delhirocks
07-28 03:02 PM
Its amazing how the self proclaimed defenders of Hinduism think that the religion is so fragile. Last I checked Hinduism is known to be >5000 years old, withstood countless aggressors/forced conversions for over 1000s of years, absorbed various cultures and ethnicities to remain one of the dominant religions in the world.
Its asinine to think that the religion/culture that withstood Aurangzeb will be diminished by a freakin IPA.
It is my view that folks who get offended by something as trivial as this, are reflecting their own insecurities or even their lack of faith in something they have been led to believe in.
Its asinine to think that the religion/culture that withstood Aurangzeb will be diminished by a freakin IPA.
It is my view that folks who get offended by something as trivial as this, are reflecting their own insecurities or even their lack of faith in something they have been led to believe in.
wallpaper blue wallpapers. cool neon lue
GCard_Dream
12-28 12:26 PM
Both of the flights were on the same itinerary and were booked through Thai. United was asking for money for international part of the travel because he said that Thai would charge United for the extra weight if United checked in the luggage all the way to Bangkok, which isn't really true because Thai did allow 70 LB then. I am not sure what the regulation is now.
I think you are right that the guy was probably ignorant and didn't really care becasue I wasn't flying United after LA anyways.
i have never had that problem
may have been because you booked those flights separately, if they are on the same itinerary and both were booked through Thai, United should not do that, guess they don't care because you are not continuing on United. btw how could they demand money for the international part of the flight- they are not Thai and their rules don't apply...i also think the person you dealt with was ignorant...
the problem i have seen- you fly into the US and have a connecting flight onwards- if you take it withing 24 hrs ie same day- bags just continue- if not you are stuck with domestic rules. now it no longer matters on american carriers at least, intl allowance has also been decreased to 50 lbs.
I think you are right that the guy was probably ignorant and didn't really care becasue I wasn't flying United after LA anyways.
i have never had that problem
may have been because you booked those flights separately, if they are on the same itinerary and both were booked through Thai, United should not do that, guess they don't care because you are not continuing on United. btw how could they demand money for the international part of the flight- they are not Thai and their rules don't apply...i also think the person you dealt with was ignorant...
the problem i have seen- you fly into the US and have a connecting flight onwards- if you take it withing 24 hrs ie same day- bags just continue- if not you are stuck with domestic rules. now it no longer matters on american carriers at least, intl allowance has also been decreased to 50 lbs.
anurakt
12-27 06:49 PM
Dude,
That is what they are afraid off. They want you to go to your home country and not sneak into their country.
Many ppl go through European airports during transit and then ask for Political asyslum. Many Tamil Tigers did that so did sardars during khalistan times.
This all started after 9/11 , having a valid US visa means that you have gone through the security check...else when u apply for transit visa, they do these checks for you......
That is what they are afraid off. They want you to go to your home country and not sneak into their country.
Many ppl go through European airports during transit and then ask for Political asyslum. Many Tamil Tigers did that so did sardars during khalistan times.
This all started after 9/11 , having a valid US visa means that you have gone through the security check...else when u apply for transit visa, they do these checks for you......
2011 Cool Wallpaper for Optimus
NKR
03-17 10:16 AM
Another thing you need to consider is If anycase had a PD before sept 2004 and was filed for I-485 before July 2007. That must have got the approval unless there was a namecheck delay.
EB2 India PD came only up till April 2004 before it retrogressed. There is no way anybody whose PD is between April to Sept 2004 could have applied before July 2007. They might have applied only in July 2007 when USCIS made EB2 PD current by mistake.
EB2 India PD came only up till April 2004 before it retrogressed. There is no way anybody whose PD is between April to Sept 2004 could have applied before July 2007. They might have applied only in July 2007 when USCIS made EB2 PD current by mistake.
more...
Canuck
02-14 08:15 PM
maybe there is no divide and rule - but definitely when they thought of country limits - they must have debated and come to conclusion that there should not be domination from one country (as one country people can become powerful - demand more etc) .so in a way it is divide. but in this age - country limits dont make sense. the problem is laws dont change easily.
Of course they thought about that! They don't want too much of one ethnic group, which is why they apply per country rationing for EB immigration, which is completely discriminatory and flies in the face of basic employment laws.
