Jon and Kate Plus 8 Official Thread - Part 6

[lisajl]

Hi,
I have not read all the posts but this show has been a guilty pleasure.

Could someone tell me how Jon can pay child support if he has no job?

I just saw the interview with Kate on The Today Show and while I don't like her that much, I am really not liking Jon either.
How can you clean out a bank account and leave your children with nothing?
Or am I just naive and this is a Kate thing?

 

[Mermaid02]

Jon's interview with Mary Hart tonight:

http://www.radaronline.com/exclusiv...ad-guy-here-im-one-trying-protect-my-children

VIDEO: Jon Gosselin Claims "I'm Not The Bad Guy Here, I'm The One Trying To Protect My Children"VIDEO: Jon Gosselin Claims "I'm Not The Bad Guy Here, I'm The One Trying To Protect My Children"
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted on Oct 05, 2009 @ 07:59PM print it send it

http://link.brightcove.com/services/link/bcpid16157557001/bctid43680590001
In a tense interview with ET's Mary Hart on Monday Jon and Kate Plus 8 star Jon Gosselin was grilled about his recent actions, including attempting to shut down the hit show and allegedly wiping out the family's bank account.

When Hart asked Gosselin if he had left his family "without the ability to pay for the roof over their head and or to put food on the table", a visibly agitated Jon shot back with a denial, claiming he pays $7,500 a month for "the kids, utilities, two mortgages and everything else that needs to be paid."

When asked if he was concerned at all that he was not going to be as sympathetic as Kate and that he's not going to win, an adamant Jon replied that "right now my kids are coming off the TV."

He went on to say, "I'm not the bad guy here - I'm the one trying to protect my children, that's called being a parent, protecting my children. I need to pull them off the television so we can work this out."

Going on to explain, "If you can fix the relationship everything else will come. You wont have to worry about anything else."

Jon did admit that he has made mistakes though saying, "I need to apologize to the public as well as to Kate and my kids."

Jon, however, refused to admit to the gravity of his actions, claiming "it's just blown out of proportion."

Here's the actual ET! video link with Mary Hart's interview with Jon:

http://www.etonline.com/news/2009/10/79399/index.html

Um- where exactly does he GET that $7500? From the money he took out of that joint account?

I missed The Insider tonight but saw a small clip on YouTube. I normally don't like Nancy Grace but , she seemed to ask some tough questions. It cracked me up when she asked Jon why is it always about him and he didn't know what to say. It would be interesting if she ever got to interview Kate.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PPx7bNyEhB0

OMG! Go Nancy! She left Jon speechless and pretty much told his lawyer to shut up.

 

[redrosesix]

So Jon is going to be on The Insider again tomorrow night, he was on Friday too and lunching at The Ivy on Saturday, so that means at least 5 days in California, when is his custody time? Yes, I know Kate was in New York, but still, isn't their custoday, she is with them 4 days and he's there the other 3?

I just gave up a long time ago on the custody time thing They definitely are not keeping to any schedule that either one has previously announced.

The only thing we know is that yesterday was supposed to be Kate's custody time and she wasn't there (as Jon just had to point out). Can you imagine how much money they'd save if either one of them was there to fill in when the other was busy -- oh, I forgot, they're not allowed to see the kids when it's not their custody time.

Hi,
I have not read all the posts but this show has been a guilty pleasure.

Could someone tell me how Jon can pay child support if he has no job?

I just saw the interview with Kate on The Today Show and while I don't like her that much, I am really not liking Jon either.
How can you clean out a bank account and leave your children with nothing?
Or am I just naive and this is a Kate thing?

I don't think either one of them has told the whole truth about anything since the divorce announcement. And I think everything they say has a hidden agenda behind it now. As for Kate, she has a pretty good PR team and she has obviously been following their advice to the letter.

Um- where exactly does he GET that $7500? From the money he took out of that joint account?

OMG! Go Nancy! She left Jon speechless and pretty much told his lawyer to shut up.

yup -- she doesn't let somebody use her show as a soapbox.

