Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

5 kids; 2-7 years old

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by MutherjuggZ View Post
    Not true necessarily... there's a skin tone factor that comes into play as well.
    No shitting there. How's this for a government fobar....I applied for CHIPs for my oldest, since he's the only kiddo that is uninsured. I'm rejected because I make dollars over the cut off a year. For those that aren't aware, with CHIPs, I would still pay a premium AND copays based on my income. His POS father, (who doesn't have a job and is in arrears for child-support,) takes advantage of having our son for his summer visitation and applies for food stamps, TANF, and Medicaid for the kiddo. He's approved for everything. So instead of letting the custodial parent pay premiums and copays, they allow a non-custodial deadbeat to work the system through a loophole and get full benefits for the kid.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by ComeAgainJen View Post
      No shitting there. How's this for a government fobar....I applied for CHIPs for my oldest, since he's the only kiddo that is uninsured. I'm rejected because I make dollars over the cut off a year. For those that aren't aware, with CHIPs, I would still pay a premium AND copays based on my income. His POS father, (who doesn't have a job and is in arrears for child-support,) takes advantage of having our son for his summer visitation and applies for food stamps, TANF, and Medicaid for the kiddo. He's approved for everything. So instead of letting the custodial parent pay premiums and copays, they allow a non-custodial deadbeat to work the system through a loophole and get full benefits for the kid.
      He has to prove that the child is with him more than 50% of the time for that to happen. Report him!!

      or at least that's what I was told
      Originally posted by Vertnut
      I'd run my junk through a waffle iron, if it makes you more "comfortable". LOL!

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by ComeAgainJen View Post
        Hell, around here, if you have a child, you buy school supplies for your child and AT LEAST one other. For example, we're told to buy five colored folders of a specific brand in red, blue, green, purple, and yellow. They, along with all of the other supplies purchased, go into a central supply closet. Each teacher uses one of those colors in her classroom and the remaining four go to OTHER classrooms. The other supplies go into the central supply closet, even if you put your child's name on their supplies, it's marked out and put in central supply. I may buy my daughter Crayola crayons, but she may have dollar store crayons in her desk, because that's what was given out to her. It's bullshit. Now, I do the $40 PTA supply packets for the kids because it's cheaper, and I don't have to get pissed because she isn't using supplies I fought the crowds for.
        thats a big negative. when my son starts school what i buy will only be for him. if they dont like it my reply =
        2011 Mustang GT
        sigpic

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by MutherjuggZ View Post
          He has to prove that the child is with him more than 50% of the time for that to happen. Report him!!

          or at least that's what I was told
          I called the fraud department, and they said if he was in his possession when he applied, and if he sees him a minimum of one day a month, it's fine. Isn't that some bullsnit?

          Comment

          Working...
          X