bcp]

and especially that booming idiot "bcp" does not speak for me.

I suspect that between the two of us, you would certainly lose the booming? did you mean Blooming? idiot award should the general population have the chance to vote.

I also suspect that you would have a very hard time convincing anyone to turn you loose with their child for any length of time.. for that matter, I personally have a feeling that you might not be the best individual to have around any children.

Now, go get a real job and get out of my pocket you vile leach.

 

[Bay_Kat]

It is my understanding that at the very beginning she got public assistance but that did not last long as she had plenty of other resources.

And then later at the end when she was dying of cancer she had to get medical assistance and less than a year later she died of the cancer.

So both of those times brought the child support collectors after me but providing for the child had nothing to do with what was really going on because my son had all of his needs filled to over flowing.

I did not really get away with it at all.

I did pay it at some times unless I could not afford it, and I did get put into jail twice by the c/s thieves, and lots of other consequences too.

If parents really got away with not paying the thieves then there would not be much of a reason for me to reform it now.

The arrears can be written off in most case, except for the poorest of the poor parents where the State gov steals the child support and the State keeps the loot and it never goes to any children, and my own case was some 27,000 in arrears and the case was closed with the money unpaid and unforgiven.

When I become Governor then I will improve all of this.

Sorry you will lose, I can't imagine someone as irresponsible as becoming anything more than a trash picker on the side of the road and even they usually have supervision from the many standing by the van with the gun.

 

[VoteJP]

Rock and roll.

I suspect that between the two of us, you would certainly lose the booming? did you mean Blooming? idiot award should the general population have the chance to vote.

Well thank you for that you silly confused idiot.

So I will concede that you would win both the booming and the blooming awards.

 

[bcp]

Well thank you for that you silly confused idiot.

So I will concede that you would win both the booming and the blooming awards.

again with your ignorance and inability to understand things numbnuts.
to be considered the idiot, would be the loss.
much like If you were to actually win by some intervention by Satan, it would equate to a loss to the state.

now, run on back to your gubmint funded slum and slap yourself you lazy non working POS.
Pisses me off to see someone milking the system like you do.

 

[daisycreek]

So both of those times brought the child support collectors after me but providing for the child had nothing to do with what was really going on


If parents really got away with not paying the thieves then there would not be much of a reason for me to reform it now.

The arrears can be written off in most case, except for the poorest of the poor parents where the State gov steals the child support and the State keeps the loot and it never goes to any children,

And where would the money come from to pay those doctors who cared for her while she was receiving medical assistance?? The majority of that money comes from the people who work and pay taxes, are they not allowed to recoup some of it???


If the mom is on public assistance the government is giving her money.. money that she should have been getting from you.. in the form of child support.

why do you feel that "the people who pay taxes" and who will be your possible voters should have to pay to support her?

Do you think that money to pay the doctors and pay peoples rents and groceries just falls outta the sky?

Don't get me wrong.. I have no issue with your ex wife getting help when she was ill... BUT SOMEONE HAS TO REPLACE THAT MONEY!

the rest of us have chipped in our share- so you needed to chip in your share as well!!!!!