Donate Child Support Calculator
Skip navigation

Going on the Dole in RVO/CSA/FC situation as a form of Strike

Add Topic

If only those men could organise themselves for the strike together

To all men

We do not have to commit suicide, kill our kids or even think about it
We don't have to feel used and exploited
We don't have to struggle with Courts and work at the same time

If you find yourself falsely accused of violence, if you have to pay thousands to CSA, if you have to fight the Family Court system just to see your kids (under supervision of course)

GO ON THE DOLE

That is, of course, if you don't drink alcohol, don't smoke cigarretes, don't gamble, and don't do drugs. If you do, address those issues first.

Pros:
- survival, no need to even think of suicide, killing etc.
- plenty of time for SRL learning, study, preparations, etc
- save thousands on legal costs
- flexible time for seeing your children (eventually it must happen without supervision)
- can apply for Legal Aid
- payment of only $356 per year via CSA
- sanity stays intact
- self esteem stays intact
- self respect stays intact

Cons:
- low income, low standard of living (what is that comparing to death?)
- possible difficulty in re-employment later

If all fathers, that found themselves in RVO/CSA/FC catch 22, used this method what would happen?

I think that government would very quickly change the laws with regards to RVO's, CSA, and Family Courts.
In my estimation, men involved in this catch 22 consist of about 20 to 30 % of all workforce.
What a tremendous power if such a strike could be effectively organized.

Please, correct me if I am wrong.
Just in reference to CSA

Why do you think the government wrote the legislation which refered to capaity to earn

No, C$A would try to use capacity to earn to extract more money from the paying parent which in effect would cause more hardship depression, suicide etc…

That is one of the reasons why the CSA was brought into being and hence the term "dead beat dad"

Even Solomon will not pour water from empty jar.

To IsntLifeGrand
 
 This is what are saying those who do not have courage to try or possibly have those vices as above, drinking, smoking, gambling, drug use, debts.
 I done just exactly what tadeuszk191 proposes and CSA never even mentioned any "capacity to earn" to me.
 I am paying about $1 a day as CSA payment and am living now in government housing.
 I simply have nothing and nobody can take anything from someone who has nothing.
 But I have all of this:
 
 Pros:
 - survival, no need to even think of suicide, killing etc.
 - plenty of time for SRL learning, study, preparations, etc
 - save thousands on legal costs
 - flexible time for seeing your children (eventually it must happen without supervision)
 - can apply for Legal Aid
 - payment of only $356 per year via CSA
 - sanity stays intact
 - self esteem stays intact
 - self respect stays intact

 
 It is quite possible that by doing this I just saved my life and I am happy and proud that I beat the system even though some will call me a bludger. I do not care.
 We live in wonderful country and there is no way Centrelik or some Job Network could force me to work if I don't want to.
 
 Cheers to all not brave enough!
 :o seriously…. how pathetic can one get. to basically brag about only having to pay the minimum in CS.
CS supports YOUR children. Grow up and be a man for gods sake.  

If you sit doing nothing all day and refuse to attempt to get a job- how would you look in the eyes of your kid/s…  I know if that were my father I'd want nothing to do with him.. pathetic!
Umm tadeuszk191, is this a joke?

I cant believe you sighted a 'Pro' of paying minimum CS is that you don't "have to" kill your kids (or even think about it).. you were the one who was saying he wanted to help separated fathers through the process and you're delivering gems like this?

I've read some odd things on this website but that by far spews over to just plain wrong and disturbing.
Go easy on tadeuszk191 as he appears to be new to the family law/child support and is in the process of discovery, hence the reactions.

Remember many of us were at this place when we started our own journey.

tadeuszk191 will no doubt soon learn that there are many people protesting the system and doing it in their own way.

It looks like he has discovered the support single mothers get from the system and is naturally outraged.
I agree with Fairgo. Our payee has not worked since the child was born more than 15 years ago and Centrelink is unwilling or unable to make her go to work. Has she ever financially provided for her child? No. How come nobody is outraged about that? Go figure!
To the Guest, If there is a valid reason to ask for assistance from the Government I am all for it, but for me and every other tax payer to pay for someone to sit on their posterior because they want to beat the system, I say, well I can't say because of the rules of the site, but I will say that you deserve everything you get out of life and feel no sympathy at all
If we all decided to sit on the dole and pay minimum's  would the government sit up  and take notice?

would all those jounalists and current affairs shows who constantly write and report about deadbeat dads start writing and reporting about the mums who havent worked a day in there life but live the "good life"

yes not all do but there are a lot who even brag about it

the major issue is society MUST get over the age old adage that the man must work and pay for the woman

men also have bonds with there children and in are sometimes better parents than women

just because women give birth does not and should not give them any more rights other than during and immediately after pregnancy

when society as a whole gets over this the world may be a better place



thats just my view feel free to tell me how I am wrong

You can fool some of the people some of the time but you cant fool all of the people all of  the time unless they work for CSA and youre a Payee:)
leroy said
If we all decided to sit on the dole and pay minimum's  would the government sit up  and take notice?

