"Deadbeat dad" flees to Philippines leaving four kids without support

According to a recent Toronto Star Article, Hans Mills, or the now infamous so called "dead beat dad" is a man with heart of black coals, who abandoned his four little children to go bang pinoy whores in a big ole whore house down in the Philippines leaving his poor four kids without any support.  Further leaving his wife also without any support.  Obviously the story was written by a bias misandronist (man hater brain washed feminist), so lemme break this story for you down piece by piece.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/1220096--deadbeat-dad-flees-to-philippines-leaving-four-kids-without-support

To make the long story short.  The man made somewhere above 100k per year, they owned a home worth $1.2 million, with $600k in equity (if the home was sold, this is how much the seller would get in hand before deductions for various expenses like realtor fees, lawyer fees, etcetera.  Further the house had a rental unit on the property that would earn $2000 a month for the family.

Of his 4 kids, 1is a heroin junkie but a legal adult (over 18 in Ontario), the other suffers from depressions (Which almost many Western women will suffer at some point and is a very murky disease because it is unclear from the article if this is a clinical depression or just the kid who is 17 feels depressed.  Mind you 17 is pretty damn close to being an adult.  So what you have really are 2 minors.   A 14 y/o with down syndrome and 10 y/o - who had cancer but appears to be in remission.  Originally, they seemed to have a private deal worked out that seemed a bit in favour of the women, but nonetheless fair as in maybe 53-47.  not a total loss for either party.  The man sold his 300k share to his wife in the $1.2 million house for near half price 175k.  This means if she sold the house she would realize a net gain of 425k, instead of the 300k that she should be entitled to assuming equal splitting of assets.  At this point still slanted to the women, but not grossly unfair.  Since she would get the kids, one could reasonably argue that she should have a larger equity due to that or some argument to that extent.

Well it turns out Ms. Mills, didn't want to work, and 425k in equity and a $2000 stream of rental income and  $2000  a month in child support wasn't enough.  she wanted more, more, more, more.  Essentially the man had given up his share of equity in the house and rental income inexchange for not having to pay alimony.  Seems fair enough, was stated in the contract.  Well turns out the wife claims she never read nor understood the contract and that it meant she'd give up alimony claim.

Well they end up in court and the genius judge decides that he will grant the wife a temporary order for spousal support in the amount of $2k a month, in addition to the 2k a month he already pays in child support.
Further Hans had to pay retroactive payments dating back to the original divorce back in 2005 up until 2012. I am a finance major.  And quick mental math (yes I can do exponents and interest in my head) and with compounding, the 2k per month, over the 7 years it was an order to pay about 317k just on back support.  Then there would be court cost that he was ordered to pay.  Meaning about 50k, for each side.

At that rate, from the new temp order he was already 417k in the hole thanks to the new order from the judge.  And that doesn't count the new 4k per months in payments he must make.

Now using finance I could estimate that he earns between 100k on the low end but closer to 130k on the high end, because back when he bought his house roughly 15 years ago, he'd probably with liar loans have about that income.  It could be as high as 200k, but more realistically 100-130k.

Now none of these payments are tax deductible.  So Even if he earns 150k.  He'd be 417k in debt, he'd have to pay 4k a month in child and alimony, and that doesn't even factor in how much the government would demand he repay the 417k.  It'd basically be a 2nd mortgage and come out to around another 2k per month.  Meaning Hans Mills, who is 53 would have to pay 2k a month just to cover back payments even when he is in his mid 70s.That is he'd likely work to the day he died if he did not want to go to jail.  And that's the other kicker.  If he falls behind too much on his child support or alimony who goes to jail.  Even if he earns 12.5k a month or 150k a year lets look at how that breaks down.

Neither child support of alimony is a tax deduction in Canada or Ontario.
With an average tax rate of about 33%, he'd only take home 99k AFTER income taxes. And he'd lose another 4% of his income to things like EI, it'd be like 93k.

Now deduct 4k in payments + 2k in back payments thanks to the temp order, and you have him paying 6k a month.  So he is paying out 72k per month.

93k-72k = 21k

Now Hans Mills is 53, he lives in the GTA, if he moves out of the gta, he will default on his loans because these kinds of salaries are basically non existent except for in trades for people in Alberta and you cannot just walk in as a 53 y/o into Fort Mac and have 150k rolled out infront of you.

