angelfire76
05-29 09:24 PM
still ppl feel pulling others lag would get them GC - this commnity can never be united!:confused:
You are not getting the point. We are not pulling others down, they are pushing us down.
It's not a subtle difference.
You are not getting the point. We are not pulling others down, they are pushing us down.
It's not a subtle difference.
wallpaper planking death video.
BharatPremi
12-14 12:11 PM
"The SC concluded that the statutory discrimination within the class of aliens is permissible."
This could justify difference in say EB1, EB2 and EB3 or F visa, H Visa and L visa. How ever there is no mention that discrimination could be on the basis of sex/race/country of origin etc. IMHO an extension of standard EEO laws should be applied for EB class immigration too.
NB: I am an HR consultant and an expert on EEO laws, I still think that this discussion is worth taking to a top constitutional attorney. An hour of his time will cost peanuts compared to what we can possibly get out of this.
With agreeing the central theme represented by Mark, still I am incliened to say "Yay" to your suggestion.
This could justify difference in say EB1, EB2 and EB3 or F visa, H Visa and L visa. How ever there is no mention that discrimination could be on the basis of sex/race/country of origin etc. IMHO an extension of standard EEO laws should be applied for EB class immigration too.
NB: I am an HR consultant and an expert on EEO laws, I still think that this discussion is worth taking to a top constitutional attorney. An hour of his time will cost peanuts compared to what we can possibly get out of this.
With agreeing the central theme represented by Mark, still I am incliened to say "Yay" to your suggestion.
gc_on_demand
08-04 07:57 AM
Hello VDLRAO ,
People from June 2006 are geting GC means that USCIS enough visa so they started to give gc to 2006 candidates.. is my belief true. What will be date in new year's first quater for eb2 india ?
People from June 2006 are geting GC means that USCIS enough visa so they started to give gc to 2006 candidates.. is my belief true. What will be date in new year's first quater for eb2 india ?
2011 http://www.planking.me/
newtoearth
05-03 01:14 AM
...
more...
reachinus
07-30 04:04 PM
Hello Atty, Hope you can reply to my question as well. Please let me know if I should contact the CBP and tell them about this or just ignore.
Thanks for your time in advance.
I am not saying that the AP cannot be used again, but it cannot be used after the Validity on the AP which is 1 year from the Issue date and the date on the I-94 doesn't have any meaning.
For example
My AP was issued on Oct 18th 2007 and I can use it to travel till Oct 17th 2008. But people are saying that they are issued an I-94 with a date which is 1 year from the date they enter/use the AP.
But my concern is that I was issued an I-94A which doesn't have any date on it. Should I be concerned about that?
Thanks for your time in advance.
I am not saying that the AP cannot be used again, but it cannot be used after the Validity on the AP which is 1 year from the Issue date and the date on the I-94 doesn't have any meaning.
For example
My AP was issued on Oct 18th 2007 and I can use it to travel till Oct 17th 2008. But people are saying that they are issued an I-94 with a date which is 1 year from the date they enter/use the AP.
But my concern is that I was issued an I-94A which doesn't have any date on it. Should I be concerned about that?
Jerrome
05-11 05:21 PM
It is easy to spit out numbers like this. Do you have independent proof of these? Please don't point us to LTTE run web sites. Provide hard proof if you can.
As for "formerly superior Tamil competitiveness", I am sure what you refer to is, the fact that during the British period, the Tamils were given the lion's share (pardon my pun) of all the civil service and other administrative jobs as part of their divide and Rule policy. When SL gained independence of course, things changed so that formerly discriminated Sinhalese started getting their fair share of thse opportunities. Mind you that Sinhalese are after all 75% of SL. Are you saying it is fair to ask 12% of the population (SL Tamils) to have 50% of all the opportuniies and land and the resources reserved for them???
Panini, This is the kind of opinion and mindset is causing the problem. Your reply tells more than the report i provided. I want to see singalese and tamils living peacefully and with equal rights in SL.
I pray god everyday for that only. Every human being is same, Getting discriminated and discriminating people is so stone age mindset.
As for "formerly superior Tamil competitiveness", I am sure what you refer to is, the fact that during the British period, the Tamils were given the lion's share (pardon my pun) of all the civil service and other administrative jobs as part of their divide and Rule policy. When SL gained independence of course, things changed so that formerly discriminated Sinhalese started getting their fair share of thse opportunities. Mind you that Sinhalese are after all 75% of SL. Are you saying it is fair to ask 12% of the population (SL Tamils) to have 50% of all the opportuniies and land and the resources reserved for them???
Panini, This is the kind of opinion and mindset is causing the problem. Your reply tells more than the report i provided. I want to see singalese and tamils living peacefully and with equal rights in SL.
I pray god everyday for that only. Every human being is same, Getting discriminated and discriminating people is so stone age mindset.
more...
reddymjm
09-23 11:33 AM
Let's do it
I just emailed all of them with my name, address and phone number. Atleast 13 of them bounced. Can some one correct the email addresses in that sheet.
I just emailed all of them with my name, address and phone number. Atleast 13 of them bounced. Can some one correct the email addresses in that sheet.
2010 house planking-death Brisbane
bayarea07
09-24 07:27 PM
Interesting Analysis from Greg Siskind
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/
COULD ELECTION YEAR POLITICS HELP RECAPTURE BILL'S CHANCES?
