4DS - Anything but Charting, page-4661

I get what he's saying. He wants to keep his investment money separate from his income.
The law was written so that children in broken homes would have the same standard of living as they would if the home wasn't broken.
eg. Dad makes a lot of money therefore kids drive nicer cars as teenagers. The PROBLEM is that the money that is spent towards the children are ripped from the hands of fathers and given to the mothers instead. Dads don't get a say, at all. When mum buys them a new car, the car comes from mum and not dad. When the kids want a new computer, mum says "Go talk to dad because I bought you a new car"... Now dad gets to buy a new car and a computer. If he doesn't, he's labelled a dead-beat.
What if you, like me, don't buy your kids new cars?? They can go buy their own and I don't care how much money I have, it's a responsibility issue.

I personally pay myself a wage from my investment earnings and when I'm dead, my children will inherit my estate. I'm not interested in buying my ex-wife the latest Lexus or expensive holidays with her boyfriend of the week or turning my kids into one of these entitled nits we see running around.

I love these over-simplified conclusions to complicated social issues. Just goes to show how brainwashed the general public has become with labelling.