<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments for Article Transway Transportation</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.transwaytransportation.com/comments/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.transwaytransportation.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 18 Feb 2012 09:42:49 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Should the dependent exemptions be removed from tax code? by bostonianinmo</title>
		<link>http://www.transwaytransportation.com/should-the-dependent-exemptions-be-removed-from-tax-code/#comment-47</link>
		<dc:creator>bostonianinmo</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Feb 2012 09:42:49 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.transwaytransportation.com/should-the-dependent-exemptions-be-removed-from-tax-code/#comment-47</guid>
		<description>Population growth in the US is SHRINKING if you hadn&#039;t noticed.  Right now it is at a level too low to sustain the Social Security system.  Additionally, bringing more taxpayers on line -- i.e. having children -- will ultimately help INCREASE tax revenues, not reduce them.

And if you don&#039;t buy those arguments, consider that the exemptions for children are such an ingrained part of the American Way that dumping them would be viewed as decidedly UN-American and would be rejected by the public almost universally.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Population growth in the US is SHRINKING if you hadn&#8217;t noticed.  Right now it is at a level too low to sustain the Social Security system.  Additionally, bringing more taxpayers on line &#8212; i.e. having children &#8212; will ultimately help INCREASE tax revenues, not reduce them.</p>
<p>And if you don&#8217;t buy those arguments, consider that the exemptions for children are such an ingrained part of the American Way that dumping them would be viewed as decidedly UN-American and would be rejected by the public almost universally.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Should the dependent exemptions be removed from tax code? by Bob F</title>
		<link>http://www.transwaytransportation.com/should-the-dependent-exemptions-be-removed-from-tax-code/#comment-46</link>
		<dc:creator>Bob F</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Feb 2012 09:13:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.transwaytransportation.com/should-the-dependent-exemptions-be-removed-from-tax-code/#comment-46</guid>
		<description>Deductions for kids are just the tip of the iceberg.  Better yet, let&#039;s eliminate the Earned Income Credit and the Additional Child Tax Credit.  Those are the credits that pays people to have kids if they agree to never marry.

Example:  Susie has two kids and makes $ 13K a year.  She will pay no taxes since her standard deduction + personal exemption + 2 dependent exemptions wipes out all income.  But not only that, the federal government (in other words, we taxpayers) will pay her an earned income credit of $ 4500.  So her taxes for the year are -$ 4500.  In other words she is a payer of negative taxes - she gets all her withholdings back plus a $ 4500 bonus.  Oh yeah, I almost forgot about the Additional Child Tax Credit.  Another bonus for anybody with kids who makes over $ 11K but isn&#039;t eligible for the Child Tax Credit, like Susie.  Without figuring it out exactly, let&#039;s just point out it can be anywhere from a few dollars to a few thousand dollars.  So she &quot;pays&quot; even more negative taxes.

On the other hand, if Susie marries Johnny, the dad, who makes $ 30K, guess what happens.  It they are married, their combined income is too high for the EIC, and they also won&#039;t get the Additional Child Tax Credit.  So if Susie says &quot;I Do&quot;, she is kissing off over $ 4500 a year.  So they shack up until Johnny finds another prettier Susie - one that doesn&#039;t have kids climbing all over her.  Then actual taxpayers who pay positive taxes will pay to raise her kids.  And what example on how to live and survive will those kids learn?  They will learn from mommy and daddy that people should have kids and shack up so the government won&#039;t tax them but will give them negative tax bonuses instead!