Yesterday, I wrote about a great bill that was introduced by Senator Menendez that would recapture hundreds of thousands of unused green card numbers, ease the strict per country limits that cause long lines for nationals of some countries and also make it easier to get a waiver when someone is subject to an unlawful presence bar.It also changes the definition of an "immediate relative" to include spouses and children of permanent residents, a provision which would be wildly popular in the Hispanic community since it would cut out the multiyear waits typical in the Family 2A category.
And, oh yeah, there's another bill that people are talking about. The E-Verify program (DHS' much discussed electronic employment verification system) expires in November.
E-Verify is the heart of the entire enforcement agenda for the antis and with Congress set to adjourn in the next week or so and with the distinct possibility that this will put off all legislation until next February or so when the new Congress comes in, getting E-Verify extended in the next few days is a huge deal. A five year extension has passed the House already. The Senate has done nothing yet.
So it was with great interest that I read in yesterday's CQ Today print edition that Senator Menendez is blocking the E-Verify reauthorization bill in order to force consideration of the recapture bill. The article describes Republicans as being infuriated and saying that the recapture bill is a nonstarter and demanding Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid bring up a clean E-Verify extension bill.
On the House side, interestingly, the recapture bill was set for a markup in the Judiciary Committee yesterday and Congressman Conyers abruptly adjourned the hearing after a bill barring horse slaughtering was finished yesterday. According to my sources, several members of the Committee were shocked that the markup on the recapture bill didn't happen even though Conyers is a strong backer of the measure. Strange.
So that has me speculating. Is something cooking with the Democratic leadership and the Obama campaign? I think the Democrats smell blood. They know John McCain is in trouble with Hispanic voters based on recent polling data. He's polling anywhere from 10 to 20 points worse than Bush did in 2004 and the Hispanic vote partially explains why Obama finds himself ahead in places like New Mexico and Colorado, states Bush won in 2004. Erosion of support in the Hispanic community could also cost McCain Florida, a state McCain cannot lose if he has any chance of winning the election.
As I reported earlier this week, the McCain campaign and congressional leaders have been clamping down on the anti-immigrant wing of the party. You didn't really think these folks suddenly decided they no longer care about this issue, did you?
What I don't think is a coincidence is the sudden reemergence of immigration in the presidential debate. Suddenly, Obama is blasting McCain on immigration and looking for more and more forums to make his claim that he's pro-immigration and his party's solidly behind him. And he's quick to remind Latinos that John McCain turned his back on them and denounced his own comprehensive immigration reform bill, something that Latino voters are now saying is one their top priorities.
McCain is asking Latino voters for a do-over and claiming that he was only pandering to his base. He was always pro-immigration. It's just politics, you understand.
As you might expect, this message is not selling particularly well. And Democrats know it. They also know that with the economy in free fall, most Americans are not thinking that much about immigration anymore and the issue has dropped back to its historically low rank on issues of concern to the typical voter. So Democrats can be more visibly pro-immigration without having to fear negative consequences.
You probably see where this is going. Provoking a confrontation over immigration with Republicans in the month of October can only have good results. Democrats might actually pass a bill they really want. And they score politically as well.
There's no time to bring up a massive comprehensive immigration reform bill between now and the election. Something smaller and simpler, but what? Oh wait, there's that recapture bill! And there's that must pass E-Verify bill. Now there's a great way to put immigration back on the front pages. Link the two and force Republicans to vote no on a pro-immigration bill likely to have a hugely positive impact in the Hispanic community if they want the E-Verify program to survive. If the Democrats can keep the two bills linked, Republicans who can't stomach more immigration will have to vote no on E-Verify, something they'll have trouble explaining to their constituents. And Republicans who think E-Verify is too important to die, will help deliver a win on the recapture bill.
And in the mean time, McCain will have to openly confront the angry antis in his party. Some of the hardliners in his party will call the provisions easing the unlawful presence waivers to be a "back door amnesty." If McCain goes against them, he'll be seen as a liar by the people in his party who he promised that he would not support an "amnesty" without enforcement first. And if he votes with the antis, it will be all the Hispanic community needs to hear to confirm they're right to support Obama.
October could be interesting.
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/
COULD ELECTION YEAR POLITICS HELP RECAPTURE BILL'S CHANCES?
Yesterday, I wrote about a great bill that was introduced by Senator Menendez that would recapture hundreds of thousands of unused green card numbers, ease the strict per country limits that cause long lines for nationals of some countries and also make it easier to get a waiver when someone is subject to an unlawful presence bar.It also changes the definition of an "immediate relative" to include spouses and children of permanent residents, a provision which would be wildly popular in the Hispanic community since it would cut out the multiyear waits typical in the Family 2A category.
And, oh yeah, there's another bill that people are talking about. The E-Verify program (DHS' much discussed electronic employment verification system) expires in November.
E-Verify is the heart of the entire enforcement agenda for the antis and with Congress set to adjourn in the next week or so and with the distinct possibility that this will put off all legislation until next February or so when the new Congress comes in, getting E-Verify extended in the next few days is a huge deal. A five year extension has passed the House already. The Senate has done nothing yet.
So it was with great interest that I read in yesterday's CQ Today print edition that Senator Menendez is blocking the E-Verify reauthorization bill in order to force consideration of the recapture bill. The article describes Republicans as being infuriated and saying that the recapture bill is a nonstarter and demanding Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid bring up a clean E-Verify extension bill.
