support. There are like 20 other items to compute child support.
Imagine you go to a supermarket, and want to buy mango. Then governments tell you a 30 items to compute the price of mangos. You go crazy right? Usually supermarket just name it’s price and you decide whether you want to buy or not.
Why not let future parents decide how much the child support be? Why not give women a choice how much child support she wants before conception?
If a girl is going to be a single mother anyway, which is often the case, wouldn’t she prefer to get $3k per month from a billionaire rather than nothing from a welfare parasite?
Well, that kind of contract is not enforceable by court. Even if she agrees she won’t sue for more than $3k per month from a billionaire, the court would declare that such commitment violates the child’s right. What often happens is, the girl simply have to aim lower. The girls end up picking mediocre males and that’s what most voters want.
Religious bigots, even more than libtards, are the first to bitch when people have sex outside their life long monogamous relationship?
Simple. Most people want to max out their political power. A way to do so is to be the pimp of all hoes. By prohibiting choices of some women, they can dictate who the women can choose. These are then used as bargaining chips to get voters.
In most countries, for example, natural resources get divided proportional to power. In democracy, one man one vote soon leads to one man one wife.
The Cost of Having One Children is the same for Both Rich and Poor
Having a child is costly. The cost of having a child is actually the same whether you are rich or poor. Unless the children have leukemia, or autism, or hemophilia, it will take the same amount of money to raise a rich kid than a poor kid if you have the same target for those kids.
For example, how much does it cost to raise a kid that can program by age 20, for example? I bet it costs the same Bill Gates then the way it costs welfare recipients. Bill Gates kids would probably be able to program by age 10 by self-learning. A typical kid of welfare parasites will never be able to be a good programmer no matter how much money poured to educate them.
There is something called talent. Those who do not have talents that match what the market want are far less likely to get rich. Those who have talents will get rich with little costs.
However, women cannot negotiate the amount of child support she’ll sue for before conception. The state will decide and the decision is set proportional to a man’s wealth.
“You can argue until you are blue in the face but the facts are this:
If his income is lower now than it was when the cs order was put into effect, the child support will be lowered.
Child support is calculated from his income, your income and the needs of the child. This is a basic formula that all states use. Google your state's child support calculator and enter the numbers. This will be very close to what you will get.” https://www.worldlawdirect.com/forum/child-custody-support/50669-ex-husband-trying-reduce-child-support-what-can-my-argument.html
So rich males, no matter how rich they are, cannot support more than 10 kids. The child support payments will bankrupts him.
The poor can breed millions of kids because no mother would bother suing him anyway.
It is Almost Impossible for Rich Productive Men with High Income to Afford His Biological Children without Risking Significant Portion of His Wealth or His Life
Let’s cross out openly marrying or cohabitating with many women. The first is illegal. The second is not clear.
When we think of the number of children a rich man can afford, we need to also take into account the political costs, namely the high amount demanded by society.
What are the other ways rich men can produce and afford more babies?
They can sleep with someone else’s wives. This is not very smart and normal. Rich people can get sued. However, sleeping with someone else’ wife is quite lucrative. The court would decide that the suckers will have to pay for the child anyway, no matter who the father is.
This is another reason why no rich men should ever get married.
There are things like artificial insemination. However, the only way to ensure that the mother won’t latter sues for large amount of child support is, namely by making the donor’s name hidden. If the sperm donor is hidden, then being rich won’t help because girls do not know.
Another way is to have children all over the world out of reach of child support payments and pay women in cash or use some form of LC to enforce contract. Could work. It will be my next start up project.
So, why government doesn’t just make it easy for rich people to breed? Let women and men decide what the terms they prefer for reproduction?
Easy. Rich smart productive people are usually financially independent. They want less government. That means fewer kickbacks for politicians.
Also middle class males do not want to compete against richer males for mate and hence prefer regulations that prevent women from picking the rich.
There are tons of discussions about whether we have too many or too few children.
Usually when the poor have more children and demand government money, people would talk positively. They would say that we need to propagate our species. They would fantasize that those children are future tax payer.
When the rich want to have more children, people would talk that the world is full. When women pick the rich, voters would scream exploitation. Yes, it’s exploitation. It’s an exploitation of the exact same voters. After all, when women pick the rich that means they’re not picking the typical voters.
Perhaps, rather than asking whether we have too many or too few children we should instead ask, what kind of children we already have too many of?
Children, after all, are not fungible. Some are born with better talents and better connections, such as having rich productive families.
And I don’t trust those so called prolife too much. Prolife simply means extra lives for those who
1.Don’t even want to breed
2.Can’t afford children
3.Too expensive to live
When those who want to breed and can afford children do breed, those religious fundamentalists would be the one that throws anti polygamy, anti concubines, anti-prostitution, and no sex outside government sanctioned marriage, and so on.
While the pro-choice are simply pro death, they are actually more reasonable. Why would you want to live a life of poverty anyway?
Power is More Important than Wealth
There are a few corollaries on this. That means control of the wealth or power over wealth is more important than ownership. Wealth is a form of power and hence worth searching. Seek, however, mainly power, rather than wealth.
Many people say that tax is not that bad. You still own the money right because you own the government? But who cares who own the money. Who control the money after you pay your tax? Can you use it to buy big screen TV? What about if governments think that the money should be spent to motivate welfare parasites breed even more kids? The will of those who are in power is the one that will be done.
So is marriage. Your wealth remains the same after you marry. However, what about the control of those wealth? Many men then end up like this:
“H. Beatty Chadwick (b. ~1938) is the American record holder for the longest time being held in civil contempt of court.[1] In 1995, a judge ruled that Chadwick hid millions of U.S. dollars in overseas bank accounts so that he would not have to pay the sums to his ex-wife during their divorce.[2]” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/H._Beatty_Chadwick
Their mistake is not in losing money they own. Their mistake is in losing control of their money.
In Chess, we are told to control the center. Why control the center? Why not own the center?
We read news. Country A fight Country B. Then, there are A’s controlled territory, and there are B’s controlled territory. Why use words like control? Why not say A’s owned territory and
B’s owned territory?
Because what truly matter in this life is not who own stuffs, but who control. Control is real ownership. Who owns what is always arguable. Who control what is a scientific term.
Indonesia is a rich country. It has tons of oil. It has a lot of land and seashores. It has tons of very smart people. Indonesians team won various sciences Olympiad.
Actually I am one of them. I won medal in International Physics Olympiad. That’s despite the fact that I am so stupid that I rank on the bottom of my class.
Are Indonesians happy with all those wealth? No. But do they own that wealth? Well, they own the country right?
When I was in school, due to government’s interference in education, I got to eat shit. I have to take tons of useless courses that I know won’t get me rich in the future. I know it’s worthless. Yet it’s in the curriculum. Some people would say, “Why not pick a different school?” Actually that’s a great idea.
Obviously we should pick a different school. If a course is garbage and some schools insist on teaching it, then students would flock to a different school. Free market will take care of things.
The thing is, free market, is not the one governing education.
After I graduated, I had a chat with one of my ex Physics teacher. He told me, “You know, I was told to go to a seminar on how to teach better Math by government.”
He is a good teacher. My high school teaches students well. Students from my high school top the test results for Math in my country. In fact, I, my wife, one of my
Welfare Parasites Can Support More Children than Billionaires: Big pink elephants 1 - How Governments Plan to Pimp Out Your Daughters and Enslave Your Sons to Voters. Page 4