He must be using some of that money for his monthly payments :confused The only other money that he has made this summer that we know of was the $15,000 for the Vegas gig -- nice paycheque for a weekend's work, but not enough to cover his own expenses plus that amount for 1 month.

 

[redrosesix]

Anyone watch LKL last night -- I was really surprised they were talking about Jon and Kate again. They had 3 lawyers plus Dr. Drew who all refused to say that doing a reality show was definitely bad for the kids. However, good point made by one of them -- the kids should not be "wailing" as Kate described because the cameras were going to be removed from their lives.

I was pretty disappointed in Dr. Drew -- he said he sides with Kate, that the show is fine for the kids because she needs as many people as possible to take care of her kids and that Jon's job as a father of super-multiples was to support their mother since it is her job to take care of the kids (does he not watch the show, does he not read?) Oh yeah, and he defended TLC (he admits he knows the head person there very well and he's sure that she wouldn't do anything wrong) I am definitely ok with somebody disagreeing with me when they know all of the facts -- but really think people like that should shut up when they obviously don't.

One of the lawyers was the person who represented Denise Richards against Charlie Sheen -- I forget the credentials of the other 2. Not much of an objective panel IMO

 

[amid chaos]

These two have a warped sense of "work". Getting paid to be on TV, making appearances, interviews.... is not "work", it's whoring yourself.

 

[Mermaid02]

These two have a warped sense of "work". Getting paid to be on TV, making appearances, interviews.... is not "work", it's whoring yourself.

So all actors-actresses-models etc are just *****s?

 

[Mermaid02]

Anyone watch LKL last night -- I was really surprised they were talking about Jon and Kate again. They had 3 lawyers plus Dr. Drew who all refused to say that doing a reality show was definitely bad for the kids. However, good point made by one of them -- the kids should not be "wailing" as Kate described because the cameras were going to be removed from their lives.

I was pretty disappointed in Dr. Drew -- he said he sides with Kate, that the show is fine for the kids because she needs as many people as possible to take care of her kids and that Jon's job as a father of super-multiples was to support their mother since it is her job to take care of the kids (does he not watch the show, does he not read?) Oh yeah, and he defended TLC (he admits he knows the head person there very well and he's sure that she wouldn't do anything wrong) I am definitely ok with somebody disagreeing with me when they know all of the facts -- but really think people like that should shut up when they obviously don't.

One of the lawyers was the person who represented Denise Richards against Charlie Sheen -- I forget the credentials of the other 2. Not much of an objective panel IMO

So which is it? You are okay with people disagreeing with you or you aren't? You were disappointed in Dr. Drew because he disagrees with you- well, maybe he's using his degree and years of experience to form his opinion..... You think he isn't as versed as you are in the language of Jon and Kate?

I found this post by you confusing and contradictory.......

BTW- I have no idea what his credentials are..... anyone?

 

[amid chaos]

So all actors-actresses-models etc are just *****s?

Jon and Kate are not acting or modeling.

 

[barkley]

$7500 per month covers both mortgages, utilities, the kids and everything else that needs to be paid?

methinks there had to be a WHOPPING down payment on that new home (so that "only $500,000 after taxes" jon spoke of on lkl must not include other sources of revenue or items/services they receive in leiu of payment). they must have a KILLER deal on health and dental care (private insurance policy to cover 10 people is NOT cheap). low insurance coverage on the houses and new vehicals (pricey home/pricey cars generaly means pricey insurance). all organic diet is generaly not the cheapest means of shopping (esp. if you go multiple times per day to the local vendor). top this off with the cost of childcare, private school tuition, and the assorted other 'basics'-if they are managing to get it in under $7500 per month then they need to be shifting gears and start offering up money managment seminars at churches and women's shows

so essentialy-if their household expenses are ony $7500 per month, does'nt that mean that they should have been able to cover an entire year's expenses 5 times over just based on their 'only $500,000' from last year? seems if that's the case, and presumably their expenses were even less in preceding years (before the new house/new cars/little ones entering private school) then the argument that the 'show must go on' to provide support for the kids realy does'nt hold water. figure just last year they made enuf to cover 5.5 years, add on this year and that ups it to 11 years. it's conceivable that by season 4 they could have amassed enough savings to cover those kids for 22 years.

