Activism Change

Fido: Maine May Eliminate Visitation Expenses From CS Calc

Question:

"Andre Lieven" wrote On a side note, does anyone else hate office answering systems that place you on hold, and lie to you to the words of " your call is important to us " ? If it really were, wouldn’t they put in enough phone lines and staff ?

Whenever I hear "All of our operators are busy.  Your call will be answered by the next available operator."  I have this vision of ONE person in a cubicle frantically trying to keep up.

Response:

Whenever I hear "All of our operators are busy.  Your call will be answered by the next available operator."  I have this vision of ONE person in a cubicle frantically trying to keep up.

I have a vision of ONE person sitting on their ass knowing that there’s always more people waiting so there’s job security.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – …And I called the Governor’s office – did you? Um… I’m in Canada, and have no kids… I have some doubt that they’d count a call from me, especially if they have call display. My area code is quite non-USian… I think that’s just fine – I think he would like to hear from people not only across the US, but from Canada and elsewhere, too. These types of exclusionary policies have wide-ranging effects. You can bet the feminists in Maine are calling their pals elsewhere saying they pulled this stunt off without a hitch….. take a minute to stop this cancer in its tracks. And, if you are paying 6c a minute for long distance like me – you can make a 10 minute call for less then the price of a candy bar. Even at 25c a minute you can make a 5 minute call for about the price of a cup of coffee…

<g I think my current calling plan has a US calling rate of 7 cents (Cdn) a minute… So, I’ll give ‘em a ring tomorrow. Its past office hours now, and I’d prefer not to have to leave a message. On a side note, does anyone else hate office answering systems that place you on hold, and lie to you to the words of " your call is important to us " ? If it really were, wouldn’t they put in enough phone lines and staff ? So, call now. That number again is:  207-287-3531. Best – Fido

And, to you. I understand how nuts the system has been to you. But, on some similar areas of laws up here, I have made calls to the relevent MPs…

As well as written to various media outlets. 207-287-3531

Andre — " I’m a man… But, I can change… If I have to… I guess. "                                     The Man Prayer, Red Green.

Response:

 support calc Maine child support table do not take into account visitation expenses. Policy Studies, Inc., the organization that prepared those tables for Maine, includes a reference to that deficiency in their report, and notes that several other states do, in fact, take into acocunt visitation expenses when figuring child support. Until now there was a provision in Maine law that permits (but does not require) an adjustment to be made to child support if the non-custodial parent spends more then 30% of the time with the children. The ultra- feminist Maine Family Law Advisory Commission brought into the 2003 legislative session an proposed law that would eliminate that adjustment. This will affect primarily women who are "custodial parents" – in Maine although 27% of the single family homes are headed by men, men make up only 8% of the child support recipients. So, this is not a "children’s bill" – this is almost strictly a women’s bill. The effect of this change in the law will push some non-custodial parents (especially men) out of their children’s lives. Those parents will be required to pay their share of the "cost of raising children" to the custodial parent 100% of the time – when the children may be with the custodial parent only 60% of the time. The remaining 40% the NCP will be required to pay twice – once in direct expenses, and once again in cash payments to the CP. With child support running at a rate around 1/3 of take home pay for NCPs, many NCPs will no longer be able to afford to maintain an adequate hosusehold for their children. You can call the office of Governor John Baldacchi at 207-287-3531 to protest this policy which serves again to push divorced fathers out of the lives of their children. The bad law is known as: "LD 234". — " I’m a man… But, I can change… If I have to… I guess. "                                     The Man Prayer, Red Green.

Response:

Thanks, brother Andre What was insideous about this change in the law was promoted under the cover of "recognizing visitaion expenses" – when it does just the opposite. In all cases I could determine this law will ALWAYS increase child support when both parents provide substantial parenting. …And I called the Governor’s office – did you? 207-287-3531 – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text –  support calc Maine child support table do not take into account visitation expenses. Policy Studies, Inc., the organization that prepared those tables for Maine, includes a reference to that deficiency in their report, and notes that several other states do, in fact, take into acocunt visitation expenses when figuring child support. Until now there was a provision in Maine law that permits (but does not require) an adjustment to be made to child support if the non-custodial parent spends more then 30% of the time with the children. The ultra- feminist Maine Family Law Advisory Commission brought into the 2003 legislative session an proposed law that would eliminate that adjustment. This will affect primarily women who are "custodial parents" – in Maine although 27% of the single family homes are headed by men, men make up only 8% of the child support recipients. So, this is not a "children’s bill" – this is almost strictly a women’s bill. The effect of this change in the law will push some non-custodial parents (especially men) out of their children’s lives. Those parents will be required to pay their share of the "cost of raising children" to the custodial parent 100% of the time – when the children may be with the custodial parent only 60% of the time. The remaining 40% the NCP will be required to pay twice – once in direct expenses, and once again in cash payments to the CP. With child support running at a rate around 1/3 of take home pay for NCPs, many NCPs will no longer be able to afford to maintain an adequate hosusehold for their children. You can call the office of Governor John Baldacchi at 207-287-3531 to protest this policy which serves again to push divorced fathers out of the lives of their children. The bad law is known as: "LD 234". — " I’m a man… But, I can change… If I have to… I guess. "                                     The Man Prayer, Red Green.