Any guesses as to why we have so many unwed mothers today?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Deductions for kids are just the tip of the iceberg.  Better yet, let&#8217;s eliminate the Earned Income Credit and the Additional Child Tax Credit.  Those are the credits that pays people to have kids if they agree to never marry.</p>
<p>Example:  Susie has two kids and makes $ 13K a year.  She will pay no taxes since her standard deduction + personal exemption + 2 dependent exemptions wipes out all income.  But not only that, the federal government (in other words, we taxpayers) will pay her an earned income credit of $ 4500.  So her taxes for the year are -$ 4500.  In other words she is a payer of negative taxes &#8211; she gets all her withholdings back plus a $ 4500 bonus.  Oh yeah, I almost forgot about the Additional Child Tax Credit.  Another bonus for anybody with kids who makes over $ 11K but isn&#8217;t eligible for the Child Tax Credit, like Susie.  Without figuring it out exactly, let&#8217;s just point out it can be anywhere from a few dollars to a few thousand dollars.  So she &#8220;pays&#8221; even more negative taxes.</p>
<p>On the other hand, if Susie marries Johnny, the dad, who makes $ 30K, guess what happens.  It they are married, their combined income is too high for the EIC, and they also won&#8217;t get the Additional Child Tax Credit.  So if Susie says &#8220;I Do&#8221;, she is kissing off over $ 4500 a year.  So they shack up until Johnny finds another prettier Susie &#8211; one that doesn&#8217;t have kids climbing all over her.  Then actual taxpayers who pay positive taxes will pay to raise her kids.  And what example on how to live and survive will those kids learn?  They will learn from mommy and daddy that people should have kids and shack up so the government won&#8217;t tax them but will give them negative tax bonuses instead!</p>
<p>Any guesses as to why we have so many unwed mothers today?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Should the dependent exemptions be removed from tax code? by jennifer_weisz</title>
		<link>http://www.transwaytransportation.com/should-the-dependent-exemptions-be-removed-from-tax-code/#comment-45</link>
		<dc:creator>jennifer_weisz</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Feb 2012 08:57:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.transwaytransportation.com/should-the-dependent-exemptions-be-removed-from-tax-code/#comment-45</guid>
		<description>Global population growth, our national deficit, education costs - these things have nothing to do with US tax revenue allocations by congress. Federal taxation, State, and the way it all mixes together to allow congress to pay down the deficit or to mail a check to somebody is extremely difficult. No one human has a grasp on it and Capital Hill has a gamut of lawyers and councils who plan this stuff out over long period of times. It&#039;s meaningless and a campaign tactic for McCain to demonstrate he is lowering taxes. And on a side note, to use this as a justification to not have kids is not only misinformed but plain wacky! Tax code is a politicians wet-dream because most of is meaningless. Whatever is taken off the board is put back on the board in another way, i.e., the IRS and congress gets what they need regardless - it balances out. I implore you to ask your State Capital Office for a break down of revenues and expenditures that the Federal gov&#039;t siphon off from your state and the break down of that along with Federal Taxes. You&#039;ll be surprised where what money goes where and how often it changes due to bureaucratic process.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Global population growth, our national deficit, education costs &#8211; these things have nothing to do with US tax revenue allocations by congress. Federal taxation, State, and the way it all mixes together to allow congress to pay down the deficit or to mail a check to somebody is extremely difficult. No one human has a grasp on it and Capital Hill has a gamut of lawyers and councils who plan this stuff out over long period of times. It&#8217;s meaningless and a campaign tactic for McCain to demonstrate he is lowering taxes. And on a side note, to use this as a justification to not have kids is not only misinformed but plain wacky! Tax code is a politicians wet-dream because most of is meaningless. Whatever is taken off the board is put back on the board in another way, i.e., the IRS and congress gets what they need regardless &#8211; it balances out. I implore you to ask your State Capital Office for a break down of revenues and expenditures that the Federal gov&#8217;t siphon off from your state and the break down of that along with Federal Taxes. You&#8217;ll be surprised where what money goes where and how often it changes due to bureaucratic process.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on Should the dependent exemptions be removed from tax code? by Thule124</title>
		<link>http://www.transwaytransportation.com/should-the-dependent-exemptions-be-removed-from-tax-code/#comment-44</link>
		<dc:creator>Thule124</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 18 Feb 2012 08:27:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.transwaytransportation.com/should-the-dependent-exemptions-be-removed-from-tax-code/#comment-44</guid>
		<description>The global population isn&#039;t a problem.  As countries get richer, their fertility rates declines.  The decline is so sharp in Russia and Singapore that they provide state-based matchmaking services, and birth bonuses.  

Children are an investment in our future, and their contributions to society will far outweigh the costs of raising and educating them, and they can support the older generation later.