So Hans Mills following the court system would basically bankrupt him.  He;d be able to have no car, so basically be difficult or impossible to work as a consultant as travel is required for his job.  Making less than 2k a month, he won't be able to afford insurance, in GTA never mind a car or gas or repairs.  He'd be lucky to find rent for $1100 a month in Toronto.  and even in the worst of ghetto in Toronto a house/apartment doesn't rent for below that unless it is government subsidized.  O  you make 150k, good luck getting into government housing.  So it'd be a miracle if he were not homeless never mind just being poor and living in the ghetto.  Canada is not like America, even our "ghetto" workers and neighbourhoods have economic mobility.  That is higher min wages mean higher rents, there are no such things as 10k houses in major cities the size of Detroit or Miami in Canada just because they a crime ridden.  Nowhere in Canada is that crime ridden.

Now here is the real kicker, once the obvious fact that to not be homeless, to work, and to eat are taken into account, Mr. Hans Mills, would end up in a position where he is either forced to evade taxes, or forced to not pay child support, either which will continually land him in prison in Canada.  So essentially he is a refugee of Canada's misandrognist justice system.  Some might say fuck him, let him be homeless so his wife can live in a $1.2 million home, and his heroin head junkie son can get his money.  I think dad's should support their kids, but is that really justice, that a dad sleep on the street so that a mother who refuses to work or sell her $1.2 million house can live in an enormous house and collect 6k a month from him in addition to another 2k a month from the government for disability. Maybe she should downgrade her expectations.

So Hans Mills, is he truly a deadbeat.  Well if being a deadbeat means not wanting to work into your 70s and likely your death, to enrich a lazy wife, with no future or prospect in life, no chance of owning a car, home, no chance of moving beyond the deepest of ghetto, likely would end up in prison and jail for much of his life, and old dudes don't do well in prison.  Then I guess he is a deadbeat 10 fold.  But in reality, he isn't a deadbeat, he only opposes paying the outrageous amounts the courts awarded to his wife that would guarantee ruin him.

Then there is the whole issue of the wife greed, she knew that he intended to leave Canada, if such a thing occured, so much so she called up the government and told them to freeze Hans Mills passport and stop him from leaving the country (a violation of his constitutional right to freely leave and enter the country-section 6 of the Canadian Constitution aka mobility rights ).

Hans is not a winner in this case, there is no real winner except the ex-wife- perhaps- and his kids when they reach adulthood, they will understand why he did what he did, for the simple reason that odds are 1 in 4 of them will probably at somepoint have a divorce or experience turbulent relationship.

However this deal with broader issues of bias Canadian courts, and all Canadian men should have a 2nd citizenship, preferably from a country that neither extradites its own citizens nor

Brazilian Girls... sigh

Brazil, once known as a land of hot and exotic women is slowly becoming amercanized.  And by that I mean increasingly, you no longer just see an old man with a big gut in a speedo, but you see a fat chick with a big gut in a speedo, thinking she is all that.

Sorry Brazil, you are no longer number 1 in the Western Hemisphere, yes there may be a thin hot girl under all that fat, but that's what they all say.

Colombia is now numero uno, Ironically, and this is for men who likes Milfs, Colombian milfs seem to be the hottest of any kind of milfs out there.

Marco Jaric and Adrianna Lima

 Marko Jaric and Adiranna Lima, O hell no

Jaric is not as good looking or rich. In fact I'd bet Lima is probably richer than him. Jaric is not only a terrible basketball player, but when you put his name in google the first search option that comes up is marko jaric ugly! I can;t figure out why she'd go for that guy, clearly there are NBA players with more $ and bigger ding dongs or more fame
http://www.datingish.com/750046560/love-...ctiveness/


I am by no means alone on this one. the only thing I figure is she has a low self esteem and wanted to make sure she married a guy who'd never cheat on her and would kiss her butt (kinda like mariah carey and mr. nick carey - but even nick is not so ugly). This would be like flava flav marrying Angelina Jolie or Prince marrying that girl from Precious.