  Thankfully (as IsntLifeGrand pointed out), theres a little thing called 'Capacity to Earn'

leroy said
would all those jounalists and current affairs shows who constantly write and report about deadbeat dads start writing and reporting about the mums who havent worked a day in there life but live the "good life"

yes not all do but there are a lot who even brag about it
I hardly think living on the Dole = Good Life. I hardly think its fair for Society to pick up the tab for your children. If you dont pay CS you're not exactly holiding your end of the deal with the Best Interests of your child then are you?


leroy said
the major issue is society MUST get over the age old adage that the man must work and pay for the woman
Its called CHILD Support - its for the CHILD.


leroy said
men also have bonds with there children and in are sometimes better parents than women
Not if you're a deadbeat dad clearly.


leroy said
just because women give birth does not and should not give them any more rights other than during and immediately after pregnancy

when society as a whole gets over this the world may be a better place



thats just my view feel free to tell me how I am wrong
 I dont believe anyone actually likes the system (and thats for both parents) but it is what it is. If you dont like it, change it the right way - not by having a cry about it and insulting the average hardworking-taxpaying schmo by condoning going on the Dole to get out of providing your children with a decent amount to live on. Its not helping anyone.
I really wish this mothers v fathers generalisation could move up an intellectual level and consider each situation on it's own merits.
Loujane said
I really wish this mothers v fathers generalisation could move up an intellectual level and consider each situation on it's own merits.
 
Tell that to the CSA. They have the payers (mainly fathers) and the payees (mainly mothers) in two different piles and two different sets of motivation. If the payer quits his job, all hell breaks loose. If the mother could work, but doesn't, that's okay. Not sure how this is generalising.
Wow, what a ridiculous notion it is that so, so many payers - or rather, meant to be payers - have.

Is it that you want the benefits of seeing and having contact with your children but you don't want to support them? You don't want to help put school shoes on their feet on contribute toward extracurricular activities?

Why is it so hard to get past the bloody mindedness of the breakup and who has the kids more and just help them out? Or to just get past the man vs woman BS?

There are mothers out there, thousands of them who are left in a situation after separation where they no longer can afford child care, ex's parents refuse to help care for the kids (if they were) because it's seen as helping the mother (not in the best interest of the children), spend most of their time shuttling the kids from here to there trying get to and from work and make sure there's time and money for all the other stuff. Sometimes, god forbid, when the children are young, the mother makes a difficult decision to leave a much loved job and career to spend the early few years, year or months before the child begins school at home because work, day care and no support simply don't add up.
On top of that, the threats from ex's such as "Oh I'll just quit my job and go on the dole so you (not the kids or any mention of the kids mind you) get nothing and then I'll fight you for 50/50".
It's appalling that anyone out there actually thinks this is good idea.

Leroy, I certainly don't buy into the age old adage that the man must work to pay for the woman, but you know what I do buy into? Both parents have a responsibility to care for their children financially and emotionally.

And to Guest, your last two Pros are that your self esteem and self respect stay intact for paying $1 a day. Your standards for yourself aren't very high are they?

 Regards…..

Who really needs this money?

Who really needs this CSA money, we (our ex-wifes) or our children?

Why Court never gives 50/50 but merely 51/49 in her favor?

I dear to say that our children would give all the money of the world for the benefit of having both parents equally in their lives.

Do not kid yourselves. The whole system is all about money.

Please, remember that I proposed the Dole as a form of Strike. We all know that strikes are very effective when it comes to changing unjust financial relations.

And this has nothing to do with caring, including financially, for our children.

By the way, the average John Citizen will pay exactly the same tax, no matter if someone else chooses to beat the system by going on the Centrelink payment.

I did the Math

I have always paid my Child Support and one day I sat down and did the Math after I got a letter from her solicitor claiming the mother modest position.  The Children go to school and the mother is not obligated to work.  In the Property stuff was able to get more than enough money to buy her house ought right leaving me in a rented accommodation.  My Rent for an average 3X1 is 325.00 PW

Here is what my Payee gets! 

Carer Allowance      106.7
Carer supplement    23.07692308 
Carer Payment        658.4
Carer Payment Sup  57.7
   
FTB                       295
csa                       402
   
Telephone Allowance    5.6
Utility Allowance    20.69230769


Plus other benefits such as a health card  reduced shire rates    reduced water rates  reduced public transport and so on

1571 Per fortnight  I know some of these allowance are paid quarterly / annually.   That is a sum of over $41,000 TAX FREE!


If both parents have a responsibility to care for their children financially and emotionally.   Where is Her Share.   She was able to move Hundreds upon Hundreds Kms away assuring  maximum benifits and when I do see my children under supervision - I have to pay more than 2/3 her Petrol and Hotel cost while she get the benefits of coming here to shop.!