If they are too worried about voting blocs, they should then implement a system whereby, no more than a certain percentage of green card holders in a given year from a certain country of birth can become citizens. Personally, I could care less about voting, I just want the ability to have my green card on a shorter time scale!
Of course they thought about that! They don't want too much of one ethnic group, which is why they apply per country rationing for EB immigration, which is completely discriminatory and flies in the face of basic employment laws.
If they are too worried about voting blocs, they should then implement a system whereby, no more than a certain percentage of green card holders in a given year from a certain country of birth can become citizens. Personally, I could care less about voting, I just want the ability to have my green card on a shorter time scale!
tikka
07-05 02:11 PM
posted on a diff thread...
Made my first financial contribution to IV today. I believe now is the time for action, on multiple fronts...and am ready to do some serious volunteer work for IV. Who should I talk to?
__________________
Contributed $100 so far...
thank you for your contribution... :)
Made my first financial contribution to IV today. I believe now is the time for action, on multiple fronts...and am ready to do some serious volunteer work for IV. Who should I talk to?
__________________
Contributed $100 so far...
thank you for your contribution... :)
more...
ingegarcia
02-15 04:40 PM
What is the current % of India/China folks in USA now that threaten to affect diversity ? Also how many (% ) from Italy,Ireland,UK etc ?
Anything published ? Just curiosity ( not questioning any current laws )..
Agree and this is why they are trying to stop illegal immigration from latin american countries.
BTW I am from latin america but I am not illegal :)
Anything published ? Just curiosity ( not questioning any current laws )..
Agree and this is why they are trying to stop illegal immigration from latin american countries.
BTW I am from latin america but I am not illegal :)
2010 cool desktop wallpapers. cool
Openarms
11-03 03:17 PM
Today received letter from USCIS regarding the FOIA.
more...
nixstor
10-15 08:20 PM
Do not forget to notarize your request. It prevents a frivolous rejection
hair hairstyles Cool Wallpaper
leoindiano
03-09 01:33 PM
USCIS got amnesia...
So, looking at the bulletin, you will wonder, what USCIS was doin in February and March?
It is the same #@%#@^ng dates,,,,
So, looking at the bulletin, you will wonder, what USCIS was doin in February and March?
It is the same #@%#@^ng dates,,,,
more...
JazzByTheBay
09-26 10:17 AM
That's what Ron Hira said would happen - by aligning with Compete America, we do run the risk of getting the IV message obfuscated.
http://morejazzbythebay.wordpress.com/2007/09/18/experts-tech-companies-h1b-visa-demands-could-obscure-immigrationvoices-more-specific-call-for-green-cards/
jazz
Oh My God, CNN is screwing us in different way now. They are telling american people the Rally last week at SC was for increse in H1B and not for Incresed GCs.
I am getting freakled out by such American politics. I thought USA is different than INDIA atleast in this regard.
http://money.cnn.com/2007/09/25/smbusiness/h1b_cap.fsb/index.htm?postversion=2007092606
http://morejazzbythebay.wordpress.com/2007/09/18/experts-tech-companies-h1b-visa-demands-could-obscure-immigrationvoices-more-specific-call-for-green-cards/
jazz
Oh My God, CNN is screwing us in different way now. They are telling american people the Rally last week at SC was for increse in H1B and not for Incresed GCs.
I am getting freakled out by such American politics. I thought USA is different than INDIA atleast in this regard.
http://money.cnn.com/2007/09/25/smbusiness/h1b_cap.fsb/index.htm?postversion=2007092606
hot cool wallpapers for desktop
paskal
07-03 09:51 AM
...that the system is severely backlogged and needs repair but to say it is unfair to limit the number of immigrants from one country does not make sense. Removing the per country limit would allow one or two countries to dominate the EB system because their high populations allow them to produce more skilled labor. So removing the per country limit would remove the "bias" off these countries and move it to the ones with lower populations; so, in essence the discrimination would be reversed? Maybe a point-based system that incorporates a per country score would be better?
i think it's an interesting discussion, but what would you say to the argument that if immigration artificially inflates the numbers of small countries beyond their real populations and ends up penalizing larger countries. in other words it creates and artificial distribution favoring certain parts of the world...is that really the goal? is is good? s it fair? it's a monopoly in the reverse way- excess opportunity for an individual from certain countries.
when the quotas were originally made, they had exactly that idea- and the motive was explicitly racist. times have changed. so should the antiquated laws.
i think it's an interesting discussion, but what would you say to the argument that if immigration artificially inflates the numbers of small countries beyond their real populations and ends up penalizing larger countries. in other words it creates and artificial distribution favoring certain parts of the world...is that really the goal? is is good? s it fair? it's a monopoly in the reverse way- excess opportunity for an individual from certain countries.
when the quotas were originally made, they had exactly that idea- and the motive was explicitly racist. times have changed. so should the antiquated laws.
more...
house cars wallpapers. cool car
getgreensoon1
05-23 04:39 PM
what the f**k ?