This supports my theory of very hot rich females wanting beta men with lots of $$$

In fact Marko Jaric is so ugly the first thing that comes up when you type his name in google is ugly... go on type it in

Norwegian girls

I can't speak of everywhere just the places I been.
The easiest women statistically are Norwegian girls, and I had no problem lizard slaying their. I found swedes more attractive though, and they are a bit more aggressive in flirting than Norwegian girls. Norwegians girls expect you to do the approach more than a french or italian girl who if they are into you will try to start a conversation where a norwegian girl would just stare you down. Ukranian girls are also easy. Been to britain but never tried to pick up girls there because I never saw anything I like but it didn't seem worst than toronto. Some seem a bit rude, but some polish girls were a bit flirty with me. Where else... irish girls seemed to be very friendly, and they are easy to bed. Finnish girls are also easy and mexican girls can't get enough. Philipinos and greeks also easy. Actually come to think of it, after living in Toronto for over 20 years, just about any type of girl seems easy. American girls are more outgoing and not stuck into the toronto clique system.

I must disclose I'm a good looking black guy, as in nice facial features, in fact I get told I look like I belong on a magazine or a tv or something, so my experiences with women may be above average (which is ironic because when it comes to toronto thats not the case, its probably below average outside of school). I have yet to hit up any liz liz from girls outside of school or outside of the country. that is if I did travel outside Canada and if I did not take those psychology courses in university/high school (and minus sex in elementary school) that had like 90% girls, then I'd probably still be a virgin. IE. If I moved here as a 20 y/o I dont think I'd get any girls. when it comes to toronto, it is very hard to be a man, below average women get hot dogs thrown at them all the time because of how few non fat/ugly/frumpy women their are. What is really like a 3-4 probably has a line of men waiting to date her at any given time, and you;d be hard pressed to find anything above a 4.5-5 out of 10 in toronto. Breast implants are rare and those carrie prejean or denise richards or beyonce type girls are basically non-existant in canada as far as I've seen.

I can't say there is a hardest country in europe to pull in, because compared to toronto where you are assumed to be an axe killer/serial rapist(because of historical reasons I document below), where men outnumber women by 15-20%, where women are given free access to clubs just because of how few of them go to clubs compared to men and men are routinely screened out for bs. If I had to pick one, I'd pick britain, just because I never got any physical ve jay jay there.

I'd recommend for any decent looking black guy to go to sweden so he can also experience what it is like to drown in Vj jay, complete hotties drool over black men there it is quite comical, I now know what it is like to be a white man in asia or latin america LOL.

As to why toronto women have such negative opinions of men. It comes down to the fact that toronto people are largely immigrants from ww1 and ww2 and other 20th century wars (Germans, Poles, Italians, Ukranians, Russians, Chinese, Koreans, etc.) Many of the women during this time were raped and even the ones who were not raped have the fear of men raping them engrained into their mind. (think rape of nanjing or how russian army allegedly raped 100,000 women in the day they conquered berlin). Long story short the girls/women of today have parents and grandparents who were most likely raped and therefore are distrustful of men. The best proof of this is the most open sexually women are the irish canadian white women who did not have this experience (ie toronto has been 90% irish 10 years after it was founded or so). some have speculated toronto women are cold because of some puritan roots(english). This is a misnomer, because the Irish according to historians made up 90% of the population by the 1850s (toronto founded in 1830s). further Before toronto even existed as a formal city it was called york at which point american loyalist outnumbered british canadians by 10 to 1 (much like americans in texas when it was in mexico). And it ended in a similar fashion except the british won (see upper canada rebellion) because america did not want a full war at that time.

Also Toronto women are highly feminazi, and have a princess complex. Yes all women have this, and understand american women have this too but it is nothing like the ones from toronto. Not every single toronto women has this, but if she is not, she probably has a dozen male friends all lining up to date her even if she is not attractive at all (I've seen it). to have a gf here it requires a certain level of self degradation and willing to deal with BS that I care not for anymore. The only women worth going for here is one who usually comes to you or will make it very easy for you to pick her up(ie she is obviously checking you out). and in my experience those have generally been east/south european immigrant girls anyways. You don't want to date those british english Canadian girls they will make you do all the work in the relationship even if you are successful.

Anyways, thats my rant.