It&#039;s more mouths to feed, but their brains more than make up for it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The global population isn&#8217;t a problem.  As countries get richer, their fertility rates declines.  The decline is so sharp in Russia and Singapore that they provide state-based matchmaking services, and birth bonuses.  </p>
<p>Children are an investment in our future, and their contributions to society will far outweigh the costs of raising and educating them, and they can support the older generation later.</p>
<p>It&#8217;s more mouths to feed, but their brains more than make up for it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on What day do you start counting on to figure out when your going to ovulate? by boosie21</title>
		<link>http://www.transwaytransportation.com/what-day-do-you-start-counting-on-to-figure-out-when-your-going-to-ovulate/#comment-42</link>
		<dc:creator>boosie21</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 11:04:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.transwaytransportation.com/what-day-do-you-start-counting-on-to-figure-out-when-your-going-to-ovulate/#comment-42</guid>
		<description>you should start counting from a week two to weeks after your period has stopped. You can also go online and go on google and type in ovulation calender and follow the instructions and it will tell you the days that you are to ovulate. Hope this help&#039;s.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>you should start counting from a week two to weeks after your period has stopped. You can also go online and go on google and type in ovulation calender and follow the instructions and it will tell you the days that you are to ovulate. Hope this help&#8217;s.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on What day do you start counting on to figure out when your going to ovulate? by Our little one arrives in June</title>
		<link>http://www.transwaytransportation.com/what-day-do-you-start-counting-on-to-figure-out-when-your-going-to-ovulate/#comment-41</link>
		<dc:creator>Our little one arrives in June</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 10:05:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.transwaytransportation.com/what-day-do-you-start-counting-on-to-figure-out-when-your-going-to-ovulate/#comment-41</guid>
		<description>the first day of you last period</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>the first day of you last period</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on What day do you start counting on to figure out when your going to ovulate? by Michelle 25</title>
		<link>http://www.transwaytransportation.com/what-day-do-you-start-counting-on-to-figure-out-when-your-going-to-ovulate/#comment-40</link>
		<dc:creator>Michelle 25</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 09:32:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.transwaytransportation.com/what-day-do-you-start-counting-on-to-figure-out-when-your-going-to-ovulate/#comment-40</guid>
		<description>Depends on what you call spotting.

Fluctuation in hormones can cause spotting.  If it is something that you&#039;ve always done, then I would count from the first day of spotting; however, if it&#039;s something that your cycle changed to doing, as you got older, I would not.

I would start counting from the moment you went from wearing a pantie liner to wearing a normal pad. Try either method for a few months to see how you feel.  

You could start with OPK&#039;s, Ovulation Predictor Kits, and there&#039;s a lot of information out there about charting your ovulation.

Good luck!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Depends on what you call spotting.</p>
<p>Fluctuation in hormones can cause spotting.  If it is something that you&#8217;ve always done, then I would count from the first day of spotting; however, if it&#8217;s something that your cycle changed to doing, as you got older, I would not.</p>
<p>I would start counting from the moment you went from wearing a pantie liner to wearing a normal pad. Try either method for a few months to see how you feel.  </p>
<p>You could start with OPK&#8217;s, Ovulation Predictor Kits, and there&#8217;s a lot of information out there about charting your ovulation.</p>
<p>Good luck!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on What day do you start counting on to figure out when your going to ovulate? by Noelia</title>
		<link>http://www.transwaytransportation.com/what-day-do-you-start-counting-on-to-figure-out-when-your-going-to-ovulate/#comment-39</link>
		<dc:creator>Noelia</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 12 Feb 2012 08:49:51 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.transwaytransportation.com/what-day-do-you-start-counting-on-to-figure-out-when-your-going-to-ovulate/#comment-39</guid>
		<description>The first day of your period is day 1. so u should ovulate about a week after ur period ends, but every women is different, its not set in stone</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The first day of your period is day 1. so u should ovulate about a week after ur period ends, but every women is different, its not set in stone</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on dependent?? by katrinamarie</title>
		<link>http://www.transwaytransportation.com/dependent/#comment-25</link>
		<dc:creator>katrinamarie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Dec 2011 10:27:56 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.transwaytransportation.com/dependent/#comment-25</guid>
		<description>I looked at a lot of questions on here and went to irs.gov.  Plenty of places stated the 5 dependency rules

you have to have lived with your boyfriend for the WHOLE year. You also have to have made under $ 3400.  He had to provide at least half of your financial  support.  Also, you two living together can&#039;t violate local laws (sounds weird but apparently certain areas still have really old laws that aren&#039;t enforced prohibiting unmarried couples from living together. If they&#039;re still &#039;in the books&#039; you can&#039;t be claimed).  So if no one else claims you, he can!

hope this helped (pardon my lazy poor grammar at the moment :p)</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I looked at a lot of questions on here and went to irs.gov.  Plenty of places stated the 5 dependency rules</p>
<p>you have to have lived with your boyfriend for the WHOLE year. You also have to have made under $ 3400.  He had to provide at least half of your financial  support.  Also, you two living together can&#8217;t violate local laws (sounds weird but apparently certain areas still have really old laws that aren&#8217;t enforced prohibiting unmarried couples from living together. If they&#8217;re still &#8216;in the books&#8217; you can&#8217;t be claimed).  So if no one else claims you, he can!</p>
<p>hope this helped (pardon my lazy poor grammar at the moment :p)</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>Comment on dependent?? by Tyler M</title>
		<link>http://www.transwaytransportation.com/dependent/#comment-24</link>
		<dc:creator>Tyler M</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 26 Dec 2011 09:33:57 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.transwaytransportation.com/dependent/#comment-24</guid>
		<description>are you guys married? If not then no</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>are you guys married? If not then no</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