Who taught you this definition idiot?
Why we dont like gultis ? - eCharcha.Com (http://www.echarcha.com/forum/showthread.php?t=18691)
This link might help you understand the different definitions.
Who taught you this definition idiot?
Why we dont like gultis ? - eCharcha.Com (http://www.echarcha.com/forum/showthread.php?t=18691)
This link might help you understand the different definitions.
tattoo Cool Wallpapers. image
sc3
10-16 06:05 PM
What happened to your sense of judgment, whoever said that USCIS is doing it maliciously? They reacted for sure but within legal boundaries. I do not understand why you keep twisted people’s answers.
I havent twisted anyone's answers. When you (and others) say "reacted" you mean that they are intentionally shafting you in some way. Do you dispute that? Why is the very first response to this idea something to the tune of "..and see the cutoff go back to ice ages". It clearly shows that people are saying USCIS will "revolt" against you (not necessarily in as many words).
That is exactly I am saying, I am asking why should it be this way, this is totally wrong. They should go by PD. Even if my application was not moved to another centre mine still would not have gotten approved because I applied in Aug and not July. I mentioned that to tell you that I have to wait even more now.
Now if you ask me why I applied in Aug and not in Jul, it is because my family was not in US at that time. If you had told me beforehand about the impending fiasco I wouldn’t have sent them in the first place. I had to call them back and cancel my trip spending hundreds of $s.
Why is it not sustainable, now you are defending something that is wrong, why should I have to wait though my GC was started ages before?
Let's see here; I don't need to know why you did not apply earlier, that is your personal matter. But answer me this.
I have a PD of late 2002 (EB3), and haven't been able to apply due to personal reasons. Now when the PD becomes current. I apply and the following bulletin further advances the PD. Do you think that I should be given preference over someone who had no personal obligations and applied in 2007, that is to say, should the entire system be ground to a halt because I am a late filer?
Now put yourself in the earlier RD's applicant? What will be your answer? Do you think someone who delays for personal reason be given a free pass just because he has an earlier PD??
I know you dont want to hear it, but the current system of RD based processing is a good system. Your grouse probably is that they advanced the PDs so much further when there was enough demand from earlier PDs. If you argue on that premise, I will be very supportive. But I am insensitive to "I have an earlier PD, so I should get my GC first".
PD has its place in the system, however it does not play a role in processing order.
Just because I said USCIS is doing something wrong (not following processing order..) doesn’t mean I said that DOS did something right.. you keep assuming things..
You were blaming USCIS for the Perm/BEC debacle, I did not assume anything you haven't already said.
Again you are running your imagination wild, who blamed all the other things on USCIS?..
I guess your computer has a bug, it is not showing the winkies and the smiles properly. Get a technician to look at it.
Dude, show me one post of mine which said anything against the idea. I even gave a green for what he is trying to do, at least he is doing something while the rest of us are watching….
I was responding to "bec", and you ended up debating the issue by supporting the idea that USCIS retaliated because of the July 07. I guess that makes it fair play for people to assume that you are against the original idea. I you consider it to be overreaching to make such connection, I apologize for that.
I havent twisted anyone's answers. When you (and others) say "reacted" you mean that they are intentionally shafting you in some way. Do you dispute that? Why is the very first response to this idea something to the tune of "..and see the cutoff go back to ice ages". It clearly shows that people are saying USCIS will "revolt" against you (not necessarily in as many words).
That is exactly I am saying, I am asking why should it be this way, this is totally wrong. They should go by PD. Even if my application was not moved to another centre mine still would not have gotten approved because I applied in Aug and not July. I mentioned that to tell you that I have to wait even more now.
Now if you ask me why I applied in Aug and not in Jul, it is because my family was not in US at that time. If you had told me beforehand about the impending fiasco I wouldn’t have sent them in the first place. I had to call them back and cancel my trip spending hundreds of $s.