On the House side, interestingly, the recapture bill was set for a markup in the Judiciary Committee yesterday and Congressman Conyers abruptly adjourned the hearing after a bill barring horse slaughtering was finished yesterday. According to my sources, several members of the Committee were shocked that the markup on the recapture bill didn't happen even though Conyers is a strong backer of the measure. Strange.
So that has me speculating. Is something cooking with the Democratic leadership and the Obama campaign? I think the Democrats smell blood. They know John McCain is in trouble with Hispanic voters based on recent polling data. He's polling anywhere from 10 to 20 points worse than Bush did in 2004 and the Hispanic vote partially explains why Obama finds himself ahead in places like New Mexico and Colorado, states Bush won in 2004. Erosion of support in the Hispanic community could also cost McCain Florida, a state McCain cannot lose if he has any chance of winning the election.
As I reported earlier this week, the McCain campaign and congressional leaders have been clamping down on the anti-immigrant wing of the party. You didn't really think these folks suddenly decided they no longer care about this issue, did you?
What I don't think is a coincidence is the sudden reemergence of immigration in the presidential debate. Suddenly, Obama is blasting McCain on immigration and looking for more and more forums to make his claim that he's pro-immigration and his party's solidly behind him. And he's quick to remind Latinos that John McCain turned his back on them and denounced his own comprehensive immigration reform bill, something that Latino voters are now saying is one their top priorities.
McCain is asking Latino voters for a do-over and claiming that he was only pandering to his base. He was always pro-immigration. It's just politics, you understand.
As you might expect, this message is not selling particularly well. And Democrats know it. They also know that with the economy in free fall, most Americans are not thinking that much about immigration anymore and the issue has dropped back to its historically low rank on issues of concern to the typical voter. So Democrats can be more visibly pro-immigration without having to fear negative consequences.
You probably see where this is going. Provoking a confrontation over immigration with Republicans in the month of October can only have good results. Democrats might actually pass a bill they really want. And they score politically as well.
There's no time to bring up a massive comprehensive immigration reform bill between now and the election. Something smaller and simpler, but what? Oh wait, there's that recapture bill! And there's that must pass E-Verify bill. Now there's a great way to put immigration back on the front pages. Link the two and force Republicans to vote no on a pro-immigration bill likely to have a hugely positive impact in the Hispanic community if they want the E-Verify program to survive. If the Democrats can keep the two bills linked, Republicans who can't stomach more immigration will have to vote no on E-Verify, something they'll have trouble explaining to their constituents. And Republicans who think E-Verify is too important to die, will help deliver a win on the recapture bill.
And in the mean time, McCain will have to openly confront the angry antis in his party. Some of the hardliners in his party will call the provisions easing the unlawful presence waivers to be a "back door amnesty." If McCain goes against them, he'll be seen as a liar by the people in his party who he promised that he would not support an "amnesty" without enforcement first. And if he votes with the antis, it will be all the Hispanic community needs to hear to confirm they're right to support Obama.
October could be interesting.
more...
justAnotherFile
06-28 08:10 PM
As per Macaca's logic, pre Oct 2005 PDs will take up all the numbers available for EB2 Indai for 2007, in June and July.
If that is the case why was the Bulletin for july not set to Oct or Nov 2005 and instead made current. Surely USCIS does not want to deal with all the extra workload if it does not have to.
If that is the case why was the Bulletin for july not set to Oct or Nov 2005 and instead made current. Surely USCIS does not want to deal with all the extra workload if it does not have to.
hair For planking death video.
Keeme
03-31 10:05 AM
Kancha Ilaya(Sonia appointed ) is being allowed by the Indian Government to lobby with the UN and US Congress so that caste discrimination in India is taken-up by these bodies. (Indians on their own have come a long way in reducing these caste discrimination but alas these people won't want that dying)It shouldn't be any surprise if we see bunch of International articles on India's disgusting caste issues soon.
Rahul Gandhi/Govt of India invites British politician to Amethi on poverty tourism.Putting it in their own words they were trying to show this foreign minister real India (meaning 'sinking India not shining India' or may be they were trying to tell this British guy look we have managed to keep the country at the same state you left it , if anything we took it to another low level).Amethi has been a constituency represented by that family for generations in Priyanka's words. Forget about country they didn't do much good to their own constituency .
This British guy before he left the country said that Mumbai attacks could have happened because India didn't hand over Kashmir to Pak.He also gave a free although unasked advice ,if such future attacks are not to happen India should reconsider it's stance on Kashmir.
British media was surprised to see that Rahul Gandhi touted as future PM by the party and Indian media with equal excitement didn't want to comment on foreign affairs.Mumbai issue or anything else.
Now every country has it's share of problems..be it poverty or something else.Can you imagine U.S politician inviting French/German politician to view America's worst and media giving it huge coverage?Just imagine what would happen then.
There are 2 ways you have to be in Indian politics. Bottom-to-top and Top-to-bottom. Sanjay Dutt, Murli Devra's son, Rajesh Pilot's son, MadhavRao SIndhia's son are some good example of Top-to-bottom. They can be MPs and MLAs but again can't go in heart of general public. Many of them would have short tem political life. Mamta Benergee, Mayavati, Mulayam, lalu, Narendra Modi, Sharad Yadav and many others are example of bottom-to-top.
Rahul Gandhi doesn't want to be labeled as top-to-bottom. It won't last long.
