Welcome to SANDYLAND!!

If I Could Change the World….

This is one of those things that I will be adding to as I think of them.  There are certain issues and situations that get me fuming….so here’s what I would do If I Could Change the World:

1) Adjust Child Support specifications.  Child support should be a set amount…it shouldn’t be based on what a parent/party makes in wages.  If it costs, for example, $300 (example!) per month to raise, clothe, feed, water and care for a child then that should be the set amount for every single child.  Child support should not increase or decrease because a parent makes more or less than another.  Too many parents (receiving child support) are taking advantage of this system.  One parent should NOT go into debt to pay for the other parent’s lifestyle. Sorry.  If it costs $300 a month to support a child then THAT is what it costs!  Of course you have to allow for medical expenses and the like, there are certainly exceptions but there should be a base amount set and whether a parent makes $15,000, $50,000 or $500,000 they should only have to pay that base amount.
2) And while I’m spewing out about children I am so fed up with people taking advantage of the system, that I am of the belief that if you can’t afford to take care of your child/children you shouldn’t have them.  This statement is directed at the many MANY (way too many) people who have decided to allow Welfare (an in turn US) pay for their children.  If you can’t afford to support your children then you should watch as your children are put into Foster Care UNTIL you get a job and can support them all on your lonesome.  Can you imagine how life as we know would change??  Wouldn’t it be great if we could stop paying for everyone else to live?  And isn’t it strange that these same people who are incapable of working or supporting themselves and their children ALWAYS seem to have money for Tim Horton’s, for cigarettes and, of course, for booze.  Oh Canada, eh?
3) I would make Social Services step in and assist with the job hunting.  If you are taking advantage of the lovely Welfare system, but are fully capable of working then you should certainly be forced to go out and (appropriately) apply for employment.  AND you should be forced to report your activities – job searching, interviews, applications filled out, etc.  Get on it!  I have two jobs….I’ll be happy to give you one of mine, dammit!!
4) People who make false claims of anything (abuse, harrasment, sexual assault/abuse, etc.) would get dinged AND HARD!  If a person alleges that he or she has been victimized by someone for his or her selfish gain (for the other party to lose custody, pay more child/spousal support, or for the allerger to get more money from Social Services, etc.) and the allegations are false, then that particular party should be reprimanded in the most harsh way.  The people who do these types of things are evil. Do they not realize that the accusations they’re making can ruin lives…and, in many cases, not only the alleged person but any children that are involved as well.  WTF?  If you want more money, go get a job, asshole! 
5) Spousal support is stupid.  If you are an individual who is fully capable of working then get a job!  Why should you rely on other people to support you? 
6) I also don’t necessarily agree with an ex-spouse latching onto his/her ex-spouse’s pension.  I think if a person worked for 40+ years for that pension then no one else should be entitled to it….especially when the other party is capable of working.  Again, get a job and support yourself.

7) Kanye West would NOT be invited to anymore award shows!!  This man is an idiot yet the media keeps giving him outlets to prove himself idiotic.  Let’s see if we can ignore him (and his childish antics) and maybe he and his mediocrity will go away.
8) Education would be FREE!!  All of it.  For everyone.  Every single person would be entitled to continue their education..no matter if they choose university or community college or another program.  People should not lose out on their future because they can’t afford an education now.  Every individual should be give the same opportunity – should they choose to take take advantage of a higher learning is up to each person.  But at least the option would be there.  We all have dreams…why not be given the opportunity to live them?

19 responses

  1. amy

    Ok, go back to the \’fearless" page, because that you are!!, I bet you have pissed off a lot of people. But good for you. and who are these selfish, self centred people who say if they could change the world there would be no more wars, no poverty, no hunger….

    September 19, 2009 at 11:04 pm

  2. sandy

    What? Were you drinking when you wrote that?

    September 20, 2009 at 2:22 pm

  3. Lisa

    OMG I just laughed my ass off at your #7!!! And totally agree with all the other 6 as well 🙂

    September 20, 2009 at 6:22 pm

  4. Tanya

    3 – I\’ve thought about that before. So many people ride the easy life of being on EI. They should PROVE that they\’ve applied for jobs. I\’d like to change something with the student loans. I think that if you dont complete the course, or don\’t get a job in the field, you shouldn\’t have to pay. There\’s nothing worse than owing ten thousand bucks for schooling that half way through, you realized wasn\’t for you. Its a long shot, but hey. I can have hopes and dreams too. lol

    September 21, 2009 at 7:00 pm

  5. Elizabeth

    6) I also don\’t necessarily agree with an ex-spouse latching onto his/her ex-spouse\’s pension. I think if a person worked for 40+ years for that pension then no one else should be entitled to it….especially when the other party is capable of working. Again, get a job and support yourself.OK I don\’t totally agree or disagree with this statement.. Personally, I am eligible for half of Henry\’s CPP once I am of age to obtain old age pensions, and I feel that I deserve half of his, after all I did support his black ass for nearly 4 years while he sat at home and did nothing, and when he did do s omething it was illegal (Sandy you pretty much know the whole story). So, my point is is that there are certain circumstances where an ex-spouse should be allowed to take at least a portion of the other party\’s CPP benefits.

