snathan
03-29 08:35 PM
Thank you for your personal opinion. India was doing well when Vajpayee was PM. He is not some management honcho. It is a vision of the person that is more important. Manmohan is a learned man and has provided country with real good service but real power rests with Sonia and her son Rahul.
Hence. Its a question of ideology in the long run and given my background, BJP govt suits me better than Congress. So I prefer Advani over Sonia.
I am not sure what vision Mr.Advani has for India. May be at this age he might have better vision than other people in the same league.
Hence. Its a question of ideology in the long run and given my background, BJP govt suits me better than Congress. So I prefer Advani over Sonia.
I am not sure what vision Mr.Advani has for India. May be at this age he might have better vision than other people in the same league.
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
gcdreamer05
03-27 12:00 PM
How about rajinikanth, vijaykanth, kamalhasan..........
Amitab bachan, hrithick, shah rukh..............
If Imran khan has come in to politics why not Azharuddin ?
We can keep guessing but you know who is the right guy ,
Abdul kalaam (can a president become a prime minister too again or something will limit him not to).
Or deport bobby jindal there and make him india PM so that he can release statements about US from there :D:D:D
Amitab bachan, hrithick, shah rukh..............
If Imran khan has come in to politics why not Azharuddin ?
We can keep guessing but you know who is the right guy ,
Abdul kalaam (can a president become a prime minister too again or something will limit him not to).
Or deport bobby jindal there and make him india PM so that he can release statements about US from there :D:D:D
u.misc
01-25 02:55 PM
I thought we're not supposed to pay for H1 and GC. Correct me if I'm wrong? I guess we can only pay for the visa appointment fee.
I came here in 1999, at that time employer was not bound to pay for H1-B expense. Later USCIS enforced the law and now most employer do pay for H1-B.
However for GC, its the employer's discretion and there is no written rule as who should bear the cost fo GC filing. I paid for mine.
I came here in 1999, at that time employer was not bound to pay for H1-B expense. Later USCIS enforced the law and now most employer do pay for H1-B.
However for GC, its the employer's discretion and there is no written rule as who should bear the cost fo GC filing. I paid for mine.
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
andy garcia
02-23 07:23 AM
Looking only at LCs that are awaiting immigrant visa numbers (ie, LCs that are "still in process" or "certified after current EB3 ROW cutoff dates") here is how it looks (copy to an XL sheet to view properly):
Period, World, India(22%), EB2-India(41% of India), EB2-India-Family(*2.1)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1997 to 2002, 269311, 59271, 24320, 51072
2002 to 2003, 36200, 7967, 3269, 6865
2003 to 2004, 13145, 2893, 1187, 2493
2004 to 2005, 6133, 1350, 554, 1163
The pre 2002 numbers pending are really bad. The last column sums up the situation for EB2-India. Use your own %ages to calculate the situation for EB3. It is clear that forward movement will be held back due to the huge chunk of LCs from 1997 to 2002 which are being certified.
So the situation is indeed hopeless and lobbying is the only way out.
Don't forget that a lot of those LC were being used for substitution($$$$) by the consulting companies. Once the regulation about eliminating substitution goes into effect. Some of those will not be able to be recycled.
Period, World, India(22%), EB2-India(41% of India), EB2-India-Family(*2.1)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
1997 to 2002, 269311, 59271, 24320, 51072
2002 to 2003, 36200, 7967, 3269, 6865
2003 to 2004, 13145, 2893, 1187, 2493
2004 to 2005, 6133, 1350, 554, 1163
The pre 2002 numbers pending are really bad. The last column sums up the situation for EB2-India. Use your own %ages to calculate the situation for EB3. It is clear that forward movement will be held back due to the huge chunk of LCs from 1997 to 2002 which are being certified.
So the situation is indeed hopeless and lobbying is the only way out.
Don't forget that a lot of those LC were being used for substitution($$$$) by the consulting companies. Once the regulation about eliminating substitution goes into effect. Some of those will not be able to be recycled.
more...