someone (not j or k's lawyers, someone who truly has the best interests of those kids) needs to 'follow the paper trail' and see just how much of the money has been used/put away for the needs of children (past/current/future) and evaluate BOTH parent's spending habits (jons doing conspicuous consumption now-it would be facinating to see what both their spending habits are historicaly like. tanning booths, spa trips, personal trainers and the like can be pretty costly and might add up over a few years to well within the range of what a single 'big ticket' purchase can run).

 

[amid chaos]

$7500 per month covers both mortgages, utilities, the kids and everything else that needs to be paid?

methinks there had to be a WHOPPING down payment on that new home (so that "only $500,000 after taxes" jon spoke of on lkl must not include other sources of revenue or items/services they receive in leiu of payment). they must have a KILLER deal on health and dental care (private insurance policy to cover 10 people is NOT cheap). low insurance coverage on the houses and new vehicals (pricey home/pricey cars generaly means pricey insurance). all organic diet is generaly not the cheapest means of shopping (esp. if you go multiple times per day to the local vendor). top this off with the cost of childcare, private school tuition, and the assorted other 'basics'-if they are managing to get it in under $7500 per month then they need to be shifting gears and start offering up money managment seminars at churches and women's shows

so essentialy-if their household expenses are ony $7500 per month, does'nt that mean that they should have been able to cover an entire year's expenses 5 times over just based on their 'only $500,000' from last year? seems if that's the case, and presumably their expenses were even less in preceding years (before the new house/new cars/little ones entering private school) then the argument that the 'show must go on' to provide support for the kids realy does'nt hold water. figure just last year they made enuf to cover 5.5 years, add on this year and that ups it to 11 years. it's conceivable that by season 4 they could have amassed enough savings to cover those kids for 22 years.

someone (not j or k's lawyers, someone who truly has the best interests of those kids) needs to 'follow the paper trail' and see just how much of the money has been used/put away for the needs of children (past/current/future) and evaluate BOTH parent's spending habits (jons doing conspicuous consumption now-it would be facinating to see what both their spending habits are historicaly like. tanning booths, spa trips, personal trainers and the like can be pretty costly and might add up over a few years to well within the range of what a single 'big ticket' purchase can run).

I thought the 7500$ was his half, meaning the household expenses would be twice as much.

 

[redrosesix]

So which is it? You are okay with people disagreeing with you or you aren't? You were disappointed in Dr. Drew because he disagrees with you- well, maybe he's using his degree and years of experience to form his opinion..... You think he isn't as versed as you are in the language of Jon and Kate?

I found this post by you confusing and contradictory.......

BTW- I have no idea what his credentials are..... anyone?

Kate is the not the SAHM that Dr. Drew believes she is...enough said.

 

[Lisa loves Pooh]

I'm not buying that $7500 is enough for 2 mortgages and feeding 8 kids orgnaically. I call HOGWASH.

This is based on my own personal family budget and NOT living in a million dollar home.

Watching CBS this morning---Jon claims they have made 2.25 million in the past 4 years. WOW!

And Jon has a "corporate" account. Hmmmm....interesting.

 

[redrosesix]

$7500 per month covers both mortgages, utilities, the kids and everything else that needs to be paid?