Rahul Gandhi/Govt of India invites British politician to Amethi on poverty tourism.Putting it in their own words they were trying to show this foreign minister real India (meaning 'sinking India not shining India' or may be they were trying to tell this British guy look we have managed to keep the country at the same state you left it , if anything we took it to another low level).Amethi has been a constituency represented by that family for generations in Priyanka's words. Forget about country they didn't do much good to their own constituency .
This British guy before he left the country said that Mumbai attacks could have happened because India didn't hand over Kashmir to Pak.He also gave a free although unasked advice ,if such future attacks are not to happen India should reconsider it's stance on Kashmir.
British media was surprised to see that Rahul Gandhi touted as future PM by the party and Indian media with equal excitement didn't want to comment on foreign affairs.Mumbai issue or anything else.
Now every country has it's share of problems..be it poverty or something else.Can you imagine U.S politician inviting French/German politician to view America's worst and media giving it huge coverage?Just imagine what would happen then.
There are 2 ways you have to be in Indian politics. Bottom-to-top and Top-to-bottom. Sanjay Dutt, Murli Devra's son, Rajesh Pilot's son, MadhavRao SIndhia's son are some good example of Top-to-bottom. They can be MPs and MLAs but again can't go in heart of general public. Many of them would have short tem political life. Mamta Benergee, Mayavati, Mulayam, lalu, Narendra Modi, Sharad Yadav and many others are example of bottom-to-top.
Rahul Gandhi doesn't want to be labeled as top-to-bottom. It won't last long.
more...
kuhelica2000
02-13 10:06 AM
I couldn't agree more with you. The limited number of GC is definitely a critical factor. But we have contributed to this mess ourselves. Look what happened with EB2 India. Did India started producing EB2 talents overnight? No; rather we started polishing our resumes with inflated years of experience and job description so that we can apply to EB2. The system is too liberal and based on trust. If employers start scrutinizing resumes and certificates a lot of applicants will simply drop off from the GC queue.
Before the Y2K problem, the most common route for Indians to migrate to the US (EB category) was this -->
TOEFL
GRE
Admission into US university (most likely for masters)
Scholarship or loan
MS/Phd in US
Internship using OPT
Job/ H1
Since this involved multiple non trivial steps; the barrier for entry was pretty high that prevented mass migration.
There were procedural delays (in some states with a lot of Indian population ( oh yeah; labor certs used to take 3-5 years esp in California, Texas & Northeast; but you could get labor cert faster in south dakota or such less densely populated places; but once you hit the 485 stage, you were certain of a GC within a few months )
And then along with Y2K came TCS, Wipro, Infosys, & infinite other bodyshops that suddenly changed the equation. No need for TOEFL, GRE. No need to fight for scholarship; no need for TA. no need for RA; no need for MS; in a lot of cases, no need for even UG degree in computers/engg. The requirements ranged from having all 10 fingers in place to knowing the right people in the bodyshop company to land an assignment in the US. Once placed at a client site, it was just a matter of finding the right opportunity to get the client to sponsor your H1. I am sure there were a lot other ways the H1 & L1 visas were abused.
So the situation changed from just procedural delays to procedural delays + extra influx of Indians due to H1/L1 visa misuse.
Ofcourse, we can only blame the inefficiencies of the USCIS/INS/DOL system & silently turn the other way when malpractices & visa abuse were rampant (I guess still is) in the IT bodyshop industry.
I am sure this rant will seem extremely prejudicial. But just for a slight moment; think about why all this happened.
Before the Y2K problem, the most common route for Indians to migrate to the US (EB category) was this -->
TOEFL
GRE
Admission into US university (most likely for masters)
Scholarship or loan
MS/Phd in US
Internship using OPT
Job/ H1
Since this involved multiple non trivial steps; the barrier for entry was pretty high that prevented mass migration.
There were procedural delays (in some states with a lot of Indian population ( oh yeah; labor certs used to take 3-5 years esp in California, Texas & Northeast; but you could get labor cert faster in south dakota or such less densely populated places; but once you hit the 485 stage, you were certain of a GC within a few months )
And then along with Y2K came TCS, Wipro, Infosys, & infinite other bodyshops that suddenly changed the equation. No need for TOEFL, GRE. No need to fight for scholarship; no need for TA. no need for RA; no need for MS; in a lot of cases, no need for even UG degree in computers/engg. The requirements ranged from having all 10 fingers in place to knowing the right people in the bodyshop company to land an assignment in the US. Once placed at a client site, it was just a matter of finding the right opportunity to get the client to sponsor your H1. I am sure there were a lot other ways the H1 & L1 visas were abused.
So the situation changed from just procedural delays to procedural delays + extra influx of Indians due to H1/L1 visa misuse.
Ofcourse, we can only blame the inefficiencies of the USCIS/INS/DOL system & silently turn the other way when malpractices & visa abuse were rampant (I guess still is) in the IT bodyshop industry.
I am sure this rant will seem extremely prejudicial. But just for a slight moment; think about why all this happened.
hot Australian man#39;s planking
thomachan72
01-13 09:39 PM
Do you think with a cordinated effort on part of the IV members that we could/should write a well drafted letter to the USCIS to not target H1b worker for the cause of unemployment. Highlighting the various well researched articles that clearly say that H1b creates/retains jobs and the more they target H1b the more employment is affected. The real problem is outsourcing.
