Child Support – The Ultimate Lottery Jackpot for Mothers.


I’ve had discussions with parents who receive and give child support, read news articles on parents who don’t pay their payments, and even go to jail.    Sadly, this system is one hundred percent biased against men.    One portion of the system that is really bad is the child support payments system.

You see there is a few huge flaws in the system.   First and foremost, when you are with someone, like a marriage, and one person’s income changes, then the household spending changes with it.  Cutting back on the budget, shopping, spending etc.  After the marriage ends, however, those payments don’t adjust or change.   This is a huge flaw and this lands many fathers in jail or leaving the country.    (Like this one:

Most fathers, don’t get custody of their children and those children are used by the mothers as weapons, to get even and even extort money from their ex-husbands.   What is even worse still, is men who agree with this system.

Men are less likely to get custody of their children in a divorce, and if they are lucky get to see their children every other weekend and rotating holidays, at worst one weekend a month.    And for this, they are forced to pay half their pay cheque to go to the child and the ex wife.   Alimony and Child Support.

This is where I have issues.   If the ex spouse is no longer receiving Alimony due to marrying someone else, then the only extra money they are getting is from child support.    If they have married someone who makes less than the ex husband does, then the wife receives a drastic drop in money.  So the argument many parents who receive this support is, “I spent all my money on my kid, so the money I got in support is reimbursing me.

To anyone who thinks this way, you are  a spoiled self entitled brat and should be ashamed of yourselves.   That goes to any one who spent any money on themselves from that child support payments.

Both parents have to realize that this type of thinking is harmful to the children.   It means you are taking money that is supposed to go to them to buy things you want.   This may sound good to you, but it’s really horrible.

You both had a child.  That means you are both responsible, for that child’s well being.   If your the parent who got full custody and has the roof over the child’s head then, part of the money goes to that roof, food, clothing and if anything is left then, is supposed to go to things like extracurricular activities, hobbies and even toys or in the bank for a college education or for an emergency.

It is not meant to compensate you, if you spend all your money on the child you created so you can get your nails done or your hair done.

Alimony payments are payments to support YOU, as the ex spouse.   To ensure you live the way you are accustomed to until such time you remarry.   You don’t get child support to pay for your personal expenses.   The money you receive for your child is for your child.

The judge in court is biased against men in general because of the system in place.    So they of course will tell the women that the money is to go to reimburse them, but this is NOT the truth.   This is why there are two types of support payments.
This is why I call it the lottery jackpot for women.  This is why women have children, without thought.   They know, they will be taken care of and even the province will pay them money per child.   In Quebec, they used to pay over a thousand dollars a month per child, to the mother in baby bonus.  This was an encouragement to people to have children to raise the population numbers.     Now imagine if you had say three children and then got divorced, and had to pay child support, and the average being a grand per child.  So the mother would receive not only Alimony, but child support and baby bonus cheque.  Just baby bonus and child support alone for three children would be over six grand a month in Quebec (or used to), but then if you added in Alimony say two grand and you have a whopping eight thousand dollars a month in free money to the ex wife.  Even if you remove the Alimony, and say one child, that is two grand a month in money.  That is money the wife is getting for support of the child.    The sad part is she is not expected to get a job and input her own money.   However, some women do work hard and to put money into the support of their child, and that is a responsible thing to do.  What is not responsible is taking some of the child support payments and spending it on yourself as “reimbursement” because you spent all your money on the child by putting a roof over it’s head, food on the table and gas money driving the child around town to appointments or football practice.

Guess what?  That is the responsibility of being the parent who got custody.   Heck that is the responsibility of any parent period.

This system is also why women are raping men.  It is why Feminists will scream rape, even for consensual sex and why more men are swearing off women completely.

Women are paid to have babies, and get paid in a myriad of ways that encourages them to get pregnant and have a kid.  It’s a horrible system that has forced many men into poverty.   This system is more harmful than good.

It helps increase the following:
– Male Homelessness or poverty.

– Male Depression

– Male Suicide rates.

And the worst part is the children suffer.   They will hear the mother complaining to her friends or family that the “deadbeat” dad didn’t send his money to her, and so he is a horrible person.

Don’t be that Mom and spend that money on yourself.   Spend it on your kid, and if you have any left over, put it in a bank account for your child’s education.  Your hair and nails are just not that important compared to your child’s future.

Differences in Law – Explained.

I recently had a discussion with a group of people online about the differences in law.   The majority of people believe that law has different categories with their own rules and regulations.


Here is how law works.  I’ll start off with the top level.