Why Russia is not corrupt

Commonly the Western Media labels Russia as corrupt, because countries like Russia send corrupt businessmen to jail for engaging in fraud.  However, countries in the first world tend to let big time fraudsters walk free, while arresting the guy who did a $15 fraud and giving him the tough on crime sentence of 15 years of hard prison.  Then truth is the entire Western economies are based off fraud, which is why whenever  these frauds are common knowledge you get a collapse.  Whether it is the mortgage bubble or the high tech bubble or the derivatives bubble, all of these speculative bubbles which drive "growth" really are just sophisticated frauds created by the mega banks in the West to give the illusion of growth.  When you take out all the bubbles and frauds the west has nothing left.  When Russia sentences the business crooks to jail, they are labelled as corrupt banana republics with lack of fair trails. But when Western con artist banks defraud people, no  one decries the corrupt prosecutors and corrupt governments who refuse to prosecute them.

Why Iranians are not white.

I have served in the military and I have been to Afghanistan.  While numerous Afghans have traits like red hair or even freckles, they are the minority, and Afghanistan is at the cross roads of central Asia conquered by numerous countries and races.  Hence nothing about that is unusual but they are not white and neither are most Persians.

1. Afghanistan is not in Europe, nor are they on a whole of European descent or even near majority of European descent.  In short, Afghans would not pass the obvious visual test for being a European Caucasian.  While being from outside of Europe doesn't ensure one is not white (ie. whites in South Africa are whites as are whites who have european ancestry in other parts of the world.)  Even Afghans who possess common European traits like blue eyes or red hair are visibly very different looking.  No one is going to mistake Hammid Karzai for being anglo saxon.

2.  50% of Afghanistan or about 14 million Afghans are Persians.  Persians are basically elite Afghans (Pashtos - who are also present in Pakistan) who came to Iran to be in the centre of the middle east and have access to the Persian gulf. Iran is about 35% Persian and almost all Iranians in the West are Persians and not Azeris who are the majority and also non whites.  No one would mistake nor consider neither Pakis nor Afghanis to be whites in fact almost all Pakis considered themselves part of the brown race like Indians and Bangladesh.  So it is unclear why once they cross over into Iran they'd become white.

3. Iran is a fundamentally central asian country surrounded by Central Asians nations.  The closest to white people in all of Iran are Azeris.  Google Ayatollah Kohmeni, the grand ayatollah of Iran, and you will see why it is simply not possible than any of these people are white.  Iraq, Turkey, Afghans, Pakis, Turkmenistan, Azerbajans, none considered to be white.  No European person would consider even for a second a turk anything less than a muslim, and definetly not white (unlike white muslims in former yugoslavia).

War in Iran, how it could unfold

The Iranians are easily the most clever of all the Islamic countries. Time after time the Iranians politically out manuever their US political counterparts. The US may be highly surprised by any attempt to attack Iran. Iran is not Libya or Iraq. Iran is larger than Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria combined. Iran has material support from Russia and China and is allies with Iraq (both shiite Islam), Syria, Lebanon Afghanistan (50% of Afghanistan is Persian, the second largest ethnicity in Iran). Basically a U.S. invasion of Iran would be WW3. Even without Russia or China (who both have secretive interest in the US LOSING - TO DETHROWN us as world power and prevent US from getting missile bases next door). Ie. Russians have incentive for US to lose Iran for the same reason they put nukes in Cuba, nukes in Turkey bother them as would nukes in Iran. And both are Iranian allies.

Iran has 110,000 rockets by Hezbollah fighters in Lebanon aimed at Israel. You saw how it crippled Israel in their last war with Lebanon, all their technology was not enough to stop a few well hidden people shooting a few hundred unguided rockets. Now throw in the conventional weapons of Iraq and Syria who all have incentives to see Israel lose, and who knows how them muslim brotherhoods in Libya and Egypt will react to Israel slaughter thousands of muslims. Iran has conventional guided weapons to destroy Israel, but all the other countries could do the hard work for them. Any attempted invasion of Iran or strikes by Israel would basically force it to declare war on Iraq. 