I am just trying to put a thought out into the forum. Let us see what the IV leaders say. Somebody said that AILA was working to halt this process maybe we should write to them and extend our support first??
I am just trying to put a thought out into the forum. Let us see what the IV leaders say. Somebody said that AILA was working to halt this process maybe we should write to them and extend our support first??
more...
house Planking
samay
07-21 08:23 PM
Hi,
I am on H1B (7th year and got extended for 3 yrs) and applied 485, received EAD from company A (140 approved).
I am asked to join Client by Company A due to some benefits both of us would receive. But Client wont support H1 so I need to use EAD.
Since EB3 is in very bad situation, Can I file new Perm, 140 and port my PD for EB2 using Company C for future position? I have position, salary and exp required for EB2. When should I join Company C if I choose this route?
Thanks in advance!
Whats your EB3 PD. You can join company C anytime assuming that it has been more than six months since you filed your I-485. Company C can start the EB2 process should you choose to. However bear in mind that this process will also take some time.
I am on H1B (7th year and got extended for 3 yrs) and applied 485, received EAD from company A (140 approved).
I am asked to join Client by Company A due to some benefits both of us would receive. But Client wont support H1 so I need to use EAD.
Since EB3 is in very bad situation, Can I file new Perm, 140 and port my PD for EB2 using Company C for future position? I have position, salary and exp required for EB2. When should I join Company C if I choose this route?
Thanks in advance!
Whats your EB3 PD. You can join company C anytime assuming that it has been more than six months since you filed your I-485. Company C can start the EB2 process should you choose to. However bear in mind that this process will also take some time.
tattoo in Australia is dead after
lazycis
02-13 08:46 AM
Does any one on this forum happen to know an approximate dollar amount that would cost for if we (IV team) is planning to proceed further with this class action law suite on USCIS?? the reason I am asking for is if we have known dollar amount/target amount in hand it makes it easy for all to start contributing towards this target amount and proceed further with law suite.
I am sure someone on IV team would create a separate bucket for this specific class action law suite task and keep track of amount that's been collected...
Yes, I totally support this class action suite and also willing to support as mush as I can financially....
I think the good start is to consult with Rajiv Khanna. He has an experience in class-actions/federal litigation and will tell whether it is feasible to go this way. It will cost $600 (approximately). To file a class-action complaint will cost around $10k. The rest depends on the lenght of the proceedings, but my estimate is another 20-30k. Peanuts comparing to lobbying :) IV may not want to go this way, as Mark Bartosik once explained, it may hurt its other efforts. If that's the case, potential plaintiffs can work with lawyers directly.
I am sure someone on IV team would create a separate bucket for this specific class action law suite task and keep track of amount that's been collected...
Yes, I totally support this class action suite and also willing to support as mush as I can financially....
I think the good start is to consult with Rajiv Khanna. He has an experience in class-actions/federal litigation and will tell whether it is feasible to go this way. It will cost $600 (approximately). To file a class-action complaint will cost around $10k. The rest depends on the lenght of the proceedings, but my estimate is another 20-30k. Peanuts comparing to lobbying :) IV may not want to go this way, as Mark Bartosik once explained, it may hurt its other efforts. If that's the case, potential plaintiffs can work with lawyers directly.
more...
pictures Following a tragic death at
logiclife
12-14 04:58 PM
I know what I am about to say will trigger a lot of reaction and some resentment, but it has to be said on behalf of those who are not Indian. I think the per country limit is to ensure that people of all nationalities and races have an equal opportunity to obtain a green card and to ensure that no one nationality, group, or even sector (i.e. IT) monopolizes the so few visas that are available. In fact, in the visa lottery, countries become excluded when the number of immigrants from them reach a certain point, so we are lucky they do not do that in the Employment-based system!
I think that by wanting to remove the per country limit so more Indians can avail of the green card quota is both asking for "special treatment" and a slap in the face for all the non-Indian IV members. The more I read the threads on this site, the more I feel that this organization is geared just to one ethnic group. I am sure that Indians probably make up the majority of members, but the founders of IV (I hope) did not want this organization to become one-sided! Please be considerate of ALL members and try to come up with suggestions that would benefit ALL members!!!:mad:
Well, I agree with your argument when it comes to diversity lottery visas. Or Family based visas. Because those green cards are not given based on any merit, education or employability of an individual. They are just given away to anyone whose relatives sponsor (family based) or whose country doesnt send enough immigrants here in USA and add those country's citizens adds diversity.
However, in employment based immigration, 140,000 green cards are given each year because those 140,000 individuals have been sponsored by their employers for a job for which no US citizen is willing qualified and able to do and the employer finds it worth it to go thru hassles of dealing with immigration in order to retain this employee. The employers dont care whether the employee is Indian, Chinese, Brit or South African. The government too, is not giving this green card because someone is Indian or chinese. The employer wants individual to fill a position, the government agrees to it - up to 140,000 a year - and that's where it ends. Therefore, in such benefit, where the ONE AND ONLY REASON for green card is EMPLOYMENT, why should employee A born in India wait for 10 years but employee B born in South Afria wait for 2 years even though the reason for both employee A and employee B for getting the greencard is the same - EMPLOYMENT.
Are you saying , based on your theory that there should be 7% per country limits in hiring too - that all these corporations, when they hire non-citizens, should keep one country's immigrant workers capped at 7% ? Should Microsoft, Cisco and Oracle fill all jobs and sponsor all greencard at rate of 7 % per country? Are you also going to complain that there are too many Indians in Microsoft and large software corporations and Indians have "monopolized" that profession? Or that Vietnamese and chinese have monopolized the nail-salon and dry-cleaning business? Do you even know what a monopoly is?
