Ok, let's examine this. The expenses a child has.
Legally-
The man is obligated to make sure the child has medical insurance. Public school, not college, provides books for free, you just return them at the end of the year. You need stationary. So throughout a year, let's say you spend 60 bucks, which for pens, papers, maybe a posterboard or two, that's easy.
that's $5 on school supply/month.
Then food, let's say the mom makes the kid a school lunch, she spends maybe 8 bucks a week on sandwich supplies, at the most. Then 1 dollar a day on his drink, less if she just packs him a caprisun, but let's splurge. Let's just round it up for the purpose of saying there are 4 weeks in a month, and say you're spending 15 a week. This is assuming the state isn't giving you free school lunch which often it does, but I digress. The dad pays 15.
So that's $60 a month.
Then breakfast, let's say $6/week for cereal. $2 a week for milk. Let's say you spend $32 bucks a month on ceereal.
Then dinner, let's say you factor in about $5 a dinner for the kid. I'll throw in at some point in the day he's had a snack so that's $6. Now we're talking 180 bucks a month on dinner.
Then clothes, let's just assume that's $240 every 6 months. So you're paying like $40 a month average for clothes.
Therefore the minimum to raise a kid falls in the range of....
40, 180, 32, 60, 5 - 317 a month. That covers food, clothes, school supplies.
It's the custodial parent's obligation to pay for a place to live, they need to for themselves anyway.
Now when you look at those expenses, and you see Masterorion's case, you think $256 isn't so bad, the only problem is that the mom is instead of getting a job to support herself and that last 100 bucks or so (factor in other random crap a kid might need, like toys, toothpaste, ext).
You can say, yes it's tough to raise a kid while living alone, but yes it's still possible. Many of you women on this board did it without those monthly checks coming in so I don't see why some women can't. Any excuse you can give to why a woman can't pay, you can give the same excuse to why the guy can't pay 256.
But you see, here's the grift. Those mothers aren't the ones I have a problem with, the ones getting 256 a month. The amount you get is basically based on his salary as you all pointed out, the question becomes, what about those fathers who make 80k or more.
Here's where it gets fishy, the dad is then required to pay 2000 a month. If you have 2 kids it's less than 4000, unless you have 2 kids each with a different father. That's 4000 a month for your 2 kids. And then these women start getting welfare from the government as well, and I'm not sure the exact amount, but it's enough to live off basically without the child support. The welfare system ignores child support, and that's a problem.
Because then it assumes you aren't getting it, and gives you enough for you and your kids. Then you with your 2 kids are pulling in 4 grand a month. This becomes a pretty comfortable living, especially if you live somewhere that the cost of living is low. Being as you don't work, there's no reason to live someone closer to where you can find a good job. Since you're a mother without a job, they won't kick you off welfare.
This is how people abuse the system. Now don't take the fact that there are abuses in the system and that I want them corrected as an attack on all mothers on welfare and all months getting child support. Like I said, I just want chlid support payments to be a factor so welfare can be given out to those who need accordingly, and those getting 2k a month/kid don't need extra money from the government for their kid. They also don't need years of welfare for themselves, that money would pay for daycare and they could get a job!
All I would want is a system to be reformed to realize that different months have greater or less needs. Why are so many women here so vehemently opposed to this?