Macaca
06-28 08:09 PM
but if USCIS knew this (that June+July can finish all the numbers for 2007) then why does the visa bulletin talk about retrogression in September timeframe for India/China? Why not August itself?
That is why I (and my lawyer) expected dates to continue in July + Aug. I actually expected USCIS to continue and use 2008 quota and start retrogressing in Nov 2007.
My analysis is based on info in Ombudsman report. May be there is more stuff! May be something changed! May be they did not have # of adj applicants.
We can complain to Ombudsman!
That is why I (and my lawyer) expected dates to continue in July + Aug. I actually expected USCIS to continue and use 2008 quota and start retrogressing in Nov 2007.
My analysis is based on info in Ombudsman report. May be there is more stuff! May be something changed! May be they did not have # of adj applicants.
We can complain to Ombudsman!
nixstor
07-03 05:23 PM
http://digg.com/politics/Rep_Lofgren_Issues_Statement_on_Updated_Visa_Bulle tin
more...
krishmunn
06-12 12:20 PM
I wonder what Dilip was doing when he was laid off. An H1 holder is out of status the moment he/she is laid off. So, our brightest Dilip was out of status (aka illegal) during the period he was laid off.
As is said -- illegals have a better chance to get GC then those trying to be legal.
With such friends of prospecting immigrants you sure do not need an anti-immigrant.
As is said -- illegals have a better chance to get GC then those trying to be legal.
With such friends of prospecting immigrants you sure do not need an anti-immigrant.
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
alisa
07-03 11:33 PM
Dear Senator XXX,
USCIS and DOS played a cruel and gut-wrenching joke with the lives and feelings of hundreds of thousands of employment based greencard applicants.
At first, DOS announced that visa numbers were available for July 2007, and so all applicants could apply for Adjustment of Status.
Hundreds of thousands of applicants, with high hopes, went through hardships collecting documents and spent money in the month of June. People flew in their families from outside United States, and cancelled trips so that they could file for AOS.
However, on July 2nd, the first day that USCIS could accept the applications, DOS declared that the visas were unavailable, and USCIS announced that they would reject all applications.
How did this happen?
USCIS worked feverishly to issue greencards, so that it did not have to deal with the applications that were going to be filed in July. According to unconfirmed reports, USCIS gave out 18000 employment-based greencards in the last day of June. USCIS does not even succeed in giving out 140K employment-based greencards in any given year.
Please see this:
http://www.prlog.org/10022648-no-celebration-for-thousands-of-highly-skilled-future-americans-this-july-4th.html
And this:
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/07/02/ap3879453.html
And this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/04/us/04visas.html?ex=1341201600&en=fbf9eb2e25eac42e&ei=5124&partner=digg&exprod=digg
It is being suggested, though it still remains to be confirmed, that USCIS actions were either illegal, or a lapse in national security.
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2007/07/full-blown-scan.html
Representative Lofgren has issued letters to Secretaries Chertoff and Rice asking them to explain the behaviors of their departments.
http://lofgren.house.gov/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=1808
We hope that you would also demand answers from USCIS and DOS. We also hope that congress would pass legislation to ease the pains of the employment based greencard applicants, like SKILL bill.
I look forward to hearing from you, and will gladly post your response publicly to share with other employment-based greencard applicants.
USCIS and DOS played a cruel and gut-wrenching joke with the lives and feelings of hundreds of thousands of employment based greencard applicants.
At first, DOS announced that visa numbers were available for July 2007, and so all applicants could apply for Adjustment of Status.
Hundreds of thousands of applicants, with high hopes, went through hardships collecting documents and spent money in the month of June. People flew in their families from outside United States, and cancelled trips so that they could file for AOS.
However, on July 2nd, the first day that USCIS could accept the applications, DOS declared that the visas were unavailable, and USCIS announced that they would reject all applications.
How did this happen?
USCIS worked feverishly to issue greencards, so that it did not have to deal with the applications that were going to be filed in July. According to unconfirmed reports, USCIS gave out 18000 employment-based greencards in the last day of June. USCIS does not even succeed in giving out 140K employment-based greencards in any given year.