methinks there had to be a WHOPPING down payment on that new home (so that "only $500,000 after taxes" jon spoke of on lkl must not include other sources of revenue or items/services they receive in leiu of payment). they must have a KILLER deal on health and dental care (private insurance policy to cover 10 people is NOT cheap). low insurance coverage on the houses and new vehicals (pricey home/pricey cars generaly means pricey insurance). all organic diet is generaly not the cheapest means of shopping (esp. if you go multiple times per day to the local vendor). top this off with the cost of childcare, private school tuition, and the assorted other 'basics'-if they are managing to get it in under $7500 per month then they need to be shifting gears and start offering up money managment seminars at churches and women's shows

so essentialy-if their household expenses are ony $7500 per month, does'nt that mean that they should have been able to cover an entire year's expenses 5 times over just based on their 'only $500,000' from last year? seems if that's the case, and presumably their expenses were even less in preceding years (before the new house/new cars/little ones entering private school) then the argument that the 'show must go on' to provide support for the kids realy does'nt hold water. figure just last year they made enuf to cover 5.5 years, add on this year and that ups it to 11 years. it's conceivable that by season 4 they could have amassed enough savings to cover those kids for 22 years.

someone (not j or k's lawyers, someone who truly has the best interests of those kids) needs to 'follow the paper trail' and see just how much of the money has been used/put away for the needs of children (past/current/future) and evaluate BOTH parent's spending habits (jons doing conspicuous consumption now-it would be facinating to see what both their spending habits are historicaly like. tanning booths, spa trips, personal trainers and the like can be pretty costly and might add up over a few years to well within the range of what a single 'big ticket' purchase can run).

Like Amid Chaos says, the $7500 is just his half of the expenses.

But you're absolutely right about everything. Even just considering the mortgage on the NEW house, I find it hard to justify relying on the children for their income -- who would buy a $1.3 million house and amortize it over only 10 years? The house is in Jon and Kate's names, not the kids'. The mortgage remaining on it is $720,000 (I think, somebody posted that a few pages back). Jeez, they could switch to a 30 year mortgage and divide that payment in half. And there is no good excuse for holding onto the old house so long as you're making your kids work to pay for that mortgage too -- it doesn't matter even if you lose money, it would be one less payment every month.

And don't forget the restaurant dining -- they both do that a lot. While their kids are at home being fed by the nannies.

 

[auntie]

Certainly these people are not the only people in the world with eight children. Surely others with large families don't rely on the children as the main support of the family. While they have made financial choices based on the income generated from the show..they should have been smart enough to know it wasn't going to last forever. Whether it was due to a divorce or any other type of situation that would cause the show to end. You don't use the kids as a means of support. Or for the opportunities the show may provide to them or the family. It just isn't right.

 

[heartsy77]

Um- where exactly does he GET that $7500? From the money he took out of that joint account?



OMG! Go Nancy! She left Jon speechless and pretty much told his lawyer to shut up.

OMG LUV IT!

 

[barkley]

for people who were'nt informed enough to know to look at their responsibility and tlc's legal requirements regarding child labor laws in their state (so sez jon and his attny) i suspect they were informed enough to get some very good tax advice that prompted them to do that home on a 10 year loan.

figure they can write a whole lot of that house off so long as filming is being done there (buisness expense) so to maximize the write off against their income, paying more in the short term can pay off. they might have also figured that (had things gone as planned-pre divorce), the likelyhood of the 'gosselin gravy train' lasting more than another 10 years was slim to none, so why not slam all that money the kids are making for them into equity in that house-it's the parent's assett, not the kid's. even if the public was still clammoring for the kids, in 10 years it would be allot harder to force them to participate.


then of course there's the suspicious former social services part of me, coupled with my current status as the spouse of full time college student who questions if there might not be some VERY specific financial planning going on to structure their assetts such that should their "income" stop or drasticly change (or they just don't want to freaking pay for it on their own) they will be set up such that those kids will qualify for a number of public assistance programs as well as generous financial aide (one of my neighbors is VERY savvy on the financial aide end and structured their assetts and buisness such that her dd is now pursuing her master's degree in the same manner she received her bachelors and teaching credential-with 100% of it covered through income/need based grants).

 

[DVCisME]

I think that all this information being put out there is absurd.
I also think that Kate might have been behing the 10 year mortgage because she knew she wanted to divorce and more of the mortgage would be paid off.
I also thing her comment that Jon "has always been a one to take advice of the one next to them", can be used against her. I also think it is very telling of how much control she really had. Interesting to that she put $100,000 aside so she would be able to feed her kids...gone are the days of coupons...lol.