Criminal vs Civil.

Criminal Law deals with crimes that have victims.  Like rape, robbery, property damage or murder.   These fall under a crime with a victim because someone was always hurt or damaged by another’s actions.  And in most cases there is reparations or jail or both.

Civil cases are all contract cases.   This is where the above mentioned discussion got heated, and I understand why.   In Civil Law there are sub categories.

Family Law, Divorce Law, Personal Injury Law, Traffic Tickets, Small Claims, and more.

So I can see why many people would confuse these as being totally separate and have nothing to do with civil cases.   However all these things are contractual and fall under civil courts and that is why they handle them.

Divorce Law.     This deals with with break up of the marriage contract either due to a violation of one or both of the parties or just a mutual amicable split.

The contract was the marriage contract you signed when you got married that allowed the government to have authority over your divorce should you get divorced and as well to define your marriage with rules. (there are laws for marriage you can look up online, results vary depending on your government).

Traffic Court – These deal with fines or violations of the contract you have with the government that you signed when you got your drivers licence concerning the rules of the road.   This is also why they call any breach of the contract a “violation” and not a crime in court.  Simply because it is a violation of a contract.

Small Claims while not always dealing with contracts between parties, the parties in court at some point individually have signed a contract somewhere that gave the government authority over the situation.   For example, two neighbors having a dispute over a fence line.     Seems innocuous and doesn’t sound like it involves contracts, but each property owner signed documents with lawyers when they purchased their property and in those documents they agreed to abide by the laws governing the area concerning the property and agreed that the government would have final say.     That was part of the land deed you signed for.   A contract.

As well to note some contracts are verbal –   If you asked to borrow my car and I said only if you filled the tank of gas, and you agreed, that is considered a verbal contract.  Because this falls on the property or even public property (which the government owns) then they have jurisdiction.

Personal Injury law is also contractual in much the same way that small claims is.   It’s part of the whole land deed contract rules as well as public land rules.    The agreement was made  when you signed the deed papers for your property.  Or if you fall on public property you would take the city to court and the court would determine if the city is liable under the contract due to a violation, like not keeping a sidewalk in proper repair and it collapses under you into a sinkhole.   That would make the government in breach of the contract by virtue of the public trust and property owners who pay taxes for the repair and upkeep.

One gentlemen claimed that this simply wasn’t true that any contract isn’t valid if your “tricked” into signing it without full disclosure.   However, the government fully discloses everything and calls it Acts or Statutes or Code.    The majority of people aren’t educated in this and assume these sub categories are all different, when essentially they are all the same.  Just the terms for each contract are different.

Think about how many times you sign documents with a government agency.  Those are all contracts friends.

We live in a “Democratic” (I use the term loosely), society.   In a democracy, we are ruled by consent of the governed.  They get that consent in different ways.   One way and the most commonly known way is the voting process.  We give our consent by voting in the person who we think should govern.   What they don’t tell you is all the other ways that they gain your consent.    And that is via the contract.    They have to do it this way because then we wouldn’t be living in a “Free” country.  We would be openly be slaves.

They need you to consent to abide by their rules for the road for example.  They have to because everyone has the right to use those roads as they are paid for by taxes when you fill your tank of gas.    So you and everyone has the right.  Which is why they are called public roads.   They use the licence system to convince people that it’s for safety and it weeds out the unsafe drivers and you sign the documents, go through some rudimentary testing and sign some documents and you get a plastic card with your photo for the privilege of using the roads by their rules instead of just using them to begin with.

And when something happens, and you end up in court, it is called a violation and comes with a fine.   The fine is a penalty for violating the contract.  Refusal to pay that fine ends in jail time or your property taken.  Remember you agreed to this when you signed that contract.

Let’s look at it this way.   IF all these laws apply all the time to everyone then why do they need you to sign forms in order to get a licence ?   Why do they need you to sign a marriage licence?

If you think about it, you realize the laws don’t apply all the time and if they don’t apply all the time, then when do they apply.  They only apply during certain circumstances and only if you gave your consent.  That is the only logical answer.

If I’m walking on the sidewalk and a cop arrests me for a violation under the highway traffic act and I didn’t have a licence or even if I had a licence. would that act apply to me if I was walking on the sidewalk?

The simple answer would be no.  It would not, simply because the highway traffic act applies to people who signed the contract and the terms deal with people who are “drivers”.   Not a pedestrian walking on a sidewalk.

So in reality all civil cases are contractual.  They have different names that even lawyers who specialize in the sub categories can’t see it.   It’s no wonder the general public can’t.