Response:

Thanks, brother Andre What was insideous about this change in the law was promoted under the cover of "recognizing visitaion expenses" – when it does just the opposite. In all cases I could determine this law will ALWAYS increase child support when both parents provide substantial parenting. …And I called the Governor’s office – did you? 207-287-3531

Are you joking?   Andre doesn’t walk any talk.   He just talks, and usually over in the soc.boys group, last I heard.

Response:

Thanks, brother Andre

No problem. I saw it on another newsgroup, and remembered that you’re from maine, and that some of the issue was quite relevent to your life. What was insideous about this change in the law was promoted under the cover of "recognizing visitaion expenses" – when it does just the opposite. In all cases I could determine this law will ALWAYS increase child support when both parents provide substantial parenting.

Likely. That increases the state’s skim of the cash… …And I called the Governor’s office – did you?

Um… I’m in Canada, and have no kids… I have some doubt that they’d count a call from me, especially if they have call display. My area code is quite non-USian… But, on some similar areas of laws up here, I have made calls to the relevent MPs… – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – 207-287-3531  support calc Maine child support table do not take into account visitation expenses. Policy Studies, Inc., the organization that prepared those tables for Maine, includes a reference to that deficiency in their report, and notes that several other states do, in fact, take into acocunt visitation expenses when figuring child support. Until now there was a provision in Maine law that permits (but does not require) an adjustment to be made to child support if the non-custodial parent spends more then 30% of the time with the children. The ultra- feminist Maine Family Law Advisory Commission brought into the 2003 legislative session an proposed law that would eliminate that adjustment. This will affect primarily women who are "custodial parents" – in Maine although 27% of the single family homes are headed by men, men make up only 8% of the child support recipients. So, this is not a "children’s bill" – this is almost strictly a women’s bill. The effect of this change in the law will push some non-custodial parents (especially men) out of their children’s lives. Those parents will be required to pay their share of the "cost of raising children" to the custodial parent 100% of the time – when the children may be with the custodial parent only 60% of the time. The remaining 40% the NCP will be required to pay twice – once in direct expenses, and once again in cash payments to the CP. With child support running at a rate around 1/3 of take home pay for NCPs, many NCPs will no longer be able to afford to maintain an adequate hosusehold for their children. You can call the office of Governor John Baldacchi at 207-287-3531 to protest this policy which serves again to push divorced fathers out of the lives of their children. The bad law is known as: "LD 234".

Andre — " I’m a man… But, I can change… If I have to… I guess. "                                     The Man Prayer, Red Green.

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Thanks, brother Andre No problem. I saw it on another newsgroup, and remembered that you’re from maine, and that some of the issue was quite relevent to your life. What was insideous about this change in the law was promoted under the cover of "recognizing visitaion expenses" – when it does just the opposite. In all cases I could determine this law will ALWAYS increase child support when both parents provide substantial parenting. Likely. That increases the state’s skim of the cash… …And I called the Governor’s office – did you? Um… I’m in Canada, and have no kids… I have some doubt that they’d count a call from me, especially if they have call display. My area code is quite non-USian… But, on some similar areas of laws up here, I have made calls to the relevent MPs…

Well, we are a bit more impressed, then.   Not just ALL talk, after all.

Response:

…And I called the Governor’s office – did you? Um… I’m in Canada, and have no kids… I have some doubt that they’d count a call from me, especially if they have call display. My area code is quite non-USian…

I think that’s just fine – I think he would like to hear from people not only across the US, but from Canada and elsewhere, too. These types of exclusionary policies have wide-ranging effects. You can bet the feminists in Maine are calling their pals elsewhere saying they pulled this stunt off without a hitch….. take a minute to stop this cancer in its tracks. And, if you are paying 6c a minute for long distance like me – you can make a 10 minute call for less then the price of a candy bar. Even at 25c a minute you can make a 5 minute call for about the price of a cup of coffee… So, call now. That number again is:  207-287-3531. Best – Fido – Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – But, on some similar areas of laws up here, I have made calls to the relevent MPs… 207-287-3531

Response:

- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text – Thanks, brother Andre No problem. I saw it on another newsgroup, and remembered that you’re from maine, and that some of the issue was quite relevent to your life. What was insideous about this change in the law was promoted under the cover of "recognizing visitaion expenses" – when it does just the opposite. In all cases I could determine this law will ALWAYS increase child support when both parents provide substantial parenting. Likely. That increases the state’s skim of the cash… …And I called the Governor’s office – did you? Um… I’m in Canada, and have no kids… I have some doubt that they’d count a call from me, especially if they have call display. My area code is quite non-USian… But, on some similar areas of laws up here, I have made calls to the relevent MPs… Well, we are a bit more impressed, then.   Not just ALL talk, after all.

I could also add that a part of the mutual criminal cases that involved myself and my ex made a national legal precedent up here…. And, that before we had to go to court, I was aware that this was a possibility… And, prepared for it, such that, when it came to be, my lawyer was ready for it. And, researching and speaking out on more topic appropriate newsgroups is rather " doing something ", otherwise we could say of you, or anyone here, that they are " doing nothing "… Just because you don’t see it in front of you, doesn’t mean that its not happening… Andre — " I’m a man… But, I can change… If I have to… I guess. "                                     The Man Prayer, Red Green.

Response:

Filed under: Feminist

Related Posts

• CHAUVINIST
• "I'll Stop That Crying!!!"
• The Equinox Follies
• tee
• question about Jephthah's Stop Sign
• The Truth ??
• How To Argue Like An Anti-Spank Zealot
• Countering the Feminist Attack on Celibacy
• sorry have to test somethin
• Confused and bewildered