Elon Musk fights to keep custody battle in Texas, where he'd only have to pay $2,760 a month in child support
3 years ago by return2ozma to c/news
But surprises me the least
Yeah, men like him get off on punishing women after having sex with them.
He's a shit dad all around, which is why his kids hate him.
Well, if he didn't live there and have to pay so litttle, he woudln't be the richest man in the world, would he?
/s
It's like he's taken a page out of Steve Jobs' book but not gone as far to say the kid isn't his at all
where $3k a month is literally a rounding error on the dickface's net worth. I bet he spends $3k a month on rogain.
The issue is not that it's to limit to less than 3k. It's to have a limit at to begin with (California doesn't have any, so it might cost him dozens or hundreds of thousands a month). Plus, maybe he's got more chances to keep custody (shared) in Texas than California.
Sounds like he should have thought about that before having kids.
so it might cost him dozens or hundreds of thousands a month
Oh no! The man worth hundreds of billions might have to pay far less than 1% of his wealth to his kids! They're bleeding him dry, I tell you!
He wouldn't be paying it to his kids though, but their mom.
$3k in child support is more than most get, who said he hasn't set up a trust fund for the kid when it grows up / isn't giving it stocks / inheritance?
Because there's no way he could possibly do both of those things.
And he definitely should be paying lawyers to fight this in court. I'm sure his kids will really love to hear about that one day.
Shared custody? Do you really think he gives a fossilized shit about his kids? How the hell would this broke-brain loser show everyone that he studied the blade while we were all partying, if he has to raise them?
What would his conversations with his son be like, anyway?
“Dad look I can tie my shoe!“ “Yes”
“Dad I got a A!” “Looking into it”
“Dad I think I might like boys…” “Pure evil”
Oh, you must be unaware of who this is. He is (or was, we'll see after his Xitter debacle) actually one of the richest men on the planet, and despite being able to pay thousands a day solely on his own child without even noticing, he's going to great lengths to avoid paying more than the absolute bare minimum for his own child.
Hope that clears it up.
The mother still pays and is very capable of providing. 3k is not the bare minimum when it's, by decree, the maximum allowed by the state.
It's not because you can spend that you should and want to spend your money (I could spend more than I do, I prefer keeping some for emergencies and special projects and investments.
Texas has a child support limit, but it might not be the only reason he wants to do it the, he might have more chance to keep custody there over California.
People keep downvoting anyone who is not against Elon Musk, no need to be supportive of him, just simply stating that some arguments against him might be wrong is enough to get downvoted to hell.
This is just Reddit all over again.
In what world is $2700/month "the absolute bare minimum" for a child? What amount seems reasonable to support a small child?
Or, more to the point, why is everyone pretending that's not an outrageous amount?
Because it's not an outrageous amount if you are one of the richest people on earth. It's all relative.
Most children do at least $200/day worth of cocaine.
When was the last time you raised a child?
1950?
The same world that produced the USDA Expenditures on Children by Families Consumer Expenditure Survey results, in which that amount is similar to other numbers. The US government may or may not have artificially inflated these numbers for intrinsic benefits. Depending on how you slice the numbers or what variables in that child's life are at play, a child can easily cost more than $2700 a month, but millions of families also raise multiple children simultaneously on less money than that. In the same world where rent prices on 1-2 bedroom places can start upwards from $1500/month, what values do make sense? The answer to that depends on whether we're talking about Musk or actual people.
And on California rent… child support doesn’t need to go directly to your child, groceries and rent/utilities are also considered a valid use
Yea it's not $100 of Teddy bears and candy
So, he's a deadbeat dad and a Nazi. I bet he thinks he's manly as fuck.
Psychopathic men are more likely to have lots of children, with minimal regard in actually being a parent to those children.
If it quacks like a duck...
Hard disagree. It would be one thing if he was just off in his corner by himself being a terrible person, but he’s very much always in the limelight and has a whole cult of personality worshipping the ground he walks on. We need articles like this as a counter to all the ass-kissing going on.
The cult of personality thing is the big part IMO. If it was just him being a piece of shit without any influence, then whatever. But he has a cult following that are influenced by him and his actions (plus Twitter seems now designed to push his thoughts). It's important that the vast majority of people understand that Musk is an idiot and a piece of shit. It needs to be lame and gross to like him.
I really don't understand this constant complaint that comes up whenever a news story about Musk is posted. Of course it is newsworthy that the (once) richest man on Earth is doing this, and providing news about what these billionaire oligarchs are up to is definitely part of a relevant newsfeed.