    September 23, 2009 at 10:55 am

  6. sandy

    A) I don\’t think you needed to make the comment of his ass being black..you could have stated that his ass was lazy….we can keep those comments to our personal conversations. :)B) I think you are entitled to something for putting up with his crapola for those 4 years…but I don\’t think you should be entitled to anything he acquired before or after your relationship ended. Sorry. If you feel that you are entitled to something (which, hells yeah, I\’m jumping on that boat!!) then certainly proceed with it…but I still don\’t feel that you should be entitled to his pension. 😦

    September 23, 2009 at 11:55 am

  7. Elizabeth

    And I agree with you in regard to anything before or after our marriage… and what I would be entitled to should not be 50% as the current standards are. I worked and paid into CPP and my own pensions during that time as well… I think it should be based on how much was made. For example, if he made less than 20K then I should get only say 10%, so on and so forth… I also think that if both parties remarry or are in a permanent relationship than neither party should be entitled to any of the pension. I have no intentions of going for any of his pension, he works for it, he deserves it, but the standards set now do not reflect the current living situations of most people.I apologize for the black comment… It should not have been said… I am not usually so blatant with my disregard of him on public forums.

    September 23, 2009 at 12:02 pm

  8. sandy

    Your rebuttal rebuttles your own original post.That being said…if the tables were flipped (even in the same situation) would you want his dirty paws on your pension? He needs to be sent to an island somewhere….along with the rest of the bums.

    September 23, 2009 at 1:26 pm

  9. Elizabeth

    Yes I aagree that he should be eligible for part of my pension. I see where you said I rebutted my own original statement…lol… I am eligible for half of his pension and vice versa, I just don\’t agree with it. There should be a formula for what each spouse is eligible for, based on earnings, time together, etc. He is just dirty enough to fight for half of my pensions but he won\’t get it because I am not fighting for half of his. I hate government bureaucracy. They set these stupid rules up 50 years ago when the main bread-winner was the man and to ensure women were able to survive in old age. Now adays, more and more men are choosing to stay home and be a stay at home parent. The laws need to change.

    September 23, 2009 at 1:35 pm

  10. sandy

    My blog isn\’t about the current laws…it\’s about what I\’d do to change them. I don\’t think anyone who\’s parted ways from a partner/relationship to be entitled to the other\’s pensions, benefits, etc. And if I could change a few things that would be one of them. I don\’t think H. would be able to claim for part of yours anyway – depending on the statute of limitations I guess. Just be thankful the effer is gone.

    September 23, 2009 at 1:59 pm

  11. Elizabeth

    I just like actually having an intelligent debate with you!!!!!! I agree with you that certain things need to change and you would make a great politician….lol… Oh I am thankful the effer is gone… He\’s not worth the energy it requires to even think his name let alone talk about him…lol

    September 23, 2009 at 2:02 pm

  12. sandy

    I just added a number 8 if anyone is interested. 🙂

    September 23, 2009 at 2:04 pm

  13. Tanya

    Amen sista to number 8.

    September 23, 2009 at 7:41 pm

  14. sandy

    Did you know that in Iran (of all places!) there are both free public schools and private schools at all levels, from elementary school through university. At the university level, however, every student attending public schools is required to commit to serve the government for a number of years typically equivalent to those spent at the university, or pay it off for a very low price (typically a few hundred dollars).AND women make up more than 50 percent of Iranian university students with some fields in science and engineering having more than 70 percent of their alumni comprising of women.

    September 24, 2009 at 8:49 am

  15. Tanya

    Weird… I thought I already replied to this.I dont know how I feel about that. I dont know if I would accept free schooling, in exchange for possibly losing my life. Chris is probably going to go through the military to get his schooling. Sure, the pay is good, and its awesome that they pay your tuition and all that jazz, but ugh. We\’ve been losing so many soldiers at war…. a war I don\’t support, at that.I think its great that places like Iran SUPPORT women furthering their education.If only Canada could jump on that band-wagon too…

    September 26, 2009 at 8:23 pm

  16. sandy

    It\’s not necessarily military…basically you just have to work for the government..in any position. OR if you can spare a few hundred bucks you can just pay it off. 🙂

    September 27, 2009 at 12:12 am

  17. Cat

    I\’m one of those people this entry somewhat pisses off. But I\’m a bit of a socialist at heart… Not getting into details at this time of night.

    October 19, 2009 at 12:30 am

  18. sandy

    I\’m waiting for details, Cat. 🙂 (I feel a debate coming on. Hehe.)