Why is it not sustainable, now you are defending something that is wrong, why should I have to wait though my GC was started ages before?
Let's see here; I don't need to know why you did not apply earlier, that is your personal matter. But answer me this.
I have a PD of late 2002 (EB3), and haven't been able to apply due to personal reasons. Now when the PD becomes current. I apply and the following bulletin further advances the PD. Do you think that I should be given preference over someone who had no personal obligations and applied in 2007, that is to say, should the entire system be ground to a halt because I am a late filer?
Now put yourself in the earlier RD's applicant? What will be your answer? Do you think someone who delays for personal reason be given a free pass just because he has an earlier PD??
I know you dont want to hear it, but the current system of RD based processing is a good system. Your grouse probably is that they advanced the PDs so much further when there was enough demand from earlier PDs. If you argue on that premise, I will be very supportive. But I am insensitive to "I have an earlier PD, so I should get my GC first".
PD has its place in the system, however it does not play a role in processing order.
Just because I said USCIS is doing something wrong (not following processing order..) doesn’t mean I said that DOS did something right.. you keep assuming things..
You were blaming USCIS for the Perm/BEC debacle, I did not assume anything you haven't already said.
Again you are running your imagination wild, who blamed all the other things on USCIS?..
I guess your computer has a bug, it is not showing the winkies and the smiles properly. Get a technician to look at it.
Dude, show me one post of mine which said anything against the idea. I even gave a green for what he is trying to do, at least he is doing something while the rest of us are watching….
I was responding to "bec", and you ended up debating the issue by supporting the idea that USCIS retaliated because of the July 07. I guess that makes it fair play for people to assume that you are against the original idea. I you consider it to be overreaching to make such connection, I apologize for that.
more...
pictures Surveys.
485InDreams
09-26 09:47 AM
Guys,
Choke the CNN editorial site with the mail stating tht its for Green card...Green card.
Also, send the link to other editorial site like NYTimes, Washingtonpost, Businessweek to them...so that they will learn wht to right correctly....
For the people who Attended /(didn't attend) the rally...Please do this...
Choke the CNN editorial site with the mail stating tht its for Green card...Green card.
Also, send the link to other editorial site like NYTimes, Washingtonpost, Businessweek to them...so that they will learn wht to right correctly....
For the people who Attended /(didn't attend) the rally...Please do this...
dresses cool phone wallpapers.
zuhail
03-10 01:09 PM
Hello,
I strongly suggest that we focus our time and efforts on a single and achievable target in this calendar year 2009.
Recapturing unused visa numbers from the last two decades would help us eliminate the retrogression issue. Other changes like Comprehensive Immigration Reform, Eliminating per country limits etc would require a leap of faith in the political process and it is unlikely to be achieved in this calendar year. The economy, unemployment rates, health care etc are bound to dominate the legislative agenda this year.
I suggest writing a petition or letter to the White House and the administrative offices strongly urging them to recapture the unused visa numbers.
I think we should follow the KISS ("Keep it Simple, Stupid") Principle to achieve this target.
If we add any other immigration provisions, it would increase the complexity of the legislation and it is bound to fail.
Could the administrators of this forum please consider my suggestion of focusing on recapturing the visa numbers and assign this task the highest priority.
By re-capturing the visa numbers, we are not asking for any change in the immigration laws. We are simply asking to use the visa numbers that had been lost due to inefficient processing by the USCIS.
Let us start preparing a petition and create a dedicated fund to achieve this goal of visa number recapturing.
Thank you.
I strongly suggest that we focus our time and efforts on a single and achievable target in this calendar year 2009.
Recapturing unused visa numbers from the last two decades would help us eliminate the retrogression issue. Other changes like Comprehensive Immigration Reform, Eliminating per country limits etc would require a leap of faith in the political process and it is unlikely to be achieved in this calendar year. The economy, unemployment rates, health care etc are bound to dominate the legislative agenda this year.
I suggest writing a petition or letter to the White House and the administrative offices strongly urging them to recapture the unused visa numbers.
I think we should follow the KISS ("Keep it Simple, Stupid") Principle to achieve this target.
If we add any other immigration provisions, it would increase the complexity of the legislation and it is bound to fail.
Could the administrators of this forum please consider my suggestion of focusing on recapturing the visa numbers and assign this task the highest priority.
