Based on your number. You say it's 1/2 of 1%. OK we know that the divorce rate in this country is around 50% which equates to a couple million divorces in this country every year, even if only half of them involve child support of some kind you're still getting a situation where you're getting at least 5000 new deadbeat dads every year (that's based on 2 million total divorces per year which is surely a small number). Assuming all of them only owe as much as my father did ($125/ month) that $625,000 per month and $7.5 million per year. That ain't chump change and it's all based on number probably much smaller than reality.
Sometimes it's hard to explain something simple in a clear way, but I know that the problem is more than a decade of propaganda piled up to make people believe things that aren't true. If you're looking for something that makes sense in - how should I say it -- a normal way, you're not going to get it. Here's the most basic thing you should focus on completely until you're sure you've got it. If you get this, then we'll have some chance of moving on. Profits are made in proportion to "collections." ALL PAYMENTS are counted as "collections." Make sure you understand that last part: ALL PAYMENTS. It doesn't matter if they're late or on time. It doesn't matterif there was ever a payment problem or not; literally ALL PAYMENTS are counted as "collections."
You're still evading the question. How are these laws being sicked on people that they shouldn't be? It's a very simple direct question. You say people with good payment history are getting busted, all I want to know is how. What's the loophole that greedy ex-wives/government officials/whoever the hell else are using to attack men that these laws were not supposed to attack. The last I heard when everything was going normally all child support payments were going from spouse to spouse no government agency involved. Did that change? If not then how are ex-wives sicking the government on men that pare paying on time? It's a simple question give me a simple answer, even an annectotal one, I realize those aren't scientific proof but I want an example. Just because it's profitable does not prove that the system is being abused, it proves that it can be but there are a lot of possible things in this world that aren't happening.
... your final comments are simply rude and not repeated in this post ...
Asking you to propose a solution to this problem you insist exists but refuse to provide any proof of is rude?! I'm no graduate of Ms Manners but that doesn't strike me as rude.