By the way, if the congressional intent was the keep diversity intact even in employment based immigration, then how come there is no per-country ceiling on H1 and L1? On H1 there is no per-country ceiling. So its ok to be disproportionate when you bring people into the country from outside (using H1/L1), but when the same bunch of people apply for green cards, there are different queues for different countries and your wait time depends on where you were born? What kind of nonsense is that?
All due respect, your argument is baseless and stems from the fact that you love the idea that you are personally benefitting by being in ROW.
There are plenty of ROW members who have supported the idea of removal of per-country ceilings, who have walked with me to congressional offices asking for parity and who have marched in DC.
I think that by wanting to remove the per country limit so more Indians can avail of the green card quota is both asking for "special treatment" and a slap in the face for all the non-Indian IV members. The more I read the threads on this site, the more I feel that this organization is geared just to one ethnic group. I am sure that Indians probably make up the majority of members, but the founders of IV (I hope) did not want this organization to become one-sided! Please be considerate of ALL members and try to come up with suggestions that would benefit ALL members!!!:mad:
Well, I agree with your argument when it comes to diversity lottery visas. Or Family based visas. Because those green cards are not given based on any merit, education or employability of an individual. They are just given away to anyone whose relatives sponsor (family based) or whose country doesnt send enough immigrants here in USA and add those country's citizens adds diversity.
However, in employment based immigration, 140,000 green cards are given each year because those 140,000 individuals have been sponsored by their employers for a job for which no US citizen is willing qualified and able to do and the employer finds it worth it to go thru hassles of dealing with immigration in order to retain this employee. The employers dont care whether the employee is Indian, Chinese, Brit or South African. The government too, is not giving this green card because someone is Indian or chinese. The employer wants individual to fill a position, the government agrees to it - up to 140,000 a year - and that's where it ends. Therefore, in such benefit, where the ONE AND ONLY REASON for green card is EMPLOYMENT, why should employee A born in India wait for 10 years but employee B born in South Afria wait for 2 years even though the reason for both employee A and employee B for getting the greencard is the same - EMPLOYMENT.
Are you saying , based on your theory that there should be 7% per country limits in hiring too - that all these corporations, when they hire non-citizens, should keep one country's immigrant workers capped at 7% ? Should Microsoft, Cisco and Oracle fill all jobs and sponsor all greencard at rate of 7 % per country? Are you also going to complain that there are too many Indians in Microsoft and large software corporations and Indians have "monopolized" that profession? Or that Vietnamese and chinese have monopolized the nail-salon and dry-cleaning business? Do you even know what a monopoly is?
By the way, if the congressional intent was the keep diversity intact even in employment based immigration, then how come there is no per-country ceiling on H1 and L1? On H1 there is no per-country ceiling. So its ok to be disproportionate when you bring people into the country from outside (using H1/L1), but when the same bunch of people apply for green cards, there are different queues for different countries and your wait time depends on where you were born? What kind of nonsense is that?
All due respect, your argument is baseless and stems from the fact that you love the idea that you are personally benefitting by being in ROW.
There are plenty of ROW members who have supported the idea of removal of per-country ceilings, who have walked with me to congressional offices asking for parity and who have marched in DC.
dresses Acton Beale died last weekend
greyhair
01-13 09:21 PM
actaccord: I also want to see civilized discussion. But that is not possible with people like PlainSpeak/GCPerm. I know this person. He has always tried to create Eb2/Eb3 divide. The problem is not with language of some of the posts you referred as "uncivilized", the problem is that for every post there are hundreds of people silently reading each posts. Each post influences those silent readers. If unanswered snakes like GCPerm can cause a lot of damage.
In an open anonymous forum you need to develop a thick skin. Person of every strip and belief can post anything. If you cannot handle this, it is better for you to resign from accessing any or all websites.For a period of time, I felt the same way as you did but it does not work that way. Stop this nonsense of political correctness when snakes like GCPerm spit venom to divide everyone.
A forum is a combination of all sorts of ideas and expression. You may like some and you may not like some. If you or your friends find it so difficult to stand this expression, then please sit quietly in your home because you cannot join hands with anyone in this real and rough world. How long are we going to " try to gain confidence" of more members? How long? I do not want to gain confidence of anyone anymore. If I was to make a decision, I would say that I don't need those members who cannot stand a little bit of rough reality. I am not going to do anything to "gain confidence" of others. If you want to work then good for you. If you don't want to work on the issue affecting your family, then so be it. You are doing a favor to no one but yourself when you speak with your Congressman. So Good luck and Good bye. But don't preach civility to everyone if you cannot first respond to PlainSpeak. I hate this Eb2/Eb3 fight.
at least one person could respond in more civilized and matured way. These kind of response will give good impression about a forum.
Guys please keep your comments in more civilized way to keep/gain good public image of the forum.
I do read most of the threads in this forum (whenever I feel free) i feel some of members who are donors/senior members feel they can get to fight (in abusive way) with any one on any thread no matter whether it spoils the image of forum or their response adds no value to the thread. These kind of attitude can be expected from new members as they may have wrong intentions (or to just vent their frustrations) to join in a forum. But people who are very senior and donors responding in uncivilized manner is not good for them as well as the forum.