Keeping their actions in the dark only helps normalising their existence and behaviour.
He's also super-effective at dismissing the notion that billionaires earned what they have, and the concept of meritocraty under capitalism - he's clearly far too stupid to be worthy.
To be honest, I find his limitless villainy fascinating and it's hard to look away. It's like watching a slow motion Tesla crash
Nah, most of (all?) his kids seem to be ivf babies. It's either down to his need to have perfect embryos to choose from a bunch or he hates sex or he's ruined by porn or some combination of the three.
Honestly, I think that's part of which he has taken his one kid being trans so badly. He chose their gender for them before they were even implanted. How dare they try to change after he made the decision.
Deranged behavior either way.
Downvote Musk spam.
The billionaire doesn’t need your help ensuring him and his businesses stay in the 24 hour news cycle. Don’t be a useful idiot.
I'm sorry, but this simply is not true. You can absolutely, 100%, easily buy fame in America.
Elon Musk is actually a perfect example of this. Remember when he bought Dave Chapelle and made him introduce him at the end of his set? Sure, he got booed, but he also made the news and nothing was ever going to stop that.
You can also literally buy media companies, or spots in the media, and simply put yourself in the news.
He has been "shamed" by news articles every single day for the past how many years? It's not working. Downvote his bullshit.
It would be a good memory.
Musk is a scumbag from the get-go.
If he didn't want to support his kids he never should have had any.
Wearing a condom isn't that hard to do.
He’s a giant selfish piece of shit with a messiah/god complex who was born on third with Hank Aaron at bat, any sane society would’ve dropped him into the deep wilderness with a bindle a decade ago. I hope he takes up submarining
Unfortunately I think he’s too much of a coward to go first on any of those himself, probably for my suggestion too, I hope he proves me wrong with the brain implants and then something doesn’t go terribly wrong with the inputs to the pain centers of his brain
Iirc he believes that it's his duty to procreate and produce as many white people as possible to prevent replacement.
And yet he's too lazy to give his "awesome Aryan super race" kids half decent names. And even his Dad was a technocrat nazi who despised the peasants. The gene pool behind this fucker should have been laid to waste a long time ago. Absolute parasite.
The replacement part is bullshit made up to hate.
He thinks EVERYONE needs to have more kids as the world is going to run into major problems with population decline, like is happening In Japan if trends continue.
I don't agree with him, but he is advocating for everyone, not white people.
Edit: and he has talked about this many times, it's not new.
But less people means not enough people to support the layer of pyramid above it.
That's it isn't it?
Who's going to pay for those millions of vacant apartments, and who's going to support the elderly if there's not enough people?
Like it or not, there will be a disruption from it if its too sudden, but I don't see it as the dire thing that he seems to think it is. It'll eventually sort itself out and we'll be better for it.
Its even crazier than that.
With his first wife, their first child died of sides and they actively used IVF. They then had a set of twins and a set of triplets (I'm assuming they were all via IVF, but I'm not sure). One of those children is the estranged trans person who changed their last name.
His two children with Grimes (including the one this article is about) were via surrogate.
He's not just refusing to wear a condom. He's a lively spending thousands of dollars, and women are undergoing surgery, in order to have children for him to neglect. It's bizarre.
I'm convinced that it's some transhumanist scheme to download his consciousness into one of his brood via the Neuralink bullshit.
Or, and stay with me here, he needs more test subjects.
Twins with Neuralink director of operations and special projects Shivon Zilis in November 2021.
A third child with Grimes, named Techno Mechanicus, according to a book review published by the New York Times on Sept. 9, 2023.
Oh thank you. I was not including the naturally conceived children. But I see now that this article is about Techno Mechanics, whose details are less publicly available.
Although if Grimes has been pregnant in public I'm sure some gossip magazines would have reported on it.
Damn. What is it about Elon that makes him attractive to so many women?
Or else what?
What consequences does he face other than people on the internet calling him mean names?
Morals are for poor people. They're the only ones who suffer consequences for not having them.
Some people are so poor that all they have is money.
$2760 isn’t even enough for rent 💀
Is it in Houston or Austin or Dallas?
Reminder. He's a billionaire.
$2760 a month is about $33,120 a year.
According to this calculation, he makes $46,303,000 A DAY.
For context:
At $33,120 a year, he could fund 1,398 child support babies with a single day of work.
And there are Elon-stans.
Small reminder that Elon Musk doesn't have that money in his bank account.