I love my Kids very much and will always pay But I do have a question should the Max amount I pay be the same as Youth Allowance (living at home)  $206 a child a fortnight?

I know this post is a bit of a Vent but sometimes you just have to   Cheers

Not enough money to put shoes on the kids? Yeah right!

I'm with you newguy. Our payee is pocketing over $30,000 net in Centrelink payments and CSA per year (one child only, now in High School). She would have to work a $36,000 job to earn this kind of money. I rest my case….
We too did the maths a few months ago, and discovered my husband's ex was getting $45k/year on various benefits (as opposed to the $15k we were led to believe).

If the government is so idiotic as to offer women ridiculous amounts of $ to sit around and have kids just for the hell of it, then let the govt bear the brunt of those fathers who decide the DOLE might be a lifestyle option.

If some of those "government benefits to mothers" were reduced or withdrawn, we would see a sharp decline in the birth rate.  And to my mind that  may actually improve the overall mentality and IQ of this nation's population….  Because as it stands a large percentage of kids growing up in Oz are raised who have no education or ambition, and contribute little to the nation.

And unfortunately a lot of their kids won't know or strive for anything better…unless their fathers, who are pushing it uphill, manage to get some kind of sensible contact, and get through to them.
Ukelele - if people don't fight to care for their children, they are seen as deadbeat parents. So taking time off work to sort children's matters out is more of an honourable act than what you suggest. Most of these parents would then go back to full-time work as well as juggle their caring responsibilities whilst the other parent continues to bludge off the system with their 51%+ care.

Parenting payment needs to be paid according to the level of care parents have like Family benefits. If Payers and can work full time and care 50% then the payee or parenting payment recipient can do the same.
Fairgo - I do actually agree with you. If you need to legitimately remove yourself from the work force to fight for your kids then I'm all for it. Get out there, do some research, reading, try for Legal Aid and do whatever it takes because I know it can be impossible for some people to do this while trying to hold down a job and their sanity. It's a horrible time after separation and it's certainly the biggest challenge I've been through in every regard - at times doubting everything I do and feeling like chucking it all in.

It is an honourable fact and should be seen as such for both mother's and father's equally - neither should be treated as a deadbeat parent.

I'm 100% against anyone bludging off the system for extended periods of time i.e. well after the tug of war for access is over and the child or children have begun school. I don't think it sets a good example for our children at all and from my own experience, I have now realised the sacrifices my mother made for my siblings and myself because she made sure she had a full time job as well as ensuring we were all able to do one extracurricular activity that we loved. That included sacrificing her lunch hour at times to leave work at a certain time to make sure we could be at sports, music events etc. Often being reprimanded at work for the need to leave early, bring us in when we were sick, leave at a minutes notice all because she had no support.

I guess the point I was trying to make, and my apologies if it came across as harsh, was that neither parent should just decide "Hey bugger it, I'm going to quit my job and go on the dole because I'm angry with what the ex is getting from the government". I'd much prefer to be the one that my children will remember as not only doing all I could in regard to access, safety etc and ALSO, kept up my financial side of the agreement. The agreement that we make, whether verbal or not, when we have a child that we will care for that child in any capacity that we are capable of.

I also agree Fairgo, on your thoughts regarding Parenting Payment, it makes sense.

 Regards…..
When the Government of the day changed the laws governing divorce it was the start of the decline in social attitudes and standards.  The corner stone of our society, "The Family", was given a slap in the face and relegated to the status of casual relationship.  Where else can one person break a contract without dire repercussions and reap the benefits, the marriage contract that is.  There is a billion dollar industry out there to reap the benefits of divorce.  What the Government should do is amend the act to say that only when there is mutual agreement then there can be no fault divorce.   There should be an industry to try and save marriage, counselling, workshops, etc.  The children from marriages need the support of the Government to try to save the marriage of their parents, not the reverse.  

The payment of money to the payee from CSA should be ceased and a system of credit or whatever implemented so that the resource from CSA can only be used on essentials for the raising of children, food, clothing , etc.  The Howard Government had a system in place in outback communities where the benefits they received could only be spent on essentials, not alcohol, cigarettes etc, so why can it not be implemented for the payment of Childs Support.  One of the biggest complaints is that the money is not spent on the children, the Government should listen and learn.

The legal system should be overhauled, in my situation my x and myself came to an agreement over property without any interference from lawyers etc, then the x was told by a lawyer that she could get a whole lot more, what happened, tens of thousands of dollars in legal fees later for what, almost the same outcome that we had agreed on originally.  Lawyers and judiciaries should be held accountable, they cause more harm than good in family law.

The Government should take a step back and look back at history and learn from it.
  

1 guest and 0 members have just viewed this.

Recent Tweets