CSA still alive - I thought I killed it long ago

For reference there is some comparitive work on child support scheme's done in 2005 at http://www.fahcsia.gov.au/sa/childsupport/pubs/ChildComparisonSelectedCountries/Documents/comparison_of_selected_countries.pdf

A bit hard to do direct comparisons but its worth noting that a lot of the calculations seem to be on net income rather than gross. Not all.

Also some interesting reading at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Child_support

R0bert

cost to raise a child
[no child is a cost..they are our investment..for tomorrow]

cost?
bah

think of what has been lost
[the death of investments [read youth[..in war

YES THAT IS A LOSS..

yet economists include that*
and its damages..[mutilations needing hospital care
and repair [for a select elect few]..as 'economic plus'

usa has aborted 65 million babies..[since vietnam]
that is a cost..!

so much more than 'money' was lost

forget cost..its an investment
and war kills that invested in..[the life love logic..good..:lost]

bah
cost!
ya gotta know values
to realise what has been truelly lost

cost bahhhh bahhh bahhh

bah
so much lost

let those who reap the advantage
bear the price

think of all we give to educate
who gives that advantage

who reaps the harvest of productivity or health

they who reap the harvest
bear the cost of the planting

we bear the burden
but who reaps the harvest
and who the bigger gain...?

make them pay

govt should supply a base standard for everything
from then on the extras/../must pay back..

the more you plant
the more you reap

govt accords each child at birth[a birth bond]..that covers basics
go beyond that equal minimum...you must [pay your own way]

govt does [must]..recognise its peoples skills
the more skill you got..the more 'credit limits you get]

offsets

so say your a good singer[govt helps you achieve greatness
the peoples skills are our one true asset

then that people
see it as value..pay its way

currently govt cash cow goes top down
rightfully it should go from the base up

let capitalists EARN..who gets our cash

The choice whether to have children (or not) is personal one and demands a significant degree of personal sacrifice and dedication, including a huge ongoing financial burden.
I've done it 3 times myself.

However I fail to see why I have to pay extra taxes to subsidise the somebody else's lifestyle choice, particularly in a society that insists it's based on the individual and abhors the very notion of socialism.

If you can't afford it, don't expect it to be given to you as some sort of "right". Pay for it or go without.

Wobbles I mostly agree but the point that I'm getting at here is primarily about so called child support figures which go well beyond the actual costs involved in raising a particular child and often beyond the ability of the payer to pay and still maintain a lifestyle that meets realistic needs.

It's about government which treats itself to breaks which it does not give to payer parents.

It's also about a system that encourages conflict over finances between separated parents and provides financial incentives to put child custody ahead of children's needs.

I do think that the harm done by CSA costs the community far more than any benefits that might come from it due to the conflict between parents it encourages and the motivation it provides to far too many to not work. For all the money transferred between parents CSA was costing the taxpayer in 2003/04 around $1 for each $8.49 transferred http://www.csa.gov.au/__documents/publications/1248.pdf. The thing is that's achieved by hitting the soft targets (payee wage earners) really hard many of whom would more than willingly support their kids but object to the bullying and extreme rates used by CSA.

They like to measure money transferred between parents which gives them an incentive to hit the soft targets really hard to help that figure along.

R0bert