I don't see anything wrong PlainSpeak's suggestion but I can't comment on if her suggestion is workable or not. But we can just explain what is right or wrong instead of getting into fight mode.
I would like to see some kind of administration control (removing the response, warning the members) on those threads with abusive/uncivilized response. I know it is tedious job but once we have senior/donors under civilized conversation controlling new members will be of easier as seniors/donors can report those unwanted conversations.
It would be great place to share ideas (good, bad, right, wrong) if those uncivilized response is reduced. The lesser the uncivilized response more the people willing to join hands.
I wanted to join hands but those uncivilized comments keeping me away from participating. I do have friends who joined after me referring felt the same, some even stopped visiting this forum after seeing uncivilized fightings.
There are great people like amitjoey who convey the message in more civilized way (as far as I have seen) and help others (its not easy to post 1100+ posts....). I am new to this country and have very less experience and knowledge to share. But I hope one day I can guide/help some people like amitjoey.
Reason for me to share my thought is amitjoey, otherwise I would have just gone through the thread and felt bad about this forum for uncivilized comments. I am not into any group yet (Eb2/3) as my comp is not going to sponsor gc as per new policy, so I don't belong to any group (or we can say group who's gc never filed). When I read PlainSpeak's comment I thought she was right and after reading amitjoey's comment I learned another view for this issue. After reading those two comments I understand the issue and why IV took different direction or direction different from PlainSpeak's. But when I continued reading this thread I felt why some educated people with good intentions have bad thoughts and respond to others in uncivilized way. In the whole thread only two comments make's sense to me rest doesn't belong/fit to this forum.
Lets get more new members and be civilized to gain confident which will gain more strength to the forum.
In an open anonymous forum you need to develop a thick skin. Person of every strip and belief can post anything. If you cannot handle this, it is better for you to resign from accessing any or all websites.For a period of time, I felt the same way as you did but it does not work that way. Stop this nonsense of political correctness when snakes like GCPerm spit venom to divide everyone.
A forum is a combination of all sorts of ideas and expression. You may like some and you may not like some. If you or your friends find it so difficult to stand this expression, then please sit quietly in your home because you cannot join hands with anyone in this real and rough world. How long are we going to " try to gain confidence" of more members? How long? I do not want to gain confidence of anyone anymore. If I was to make a decision, I would say that I don't need those members who cannot stand a little bit of rough reality. I am not going to do anything to "gain confidence" of others. If you want to work then good for you. If you don't want to work on the issue affecting your family, then so be it. You are doing a favor to no one but yourself when you speak with your Congressman. So Good luck and Good bye. But don't preach civility to everyone if you cannot first respond to PlainSpeak. I hate this Eb2/Eb3 fight.
at least one person could respond in more civilized and matured way. These kind of response will give good impression about a forum.
Guys please keep your comments in more civilized way to keep/gain good public image of the forum.
I do read most of the threads in this forum (whenever I feel free) i feel some of members who are donors/senior members feel they can get to fight (in abusive way) with any one on any thread no matter whether it spoils the image of forum or their response adds no value to the thread. These kind of attitude can be expected from new members as they may have wrong intentions (or to just vent their frustrations) to join in a forum. But people who are very senior and donors responding in uncivilized manner is not good for them as well as the forum.
I don't see anything wrong PlainSpeak's suggestion but I can't comment on if her suggestion is workable or not. But we can just explain what is right or wrong instead of getting into fight mode.
I would like to see some kind of administration control (removing the response, warning the members) on those threads with abusive/uncivilized response. I know it is tedious job but once we have senior/donors under civilized conversation controlling new members will be of easier as seniors/donors can report those unwanted conversations.
It would be great place to share ideas (good, bad, right, wrong) if those uncivilized response is reduced. The lesser the uncivilized response more the people willing to join hands.
I wanted to join hands but those uncivilized comments keeping me away from participating. I do have friends who joined after me referring felt the same, some even stopped visiting this forum after seeing uncivilized fightings.
There are great people like amitjoey who convey the message in more civilized way (as far as I have seen) and help others (its not easy to post 1100+ posts....). I am new to this country and have very less experience and knowledge to share. But I hope one day I can guide/help some people like amitjoey.
Reason for me to share my thought is amitjoey, otherwise I would have just gone through the thread and felt bad about this forum for uncivilized comments. I am not into any group yet (Eb2/3) as my comp is not going to sponsor gc as per new policy, so I don't belong to any group (or we can say group who's gc never filed). When I read PlainSpeak's comment I thought she was right and after reading amitjoey's comment I learned another view for this issue. After reading those two comments I understand the issue and why IV took different direction or direction different from PlainSpeak's. But when I continued reading this thread I felt why some educated people with good intentions have bad thoughts and respond to others in uncivilized way. In the whole thread only two comments make's sense to me rest doesn't belong/fit to this forum.
Lets get more new members and be civilized to gain confident which will gain more strength to the forum.
more...
makeup planking
BharatPremi
12-14 05:46 PM
Then the numbers get distributed among those few countries that produces required skilled labor. To some extent, I thought this is already happening!!:rolleyes:
Imagine the situation 3 countries supplying 90% of required labor and rest of the world 10%... This 7% limit screws things there. If US can find laboe "Equally" from every hemisphere and evry country.. 7% limit will work without a question. Otehrwise it would not work and hurt the economy badly.