 

[redrosesix]

for people who were'nt informed enough to know to look at their responsibility and tlc's legal requirements regarding child labor laws in their state (so sez jon and his attny) i suspect they were informed enough to get some very good tax advice that prompted them to do that home on a 10 year loan.

figure they can write a whole lot of that house off so long as filming is being done there (buisness expense) so to maximize the write off against their income, paying more in the short term can pay off. they might have also figured that (had things gone as planned-pre divorce), the likelyhood of the 'gosselin gravy train' lasting more than another 10 years was slim to none, so why not slam all that money the kids are making for them into equity in that house-it's the parent's assett, not the kid's. even if the public was still clammoring for the kids, in 10 years it would be allot harder to force them to participate.


then of course there's the suspicious former social services part of me, coupled with my current status as the spouse of full time college student who questions if there might not be some VERY specific financial planning going on to structure their assetts such that should their "income" stop or drasticly change (or they just don't want to freaking pay for it on their own) they will be set up such that those kids will qualify for a number of public assistance programs as well as generous financial aide (one of my neighbors is VERY savvy on the financial aide end and structured their assetts and buisness such that her dd is now pursuing her master's degree in the same manner she received her bachelors and teaching credential-with 100% of it covered through income/need based grants).

ITA with everything you said here -- their financial plan includes them doing the show, and accumulating as much wealth as possible for themselves while they're doing it. That said, they could easily come up with a new financial plan that doesn't include the show -- I truly hope the judge and/or arbitrator forces them to look at this possibility.

And yes, I don't see any reason why the kids won't qualify for financial aid -- with 8 kids potentially in college at the same time.

 

[Mickey527]

Nancy Grace was good and did put some pressure on Jon but she kept saying "work on your marriage".
I don't think after what they both have said and done that there will ever be a way to repair that marriage. And Jon kept trying to tell her that he wants to mediate and work on being good co-parents, but not married. she wouldn't shut her trap for enough time for that to get into her brain. (not a Nancy Grace fan)
They do have to talk about how they will raise the kids, and maybe enforce that when one is home the other can traipes the world doing their tv shows and interviews. The person who has custody MUST be at home during that time or take the kids with them on their dime and NO interviews with them on camera.
Another thing that Jon brought up last night was that when he went to the house for the first time he found the bedroom door had a deadbolt on it. He said he couldn't get in to get his clothes etc... Maybe that is why he was wearing those khacki shorts for two days in a row?
If he was living in the basement or garage why did he have all his stuff in the bedroom. And if that is his house he has every right to break down the door in whatever way he needs to get into his room. No room is out of limits for the owner no matter what the other has done. I personally would put a ladder up and break down the window, they are cheaper to replace. then go in and unlock the deadbolt from the inside and take it off. Teach Kate a lesson that she can't control the house they both own.

 

[mousey]

Actually I thought Jon handled Nancy Grace pretty well. She acts tough for the camera. She is forever looking at the camera. I thought he answered questions a lot more honest than Kate did or ever will.

Kate isn't giving the whole story about the missing money. She leaves out details that explain why he withdrew money and also neglects to say what she took money out for!

Kate says she wants the old Jon to call her but Jon says, the old Jon is gone--he's not her servant anymore.

I think what happened was Jon said back in October that he wanted to stop doing the show and Kate freaked out. She likes the camera and being in charge. The kids have no choice.

I watched the organization show yesterday and thought Kate was back to her snotty self. She seemed very unappreciative at times and I'm sure those two women wanted to strangle her. The kids were running wild and she introduced her "new best friend" who did not look familiar at all. The best was in one scene the dogs were passing by--must of been filmed a couple months ago. Poor Kate you would of thought that she is the only one in the world who has 8 kids and where to hang their winter jackets and snowpants. Once again, phoney as ever. Please Kate, give it up---the ratings have to be rock bottom after this waste of 30 mintues.