Wednesday, August 27, 2008

Defecit Reduction

An article in the Post-Gazette today filled me with rage. I know I promised not to over-react to things anymore, but this one dealt with the new great idea to take CHILD SUPPORT money from custodial parents as a way to reduce debt. Of all the debt-reduction methods possible in the universe, I feel this is the very worst one. How dare our government take food from the mouths of children to support our wasteful spending? How dare we finance a war with money that should pay for children to have clothes?

I just can't even think about it. This new great idea takes $25 annually from any custodial parent in PA receiving more than $2000 per year in child support. That's just over $166 per month, which is now whittled down to $164 per month. Do any of our decision makers know what it costs to feed and clothe a child? Twenty-five dollars may not sound like much when you are affluent, but it could mean the difference between new shoes for school or toes poking through the holes in old ones.

In the very same section of the paper, an article explained that Pittsburgh was the 5th poorest large city in the country. Why are the poor being exploited to eliminate the debt that our government incurs? What's the electric bill at Camp David each month? What's the lunch tab for senate meetings? I want to know who I can write to in order to insure that children do not lose money to pay for extravagance. There is no room in my heart for a government who comes to work in custom-tailored shirts with no concept of how many dwellings they own while children are being stripped of nourishment.

5 comments:

Emily said...

what is the MATTER with these people?!?!

have you read Moyers on Democracy?

Katy said...

i have not read that book, but i am still so steamed about it that i can't concentrate. i am just completely ready to move to canada

freya said...

When I was a credit counselor, I talked to plenty of people who received child support, and they were not all poor and struggling. There were plenty of people not working because they received a huge amount of child support and didn't have to. I think the cut off is ridiculously low, but for the upper end, I don't think this is a bad idea.

Anonymous said...

"The state could have collected the fee from the noncustodial parent but didn't because it would be more difficult to collect, she said."

They can garnish their wages and they can do this through the Uniform Reciprocal Enforcement of Support Act. They're too lazy and stupid (at the State level) and just plain stupid at the federal level. I also agree with freya that if the threshold were higher it might not be so terrible.

The whole system needs to be scrapped and redone, welfare, taxes, all of it.

judy said...

Why should only divorced people contribute to this deficit??? I get more than 2000. but let me tell you it doesn't compare to the costs of raising my children. Why not 25 from people who collect unemployment??? They could be working. Sorry, now I'm fired up. I have to look into this...