Imagine the situation 3 countries supplying 90% of required labor and rest of the world 10%... This 7% limit screws things there. If US can find laboe "Equally" from every hemisphere and evry country.. 7% limit will work without a question. Otehrwise it would not work and hurt the economy badly.
girlfriend Acton Beale died after he
Munna Bhai
01-26 08:01 AM
Hello,
My I-140 is approved and I have a PD of Feb 2006.
One of my colleague whose job description is little different then mine has a PD of Sep 2003 and his Labour got approved but he left the company.
So is there anyway his approved labor is useful to me. What are the ifs,buts etc.
----------------
I changed your thread title. when you start a new thread make your thread title descriptive for all members to easily sift through threads- Admin
My I-140 is approved and I have a PD of Feb 2006.
One of my colleague whose job description is little different then mine has a PD of Sep 2003 and his Labour got approved but he left the company.
So is there anyway his approved labor is useful to me. What are the ifs,buts etc.
----------------
I changed your thread title. when you start a new thread make your thread title descriptive for all members to easily sift through threads- Admin
hairstyles Planking on my Dervish
amar123
07-03 11:18 PM
http://digg.com/politics/USCIS_Visa_scandal (http://digg.com/politics/USCIS_Visa_scandal)
Guys, we are all computer friendly unlike our previous generation,lets use the internet to the fullest.
Please dig the link so ppl understand the scenario and making the news sensational but true helps!! Please add your comments to the blog ,hopefully, comments not 2 frustrated or impolite. Remember we claim to be legal immigrants,lets show some refinement and class :)
Guys, we are all computer friendly unlike our previous generation,lets use the internet to the fullest.
Please dig the link so ppl understand the scenario and making the news sensational but true helps!! Please add your comments to the blog ,hopefully, comments not 2 frustrated or impolite. Remember we claim to be legal immigrants,lets show some refinement and class :)
samay
07-06 12:03 PM
My LC applied in Feb 2008
LC approved Apr 2008
I-140 Applied May 2008
My 6th yr H1B expires Dec 2008
H1B Maxout Jan 2008
I am short by around 20 days Should i recapture the days by going out of country for 20 days and apply H1B 1yr extension, Will i Qualify for 3 yrs in this case...?
or should i just Apply for I-140 PP in Oct 2008 and 3 yr H1B Extension without worrying about recapturing 20 days.
Hello
In order to qualify for a three year extension one has to have an approved I-140. From the given facts I understand you will be eligible for one year H-1 B extension in February 2008. You can apply for an extension of H-1 B for a recapture of the days you spent outside India. You are not required to get out of US so long as your petition for extension is pending with the USCIS. Alternatively you can apply for premium processing of I-140 (when it commences). The benefit of course will be that you will be able to get a three year extension. You will have to weigh the cost of the PP with the cost of the H-1 B extension.
LC approved Apr 2008
I-140 Applied May 2008
My 6th yr H1B expires Dec 2008
H1B Maxout Jan 2008
I am short by around 20 days Should i recapture the days by going out of country for 20 days and apply H1B 1yr extension, Will i Qualify for 3 yrs in this case...?
or should i just Apply for I-140 PP in Oct 2008 and 3 yr H1B Extension without worrying about recapturing 20 days.
Hello
In order to qualify for a three year extension one has to have an approved I-140. From the given facts I understand you will be eligible for one year H-1 B extension in February 2008. You can apply for an extension of H-1 B for a recapture of the days you spent outside India. You are not required to get out of US so long as your petition for extension is pending with the USCIS. Alternatively you can apply for premium processing of I-140 (when it commences). The benefit of course will be that you will be able to get a three year extension. You will have to weigh the cost of the PP with the cost of the H-1 B extension.
eb3retro
07-27 08:55 AM
hang on, I have heard these words somewhere? Let me think which walmart / indian temple? This thread really bothers you guys eh??
I am not with Amway or Quixtar but I think the folks with Amway/Quixtar are under represented on this thread and it's not fair :-)
Just to add another dimention to this thread I will play the devil's advocate :D
Here I go ...
You guys are all wasting your free time bitching on this thread where as we are spending all our free time growing our business. We will retire early as we would make $xxxx/month for nothing when we turn 40 and dont need to work anymore where as all you guys bitching about Amway / Quixtar will still be working hard at your jobs till 60.
What's your response ?
:D:D:D:D
When did talking to strangers a crime. If you dont like you can always say no :-) . If you are as ambitious as us come join us and make millions by 40. Otherwise live your fixed income lives .
I wont be offended as I am not with Amway/Quixtar I am just posting on behalf of them for fun :-)
I am not with Amway or Quixtar but I think the folks with Amway/Quixtar are under represented on this thread and it's not fair :-)
Just to add another dimention to this thread I will play the devil's advocate :D
Here I go ...
You guys are all wasting your free time bitching on this thread where as we are spending all our free time growing our business. We will retire early as we would make $xxxx/month for nothing when we turn 40 and dont need to work anymore where as all you guys bitching about Amway / Quixtar will still be working hard at your jobs till 60.
What's your response ?
:D:D:D:D
When did talking to strangers a crime. If you dont like you can always say no :-) . If you are as ambitious as us come join us and make millions by 40. Otherwise live your fixed income lives .
I wont be offended as I am not with Amway/Quixtar I am just posting on behalf of them for fun :-)
0 comments:
Post a Comment