    October 20, 2009 at 12:02 pm

  19. Cat

    Do we have to get into details? *shuffle* I like to avoid conflict and making statements on things I haven\’t really thought about enough. But ok, here\’s a couple of comments.1) Disclaimer: I have no idea how child support actually works."Child support should be a set amount…" "One parent should NOT go into debt to pay for the other parent\’s lifestyle." This argument doesn\’t make sense to me. I obviously see that if the custodial parent was to quit working and completely free-load off the other parent, that would be bad. But say the parent who has to pay child support happens to not be able to afford the "set amount" because they cannot find a good-paying job, get laid off, have to support ailing parents or has uninsured medical expenses themselves, or are unlucky enough to somehow else be short on money *legitimately*, they would then end up having to go into debt to pay the set amount. Also, who is going to figure out this set amount? It would vary greatly depending on where you live, what housing/utilities cost, what the current cost of groceries, etc is, how much gas costs, how much a particular school might expect in extra fees or what daycare costs in that area, which sports the kid might want to be involved in, etc etc. And I am not talking about choices to get designer clothes and frivolous spending etc. But these things just vary and are not really totally under our control. So rather than trying to figure out a cost year to year to approximate an average will not fit all, a percentage of income or something like this seems to be a simple way of figuring it. Because chances are if the child was living with the second, high-income parent, their cost of living *would* increase because they *would* be buying more etc. SO why should the child "lose out" on those priviledges just because parent A got custody?2) "If you can\’t afford to support your children then you should watch as your children are put into Foster Care UNTIL you get a job and can support them all on your lonesome." This statement made my hackles rise. Yes, people should plan ahead and hopefully not have kids they can\’t afford BUT taking the kids away is just wrong on so many levels.a) it is a pretty severe punishment and a violation of their right to a family life when not all people who can\’t afford their kids are negligent in family planning or may have been able to afford them when they first planned them.b) it is a cruel punishment to their kids who are innocent and are worlds better off with their own family than in foster care with strangers where they are not truly loved, get abused, feel abandoned, etc.c) it does not make sense economically, because many of the people who have kids on welfare do not have the skills necessary to get a job and some may have disadvantages preventing them from getting these skills. WE would have to pay for the social workers to monitor and enforce the family situations, monitor and organize foster care, pay the foster families for the childrens\’ care and then pay for the therapy to fix the kids who get screwed up. I think that it would be more reasonable to put in place mandatory training and job placement *once the kids are in school* because having a parent or other individual caregiver at home taking care of the kids is the #1 ideal environment for younger kids, and because getting a low-wage job and paying the sort of daycare costs we have simply does not make sense in a lot of cases and makes it impossible to actually support a family. Making $8/hr for 40 hours a week 52 weeks a year you would make $16,640 gross a year, minus taxes and deductions. Daycare for 2 kids is approx. $12,000. That is impossible to live on and we would still have to pay those moms to supplement them, or they would be living in poverty and going hungry. I would rather pay for their mom to stay home a few years. (Like I said, I am a closet socialist.)3) No argument there.4) Ditto.5) "If you are an individual who is fully capable of working then get a job!" That\’s making an assumption, though. What if you are NOT capable of getting a job? Maybe you got married and didn\’t get any training because you made the agreement that you would stay home and do the traditional marriage arrangement (a valid lifestyle choice). Maybe you had training but have been married for X years and have no job experience and outdated training and no one will hire you? You have planned your life one way with this other person in mind and now it is all turned upside down and you have to start from scratch. I would agree that maybe there should be an expiry date on spousal support, say you get it for 5 years after which you should have figured something out and maybe gone to school or something and can go fend for yourself.6) Same for the pension – you should get the appropriate percentage of the pension the other half put away while you were married (not before and not after). Though maybe what was put away before should figure into it somehow, because your own retirement plans would have hinged on the joint assets. You wouldn\’t put away so much if you as a couple figured the other person had lots put away for both of you. And if you had the traditional arrangement with spouse #1 staying home to tend the kids (saving on daycare costs) and home, then they would have given up their own opportunity for saving for retirement for the benefit of the family unit. If you can\’t count on some share of the pension, then no one would be able to risk to choose not to work.7) I don\’t give a flying %&*^ about KW or awards shows…. ;P8) Free education is great, and I mostly agree with it. Except WE would all be paying for it. And some people would make a living of continuing to go to school (some already do this). And some individuals given the same opportunity would be a waste of money because not everyone has the capacity to make it through their chosen program. (In Poland many people do get free education, but you have to pass entrance exams. I think, though I am not sure, that the people who don\’t make the cut can still get schooling, but need to pay for it themselves??)OK. I guess I really did get into the debate. Oops.

    October 21, 2009 at 1:08 pm

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s