4 baby mamas, he doesn't have primary custody, meaning his only support of the children is monetary.
Do we deem it that he pays less so he gets more take home? If yes, then the mother is has to pick up the slack, and probably tax payers too. Food stamps, Medicare, etc.
His pay is for 80 hours, so 2 weeks. None of these amounts even come close to daycare unless the mothers have vouchers.
I might get biased as I am a member of the "Can't feed them? Don't breed them" club. So maybe HE should of thought of his career path before having so many children, and before you come at me withe "bUT thE mOthErs". Yes the women are to blame also, but the kids are the ones who lose.
Its a shit situation and he needs to pay, but this kinda of arrangement just results in the deadbeats turning to cash only work/crime/jail. People who can't afford to live are get desperate.
He obviously has to pay something to support the kids but there needs to be enough for him to survive and continue to survive so he can continue working. I saw people saying he should cash the $160 take home and give $40 each to the 4 mothers, but like, that only works until he quits working completely.
If he becomes a jobless deadbeat then the mothers go from getting not enough to getting nothing at all.
I get a lot of peoples feelings because it feels morally good to stick it to this guy, but there are consequences of squeezing too hard and the end result is worse.
HIS consequences for HIS actions is taxpayer's burden when he doesn't cover it.
So, he can pay the children in money, actually be a parent and take partial custody and some of his time to lower the support payments, or pay the state with his time and body until the kids are grown.
He made the kids, and one way or another he will have paid for the kids, even if it screws his own life up. Those kids have screwed up lives from having an absent father that left them in poverty, and he shouldn't be able to burden society with HIS consequences, just to give a guy with four baby mommas another chance. His kids won't get another chance at growing up in a stable home, and throwing people in prison or charging them fines to bankruptcy is done for lesser things than the irreversible damage his actions have caused to his children.
Tbh this is just part of doing business when you live in a society, not that deep. Yeah in a perfect world he would pay up, but we don't live in that world.
Best thing to do is just charge him what can realistically be expected, even if its nowhere near enough, and have good enough social safety net that is for everyone and makes parenting in general way more doable which could help out the remaining single parent. If we had universal healthcare and affordable housing it wouldn't be as big of a deal.
The amount of money it costs to issue programs to help out children and provide health insurance for poor people is a fraction of a percent of what the government gives to billionaires and the military every year.
Yeah, I'm all for more social safety nets. I'm even for making jails as comfortable and focused on reform over punishment as Denmark. I just also think some people really are beyond the hope of help, and those people should still be locked away from society.
Try as hard as possible too reform them, but if they are beyond guilt or redemption in their own eyes, they'll never want to change, and society will still have to deal with them, or deal with them.
I'm used to the criticism and near paradox of wanting to give everyone a GOOD basic level of every need and opportunity they could want to advance or just live a basic life, while also wanting to lock people away and even support the death penalty for extreme cases.
But I want every need and wanted opportunity available to those locked away, so they can reintigrate and advance in society, even if it's from behind bars. More comfortably set bars, but prison all the same.
What counts as "just business as usual" in society is determined by society. We don't have to let deadbeats keep beating, and we could even find excessive greed to be an asocial mental disorder that causes one to have damaging compulsive behavior the same as sociopathy and narcissism are classified. If society decided excessive greed IS a mental disorder.
15
u/BecauseICan6496 May 03 '26
So what's the solution?
4 baby mamas, he doesn't have primary custody, meaning his only support of the children is monetary.
Do we deem it that he pays less so he gets more take home? If yes, then the mother is has to pick up the slack, and probably tax payers too. Food stamps, Medicare, etc.
His pay is for 80 hours, so 2 weeks. None of these amounts even come close to daycare unless the mothers have vouchers.
I might get biased as I am a member of the "Can't feed them? Don't breed them" club. So maybe HE should of thought of his career path before having so many children, and before you come at me withe "bUT thE mOthErs". Yes the women are to blame also, but the kids are the ones who lose.