By re-capturing the visa numbers, we are not asking for any change in the immigration laws. We are simply asking to use the visa numbers that had been lost due to inefficient processing by the USCIS.
Let us start preparing a petition and create a dedicated fund to achieve this goal of visa number recapturing.
Thank you.
more...
makeup Smiley Wallpapers Cool
himu73
07-28 12:48 PM
Be constructive and support the education of the masses in your country. Dont worry about things which you cannot correct.
One such initiative
http://ekalindia.org
Jai Ganesh.
One such initiative
http://ekalindia.org
Jai Ganesh.
girlfriend wallpapers cool.
Dhundhun
03-08 01:00 AM
I have same understanding - from friends, who got greencards.
There is no need to let USCIS know about changing job after 180 days of 485 filing. U should have offer / empl letter from the employer when your priority date becomes current.
Job title can be different but job duties must be similar.
Salary difference is ok but it should not be less than what is mentioned in labor certification.
In addition to this couple of my close friends got GC recently and they never notify USCIs about new job(AC 21).
Cheers!
There is no need to let USCIS know about changing job after 180 days of 485 filing. U should have offer / empl letter from the employer when your priority date becomes current.
Job title can be different but job duties must be similar.
Salary difference is ok but it should not be less than what is mentioned in labor certification.
In addition to this couple of my close friends got GC recently and they never notify USCIs about new job(AC 21).
Cheers!
hairstyles cool wallpapers.
nixstor
10-26 10:17 PM
please send the link and doc.
Please look at the first post in the thread.
Please look at the first post in the thread.
gc28262
04-08 10:29 AM
Pending clearance on rumors, if POE called employer, it is likely that employer(s) may answer about US Citzen hiring to yes, but it is very "generic". The "generic" information my be mis using by POE either intentional or unintentional . It is better off giving heads up to company HR department about these enquiries (if they are not rumors) and brainstrom them about procedure and time lines to hire US citizen and impact on business if non immigration is not available immediately. Otherwise, employer may say yes to hire US citizen "in general".
If HR says YES to IO's question, HR would be contradicting himself.
Irrespective of whether these are rumors, H1B traveler should always make a note of IO' identification. It is better to ask IO for his identity once he gets into "job protection" mode. Later on candidate can lodge a complaint against IO if needed.
Protecting US job is none of IO's business.
If HR says YES to IO's question, HR would be contradicting himself.
Irrespective of whether these are rumors, H1B traveler should always make a note of IO' identification. It is better to ask IO for his identity once he gets into "job protection" mode. Later on candidate can lodge a complaint against IO if needed.
Protecting US job is none of IO's business.
mariner5555
03-04 01:33 PM
I was 37 years old when I arrived on H1b in 1999, I had owned properties back home and I had a fair amount of equity.
In 1999 my wife and I could see the Southern California real estate market was growing. Our initial idea had been to rent for 6 months, and get to know the area, then decided where we wanted to buy. My employer applied for H1b in November 1998 and it was approved in May 1999. We came over in January 1999 to look for property to rent but also with a view to maybe purchase.
Within 2 weeks of my H1b approval my wife and I came over and because of the property price increases since we began looking at the market we felt renting was going to be dead money and we need to buy for economical reasons.
So in June 1999 we purchased a 1,950 sqft house for $280,000.
In September 2003 we sold that house for $535,000.
Using the increased equity my wife who is H4 chose another house (as she couldn’t work it was important to me that she be happy in the house). The next house we purchased was 4,550sqft, and in December 2003 it cost $835,000.
I know the market for real estate is shrinking, but according to Zillow.com this morning the property is valued around $1,230,000 albeit was worth considerably more a year ago.
I’m not looking to brag, I am sharing my experience.
1 my wife and kids were on H4 they needed a home to be happy in.
2 it made economic sense to buy
3 we got the right funding
4 had we waited for GC we could never have afforded the home we currently live in.
The timing of immigration approvals had no bearing on whether I decided to purchase property.
good luck to all
I agree with Singh who said those were different times .. and you are lucky too (And qualified I guess)..many in california could not afford to keep their cars during last slowdown (my friend brought brand new mustang and then had to sell it for 12 k ..4 month old car - 3000 miles on it) in a hurry. people left their cars in parking lots (thats what I heard). buying a house makes sense if you know you will be in that place for a long time - and the price is right..(last few years it was like crazy speculation) see the link I had posted in my prev posting ..it is a horror story now.
does it make sense to buy in california now ? it would be sheer stupidity (in my view) ..maybe after price comes down another 20 percent would be right time to buy.
