Dead beat Dad bashing by the Sunday Star Times
Absent dads owe billions in unpaid child support
CHILD-SUPPORT dodgers owe their children – and the taxman – billions. Inland Revenue is owed more than $1.8 billion by parents who have shirked their financial responsibilities. Figures released to the Sunday Star-Times by Inland Revenue show that of the 176,500 people liable for child support, 121,500 are behind in their payments.
The real problem here is that Inland Fucking Revenue see the late fees as a source of revenue. Inland Revenue do not send out monthly accounts to solo fathers, they send one letter at the start, and that's it. Note of the supposed 'billions' the female reporter from the Sunday Star Times screams solo fathers are supposedly owing, only $560 million is actually owing, the rest, a staggering $1.2 billion is in bloody late fees. I can understand the anger many solo fathers feel at having to pay late fees to IRD that NEVER go onto the mothers child, that money simply goes to the IRD.
Why the Sunday Stay Times is pimping for cash for the IRD is a little beyond me, and note the 'solution' is more draconian penalties.
If the IRD wanted to do the right thing, they would send out monthly accounts and rather than a late fee penalty regime that will see a father punished 10% of the entire payment if the payment is even one day late, give him a weeks grace in getting the money through to them!
Who gets away with such draconian per month penalties regime and then has the audacity to have a Newspaper side with them over how evil solo fathers are by denying them $1.2billion in draconian late fees that IRD themselves generate?
This bloody story in the increasingly gutter Sunday Star Times should be asking why that $1.2billion isn't going to the children and is instead going to the fucking IRD!
posted by Bomber @ 10:20 am
10 comments
10 Comments:
If the IRD wanted to do the right thing, they would send out monthly accounts and rather than a late fee penalty regime that will see a father punished 10% of the entire payment if the payment is even one day late, give him a weeks grace in getting the money through to them!
If these deadbeat dads would just man up and help pay for their childrens upkeep, then IRD wouldn't have to chase them for unpaid child support.
Most of these guys are just vindictive pricks who would rather watch their children go without just so they can get back at their exes.
Late fees are there to encourage these men to pay the child support, and even then they don't.
If there were no late fees, these guys wouldn't pay a cent.
IRD is exactly the Govt Dept to collect unpaid support.
In your rush to denigrate solo fathers, you miss the point i'm making brilliantly.
10% monthly late fees that create $1.2billion in money for the IRD - note dear brave anonymous poster not one cent of that $1.2billion goes to these children you proclaim to care about.
The IRD's position is to create wealth for themselves, it has nothing to do with the welfare of the children.
The scream tactics by the SST takes the same limited view you have to this issue.
Most of those solo mums are supported by the DPB from general taxes.
Most of the money gathered from dads by IRD does not go directly to those mothers.
Instead, it is used to offset the cost to the taxpayer for paying the DPB. It's a big money-go-round, really.
The children are not deprived in any real sense at all. The DPB goes to the mum whether dad pays or not.
Yes, but the $1.2Billion for IRD are not in child support payments, they are late fees because of the draconian 10% per month penalty rate, IRD see the late fees on child support as a revenue stream!
Chance are your gonna get a bullet in the head for daring to expose the IRD's extreme scam for cash theyve got going on. Just scream 'deadbeat dads' louder so nobody sees the real moneymaking scheme theyve got going on!
Yea whatever . Check the "solo" mother working at the Crown Law Office and living with a judge who takes her unemployed teacher ex--husband to court to argue the toss over the $300 a fortnight or whatever he needs to pay ...on the dole ?? Well sell something then ..we can't survive on half a mill p.a. SST : worst paper in the country , no contest.
brought up two kids and never had a cent from any useless father then they turn up when they are 18 and try to be the cool wonder guy....yeah right. i worked with a guy who had 5 kids and no of them had his name o n the birth certificate but he was always wanking on about how much he loved then etc. if you have a kid be a man and look after them no matter what and if your good at all you get back is lots of love and the joy of seeing a person become great
brought up two kids and never had a cent from any useless father then they turn up when they are 18 and try to be the cool wonder guy....yeah right. i worked with a guy who had 5 kids and no of them had his name o n the birth certificate but he was always wanking on about how much he loved then etc. if you have a kid be a man and look after them no matter what and if your good at all you get back is lots of love and the joy of seeing a person become great
Yes I know of many men who build a large amount of resentment towards the mother if the conception isn't mutual, ie the father hasn't consented to the birth - and as patronizing as your anger towards solo fathers is, I think you are still missing the point anon, and that point is that of the 1.8Billion owed to solo mothers, only $600 million is actually money owed, where as $1.2Billion are late fees charged by IRD for their 10% per month draconian, and dare I say it, sexist penalty regime.
I say sexist because I just can not imagine a scenario where a woman with a child would face draconian 10% penalty rates per month from a Government department, but the 'dead beat dads' can have any level of crippling punitive punishment handed to them because of the very mentality you exibit anon.
Even if we were to hammer Dead Beat Dads in the predictable way National hammer solo mothers, let's think about that, $1.2billion that could be in the pockets of solo fathers, instead of being greedily used as a revenue stream by IRD. Most of these men are from the lower part of the socio-economic system, just visualize that $1.2billion being sucked out of that environment rather than being spent there.
I mean at $1.2billion plus penalty interest, IRD aren't helping the situation at all are they? They are making money out of solo fathers, note IRD don't bother to send out a monthly account and provide not even an hours grace for a late payment before automatically charging a 10% penalty plus interest!!!!!!!
It is sexist but acceptable because it is aimed at men.
It's more 'unwilling' to put up with sexist crap than unable anon.
This cracks me up massively, firstly I was gonna write a full reply why men are so ripped off when it comes to having the opportunity to have a relationship with their children ( ideally this is what we need for our kids )And the family court bias blah blah blah......I havent the energy to go down this track and I am the fortunate one...Next we will have some w$nk from kiwiblog blaming those dam maaris as is mainly the case.......I am a father of 2 boys, I have raised them since they were born....its been 13 years this year....I dont get family support because their mother moved to australia 10 years or more ago....I m not entitled to any working for families.....but get this into perspective......There is a theme occuring where the females are leaving their children and in a lot of cases fathers are picking up the slack and in most cases doing an excellent job....Dont get me wrong I am not women bashing, I respect a lot of single women who are raising there families in an awesome way in trying conditions....And they are doing a great job......Men dont always abandon their kids because they want to...Sometimes and I say sometimes it is for the best...And for a lot of guys its just easier to walk away....Men dont get support in NZ....Is it because macho men dont need, Nah I think its because men are not that valued in our society....throw it away and get a new one cos newer is always better?
Post a Comment
<< Home