The only reason why his net worth is that high is because he has stock in the stupidly overinflated (and now quickly deflating) Tesla.
He had to pull loads of stock from tesla to buy twitter (after he was forced to do so by courts because he said he would) and still had to borrow money because he simply doesn't have 44 billion. Quick side note: payments with interest for those loans are due, good luck paying those billions from a company that lost.over half its value, asshole!
If he pulls all his tesla stock then telsa would completely crash, he'll never get access to anything near 166 billion.
I'm sure he has a few millions in liquid assets, but he is VERY far from making millions per day. The way he's going right now, his ex wife better hurry because he'll be bankrupt within a few years.
His Money in the Bank Account and his Net Worth are 2 different Pairs of Shoe but Elon takes a Credit for Multiple Millions (cheaper than having a Wage) and then giving them Stocks as Security.
He totally can afford to have his Child getting more than 33k in a Year.
TIL that he called his child "X". What an idiot.
It turns into a mega X child to fight space invaders.
@return2ozma If the shitstain did not buy twitter he literally could have handed each of his children a billion dollars and still be richer than if he had not bought twitter. He does not appear to be very bright.
Walzer said Musk and Grimes could spend months just trying to prove which state the kids actually lived in.
That's putting it lightly. Parental disputes that cross state lines is some of the messiest shit one can go through. Just ooof. Dude probably thinks evaporating $44B on Twitter was rough, he's just getting started on this shit.
I always wondered why Musk keeps taking X around to all the things and never any of his other kids.
I previously attributed it to getting good PR.
I now sees it's how he's going to "win" against Grimes.
Doucheladdle
After watching his management skills in business, I suspect his being a father isn't a great thing for his kids.
Shock. A billionaire who only cares about themself?
Only? I'd live with that amount of income
Curious how people raise children on way less 🤷
Yeah, I just don't see why his kids should get luxuries while others go without food and water.
An expensive coffee costs $5. For a person that makes $100,000 that's 0.005% of annual income.
Musk's annual cost would be $33,120 for all three kids. I don't know his annual income and because a lot of his worth is in stocks it's probably hard to figure out and highly variable. I'll do some pretty stupid math and say he's worth 185 billion and he's 52, so he's made 3.5 billion a year.
Musk is fighting to pay an annual cost for all three of his three kids of 0.0009% of his annual income, a amount proportionally less than what many spend one day on coffee.
Again, no. Musks networth was somewhere around 160 billion because of stocks in the stupidly overinflated tesla. The tesla bubble is already inflating like hell and with that I'm sure he's losing networth like hell. If he continues current course he'll be bankrupt withing a few years.
Either way, the money he has in his bank accounts is NOT the same and probably in the tens of millions tops.
Boo hoo, pay the support, you pompous sycophant. It'll be the least amount of money you'll lose compared to the public embarrassment of buying Twitter and losing billions within the year you've bought it.
the public embarrassment of buying Twitter and losing billions within the year you’ve bought it.
Isn't it clear by now that he bought it to destroy/subvert it on purpose because it wasn't peddling NAZI propaganda enough?
I don't agree with that narrative.
Look at the way he handles those that oppose him, like news journalists and others who criticize him. He bought a social media platform because he wanted to control his PR. He knew he couldn't do that if he didn't own Twitter, so he goes and buys it just so he can do that.
It's like a rich troll who buys your favorite forum site so he can ban everyone who didn't like him.
I am curious as well...
(A sycophant would be a Musk fan-boy or anyone that just loves to stroke people like Musk, for those who need the definition.)
I'm no Muskcuck, but I am in favor of capping the generational transfer of wealth. Let these big inequalities die with this generation and set up a (more) even playing field for the next. If the rich want enhanced educational outcomes for their kids they have to fund public institutions.
It's child support bro
He didn't say Musk shouldn't have to pay child support.
He's arguing that his children shouldn't be billionaires out the gate because their daddy screwed over other parents.
Nah I'm the normal person. I understand this is fringe social media, and I accept that, but you're not the normal people.
This is why downvotes and mean comments never bother me. I'm hanging out in the crazy neighborhood. It's gonna happen
But this place will eventually get more popular and every normal person that joins is just more of me.
give all the things you want. multiple BILLIONS of dollars? nah man.
imagine telling a grown adult one person shouldn't horder 30% of the money. IMAGINE!
imagine telling a grown adult one person shouldn’t horder 30% of the money. IMAGINE!
Two things.
1: You can just tax rich people without crazy-ass plans like this
2: this isn't how money works
What makes you think this opinion will die on the Internet?