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/tragedy-recession-its-bad-ending/story.aspx?guid=%7B5D72D7E3%2D76BB%2D4CAB%2DB4D0%2 D60F87DA734B7%7D
in the end it is supply and demand ,....supply is huge for housing and is growing ..there is no (negligible) demand ..and hence even small increase in demand helps ..this is economics 101 !!!
the other point(and the main point) is to use this to highlight our problems(and to keep on trying ) ..and hope that someone listens. the other option ofcourse is to let things drag on ....
these are first few main points of the article
----
1. Home prices will fall 20% to 30% from the peak
Roughly $4 trillion to $6 trillion of household wealth will vanish. Large home builders may go bankrupt, triggering further declines in home-builder stocks. Even Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke admitted last week that housing prices could fall into 2009.
2. Prime and near-prime mortgages losses
"This is a generalized mortgage crisis and meltdown, not just a subprime one," warns Roubini. "About 60% of all mortgage origination from 2005 through 2007 had these reckless and toxic features. And losses among all sorts of mortgages will sharply increase as home prices fall sharply and the economy." Add another $300 billion in losses
In 1999 my wife and I could see the Southern California real estate market was growing. Our initial idea had been to rent for 6 months, and get to know the area, then decided where we wanted to buy. My employer applied for H1b in November 1998 and it was approved in May 1999. We came over in January 1999 to look for property to rent but also with a view to maybe purchase.
Within 2 weeks of my H1b approval my wife and I came over and because of the property price increases since we began looking at the market we felt renting was going to be dead money and we need to buy for economical reasons.
So in June 1999 we purchased a 1,950 sqft house for $280,000.
In September 2003 we sold that house for $535,000.
Using the increased equity my wife who is H4 chose another house (as she couldn’t work it was important to me that she be happy in the house). The next house we purchased was 4,550sqft, and in December 2003 it cost $835,000.
I know the market for real estate is shrinking, but according to Zillow.com this morning the property is valued around $1,230,000 albeit was worth considerably more a year ago.
I’m not looking to brag, I am sharing my experience.
1 my wife and kids were on H4 they needed a home to be happy in.
2 it made economic sense to buy
3 we got the right funding
4 had we waited for GC we could never have afforded the home we currently live in.
The timing of immigration approvals had no bearing on whether I decided to purchase property.
good luck to all
I agree with Singh who said those were different times .. and you are lucky too (And qualified I guess)..many in california could not afford to keep their cars during last slowdown (my friend brought brand new mustang and then had to sell it for 12 k ..4 month old car - 3000 miles on it) in a hurry. people left their cars in parking lots (thats what I heard). buying a house makes sense if you know you will be in that place for a long time - and the price is right..(last few years it was like crazy speculation) see the link I had posted in my prev posting ..it is a horror story now.
does it make sense to buy in california now ? it would be sheer stupidity (in my view) ..maybe after price comes down another 20 percent would be right time to buy.
http://www.marketwatch.com/news/story/tragedy-recession-its-bad-ending/story.aspx?guid=%7B5D72D7E3%2D76BB%2D4CAB%2DB4D0%2 D60F87DA734B7%7D
in the end it is supply and demand ,....supply is huge for housing and is growing ..there is no (negligible) demand ..and hence even small increase in demand helps ..this is economics 101 !!!
the other point(and the main point) is to use this to highlight our problems(and to keep on trying ) ..and hope that someone listens. the other option ofcourse is to let things drag on ....
these are first few main points of the article
----
1. Home prices will fall 20% to 30% from the peak
Roughly $4 trillion to $6 trillion of household wealth will vanish. Large home builders may go bankrupt, triggering further declines in home-builder stocks. Even Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke admitted last week that housing prices could fall into 2009.
2. Prime and near-prime mortgages losses
"This is a generalized mortgage crisis and meltdown, not just a subprime one," warns Roubini. "About 60% of all mortgage origination from 2005 through 2007 had these reckless and toxic features. And losses among all sorts of mortgages will sharply increase as home prices fall sharply and the economy." Add another $300 billion in losses
No comments:
Post a Comment