Yeah, I kind of already had that feeling; this proves it, coming from its parent. How can they NOT KNOW the STORY or INFORMATION?
(The ANSWER, of course, is THEY DO KNOW!!
For the record, I hate going to the Times website directly. I know I but the big-city regional shit sheet for my blog's kitsch; however, I only post them because I actually purchase the damn thing. But I rarely post the Times' website directly. And I'm only going there now because I was directed by a local I never purchase because even their local sports coverage was shoddy!
I used to be a faithful Times reader, but that was one New Years resolution that stuck. Not since Dec. 31, 2007 have I purchased a New York Times -- let alone read one -- and never look at it on the rack.
And the thought of touching it? Aaaaaaahhh!!!! Too many lies for too long, Times. And I believed in your truthfullness and fairness for so long. Never again!!!!!)
Anyway, here you go:
"Fighting Over Child Support After the Pink Slip Arrives" by Julie Bosman
.... To explain why they can no longer pay as much per month, the parents, typically fathers, cite layoffs, cutbacks in work hours and the loss of homes to foreclosure. Presented with documentation of falling incomes and rising expenses, judges often have little choice but to grant the downward adjustments, even in the face of protests from mothers struggling to support children....
Some of what the mens' rights guys say is true: on issues like abortion and welfare (trillions for wars, banks, etc, oh, never mind!) are presented to us by the agenda-pushing MSM in such a way as to engender feelings for and against certain gender groups and thereby splitting not only them, but dividing the entire family structure. When you consider the globalist economic structure as being designed to destroy these men due to outsourcing of jobs, the word INSIDIOUS comes to mind. So does disingenuous and evil.
To use a well-worn cliche, THERE YOU GO AGAIN, MSM!!!!!!
The reductions force some families to apply for welfare for the first time, while others become increasingly dependent on food stamps or risk eviction when they come up short on rent....
And whose getting TAXPAYER MONEY THIS WEEK? BANKS, WARS, and AUTO COMPANIES that are LINING THEIR POCKETS and CONTINUING to OFF-SHORE?
In recent weeks he had seen a former Lehman Brothers executive whose $7 million in stock had disappeared, leaving him unable to pay his child support. And then there was the divorced couple whose combined income had surpassed $400,000 — until they both lost their jobs and were scrambling to figure out how to pay two private-school tuitions on roughly $800 a week in unemployment benefits.
That much, huh?
Oh, POOR BABIES!!! The Jew York Times doesn't hide its elitism, does it?
Most, though, are more like the man who went from a decent-paying factory job to working in food service during Mets games in Queens....
Yeah, but DON'T VIOLIN over HIM!!!!
The court will typically order fathers to pay a portion of their unemployment benefits in child support.
Now THAT does seem UNFAIR!
But if their unemployment runs out, and they have no income, the court will temporarily resort to what is called “open support,” Ms. Marks said. What that means, she explained, is “you don’t have to pay any child support.”
Trillions for wars, banks -- why we gotta even worry about kids, no matter what happened?!!
--more--"
When you think about it, child support saves money for state so they can hand it over to corporations and looters. The agenda-pushing reasons for man-hating divisions from our agenda-pushing newspapers gets clearer all the time.