Iran has a population the size of roughly imperial Japan with far larger and more treacherous terrain. Iran is basically a giant mountain, whose capital sits with its back to Russia (eliminating any easy attack on the capital. In fact Iran was basically founded by Afghan Pashtun elites who moved westward to gain access to the Persian gulf and be able to better protect their capital from invasions. In WW2, US lost 100k people and had 250k wounded by end of battle of the pacific. Further Iran possess a missile stockpile that simply did not exist at the time of WW2. It is basically possible to wipe out an entire naval fleet or military base with a single missile. My professor taught me in military college that battles of the bulge and conventional warfare was essentially dead, ever since the 1970's where a single tank shell or missile can blow up mid air and fragment in to a million piece each faster than the speed of sound. That is a single missile can destroy a ship and its anti missile weapons are useless to defend against a million quarter inch projectiles.

Any talk of nuking Iran, who shares a border with Russia, and several US allies is just fantasy. Not that the US could not physically do it, but sending soldiers into a country that was just nuked would be suicide for the soldiers. Not to mention nukes behave in unpredictable ways and the fallout tends to spread by the wind. Meaning the fallout could blow into neighbouring Russia, China, Pakistan, India (all nuclear powers) or blow onto US bases or allies in neighbouring Turkey, Qatar, Dubai, etc.

Then there is the Pakistan factor. Pakistan could close of its route to US troops and basically US soldiers could find themselves quickly stranded in the continent of Asia, surrounded by mountains with no easy escape routes and several massive armies closing in on them. And its not a could, more like will, as Pakistan has vowed to defend Iran in the event of a US invasion.

Even if the US wins, it will be a hollow victory, there will be a minimum 300k us troops killed, Israel will be destroyed, and oil prices will be through the roof, and China will be the winner as all the debt from the war will put America on its knees, and China will take the opportunity to freeze credit to America to give it the kiss of death and make China the strongest economy in the world.


The horrible truth will be for America, we gain nothing from invading Iran, they lose nothing from an invasion. Because once we leave they just hate America again and build nukes anyways and Israel really will be wiped off the map, and of course they will demand more money from us, meaning hire taxes for Americans to rebuild foreigners.

Iran actually has a highly advanced conventional army, with jet planes, advanced ships, anti air craft weaponry, radar. This isn't Afghanistan, its not Iraq, the army is going to fight. Not to mention a very large army and numerous powerful allies. The US could quickly find itself up the creek and paddle less. With all its bases closed down in Afghanistan, Pakistan and turkmenistan (russia biggest ally and a friendly to Iran and would likely close its bases to avoid being invaded by a much stronger Iran). In fact the US soldiers may just end up being slaughtered on their bases which may act like death traps rather than camps. US soldiers may be forced onto bases by militaries who do not want to see Iran bomb their country.

The war can be further complicated if young kim jong un takes the opportunity to invade south korea since US is bogged down in war with Iran. US has never even invaded a country with nuclear power, in general US invades small banana republics like Panama or Grenada. Even the invasion of Cuba failed after it was discovered Castro might still have nuclear capabilities as it was unclear if it was Castro or the USSR in control of nukes in Cuba and millions of Americans could have died. Iran has missile capabilities that can reach well into the Indian ocean and blow out US ships before they even get close enough to to shoot at Iran. 

In the end I think America would win, but most likely a draft would be required, and US would be crippled economically by the war and it'd drag on for at least a year in the best case scenario. Not to mention the thousands of guerillas fighters who'd make Iraq look like Greenwhich, CT. You people thinking we can just parking lot Iran are on fantasy island


The fact that I show the truth about what a war with Iran would look like and how it would be a disaster for America, and how the Chinese and Russians and globalist would be laughing to the bank while Americans spends its money on weapons and sends its kids to go die in another worthless achieve nothing war is a joke. All you warmongers, what do you have to show for all your wars since ww2, nothing, all it does is make America #1, #1 at being the worst in everything, worst in education because they need dumb people to fight their stupid wars that mean nothing, #1 in stupidity and laziness, #1 in tv brainwashing, #1 in sitting on the counch playing video games, #1 in can't read and write your own damn language while people in the rest of the world learn 3-4. #1 in not being able to add. Iran will just be one more war where trillions of your tax dollars will be spent to kill overseas, while your roads are still congested, your bills go hire, you can't find no job, your gas goes up, tuition goes up, all prices go up and your income goes down. If our leaders were any good, they'd go bomb China or Europe because they are our competitors and maybe we'd at least be able to take their money and get a few jobs back in America.