Because it's truly insane and will never get any support in real life.
Absolutely no one will vote in favor of the government confiscating all of your property when you die. Tankie shit isn't popular outside of a handful of message boards.
Capping the amount of wealth anyone can inherit seems sane to me. In fact it seems healthy for the whole economy, so not just sane but prudent. If you let all the wealth be collected by a few the system breaks down and all the money becomes worthless. Preventing that is entirely sane.
I'm against preventing the transfer all all property. That seems like a recipe for corruption but I'd vote for limiting it to a trust of like $50-$100 million maximum plus an occupied home, a vacation home, and some reasonable amount of small property like boats and cars. Honestly that amount seems excessive to me but I think the majority would be in favor of such a law.
Holy multi Strawman attack batman LOL.
Because it’s truly insane and will never get any support in real life.
It's got lots of support IRL already. I support it, therefore your assertion of 'never get support in real life' is specious and incorrect.
Absolutely no one
bzzzt wrong again, I'd vote for estate tax reform in a heartbeat.
no one will vote in favor of the government confiscating all of your property when you die.
if this is what you think the estate tax is you're incredibly stupid. yet another misrepresentation of reality to fit into your premise, but it's so fucking dumb from the outset it doesn't even warrant a reply. Yet here we are.
Tankie shit isn’t popular outside of a handful of message boards.
Taxing the ultra wealthy isn't 'tankie shit' you fucking dirtbag. Cute attempt to associate 'people who don't think a few should horde all the wealth' with 'tankies'.
Your entire argument is lies and garbage. Please, just stop whatever weird piece of performance art this utter shitshow is.
I love how all we need to do to find loop holes in the system is try to apply a law to the rich and see how they try to wiggle out of it. Then we close that loop hole. Seems like a pretty good system to me!
Yeah, worked great so far!
What's the loop hole ? It's over 32,000 a year for the child. A child doesn't require 32,000 a year. The mother wants to move the case and get more child support so she can use it on her self and her life style.
I’d argue that Musk needs that $32,000 even less. It’s a rounding error to him. This is Smaug, fighting over a rounding error. Stop begging to gobble his knob.
Also, that’s for three kids.
I take it back. Choke on that knob.
Its no surprise really, that fits his MO. Here is a recent video that shows how scummy the man really is.
Dang.
When your eyes are bigger than your stomach, lol.
Who or what is "Grimes"? Is this some woman's surname?
In previous comments, you've defended trump and twitter. I'm pretty sure your opinion is not relevant on this topic either.
I don't see things in black and white. I find them to be both morons, but I am not blinded by my political leaning to the point of seeing everything with Manichean reductionist lenses. by the way I have no shtick in US politics
by the way I have no shtick in US politics
Really? Why do you come to the defense of fascist U.S. political figures? Is it because you are so open-minded?
Did we just ignore the fact that he uses a harness on his kid so he won't run away? (See article picture)
He's actually known for the opposite: letting his pretty young child run around, exploring, even in the SpaceX factory (always while watching at a distance). He understands that children need not to be over protected.
Yeah- a small child playing in a rocket factory only being supervised at a distance. What could possibly go wrong? Next, a trip to the broken glass and rusty nail depository!
@lemmy.world
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
go to feed...
@lemmy.world
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious biased sources will be removed at the mods’ discretion. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted separately but not to the post body. Sources may be checked for reliability using Wikipedia, MBFC, AdFontes, GroundNews, etc.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source. Clickbait titles may be removed.
Posts which titles don’t match the source may be removed. If the site changed their headline, we may ask you to update the post title. Clickbait titles use hyperbolic language and do not accurately describe the article content. When necessary, post titles may be edited, clearly marked with [brackets], but may never be used to editorialize or comment on the content.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials, videos, blogs, press releases, or celebrity gossip will be allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis. Mods may use discretion to pre-approve videos or press releases from highly credible sources that provide unique, newsworthy content not available or possible in another format.
7. No duplicate posts.
If an article has already been posted, it will be removed. Different articles reporting on the same subject are permitted. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners or news aggregators.
All posts must link to original article sources. You may include archival links in the post description. News aggregators such as Yahoo, Google, Hacker News, etc. should be avoided in favor of the original source link. Newswire services such as AP, Reuters, or AFP, are frequently republished and may be shared from other credible sources.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
go to feed...
For fuck's sake... imagine finding out your father, the richest man in the world, fought to only have to pay your mother less than $3000 a month in child support!
save