Please see this:
http://www.prlog.org/10022648-no-celebration-for-thousands-of-highly-skilled-future-americans-this-july-4th.html
And this:
http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/07/02/ap3879453.html
And this:
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/04/us/04visas.html?ex=1341201600&en=fbf9eb2e25eac42e&ei=5124&partner=digg&exprod=digg
It is being suggested, though it still remains to be confirmed, that USCIS actions were either illegal, or a lapse in national security.
http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2007/07/full-blown-scan.html
Representative Lofgren has issued letters to Secretaries Chertoff and Rice asking them to explain the behaviors of their departments.
http://lofgren.house.gov/PRArticle.aspx?NewsID=1808
We hope that you would also demand answers from USCIS and DOS. We also hope that congress would pass legislation to ease the pains of the employment based greencard applicants, like SKILL bill.
I look forward to hearing from you, and will gladly post your response publicly to share with other employment-based greencard applicants.
more...
ItIsNotFunny
03-27 08:59 AM
Hi All,
I currently have an EB3 March 2003 priority date labor I140 approved with my company. Recently, I wanted to move to consulting, sothat I can get my GC converted to EB2 as the dates are only 2 months apart. I have asked my company if they are willing to take me as a contractor once I am out of the company and go to a consulting company. They said that it should be fine, but they said if GC is the only purpose, they can try to do something about converting my existing labor to EB2. It's a very big fortune 500 company and they do all their labors in EB3. My question is:
1. Can I re-apply another labor in EB2 for a position that qualifies in the same company and can port the existing EB3 priority date? Has anyone done this in the past?
2. Can I use any prior priority date approved labor in the same company, even though my EB3 I140 is approved with the same company.
3. Can I move to consulting company and reapply in EB2 with existing priority date and work for the same company that has my current labor.
The company legal counsel said that they would come back to me with some answers this week, but I want to get second opinion from all of you in this regard. I have my Masters in 2000 and MBA in 2004 with 8 years experience and so EB2 qualification shouldn't be a problem
Any help will be greatly appreciated!
Thanks,
Yes, you can move to another company with existing priority date. You still have to get LC and I-140 approved from new company but while filing 485, you can use old 140 priority date.
I currently have an EB3 March 2003 priority date labor I140 approved with my company. Recently, I wanted to move to consulting, sothat I can get my GC converted to EB2 as the dates are only 2 months apart. I have asked my company if they are willing to take me as a contractor once I am out of the company and go to a consulting company. They said that it should be fine, but they said if GC is the only purpose, they can try to do something about converting my existing labor to EB2. It's a very big fortune 500 company and they do all their labors in EB3. My question is:
1. Can I re-apply another labor in EB2 for a position that qualifies in the same company and can port the existing EB3 priority date? Has anyone done this in the past?
2. Can I use any prior priority date approved labor in the same company, even though my EB3 I140 is approved with the same company.
3. Can I move to consulting company and reapply in EB2 with existing priority date and work for the same company that has my current labor.
The company legal counsel said that they would come back to me with some answers this week, but I want to get second opinion from all of you in this regard. I have my Masters in 2000 and MBA in 2004 with 8 years experience and so EB2 qualification shouldn't be a problem
Any help will be greatly appreciated!
Thanks,
Yes, you can move to another company with existing priority date. You still have to get LC and I-140 approved from new company but while filing 485, you can use old 140 priority date.
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
gc_chahiye
06-28 07:41 PM
I suggest that you do this: Send the URL from AILA's memo about what happened to EB3-other worker category in June. And copy your HR and senior folks of your company when you email lawyer. That will tend to focus the attention of your lawfirm and they will either have to say "We will file asap" or they will have to say "AILA's memo doesnt mean anything".
I bet they will come back with the former conclusion.
Apparently, these lawyers have been too conditioned to work 30 hours per week and now, having to work 60 hours per week is too tough. NEWSFLASH LAWYERS : We idiots in IT and software very often work long hours to meet project deadlines. Its a part of life. Get used to it or like I said before, find something else to do. Like basket weaving or poetry writing so that you dont have to see deadlines and dont have to burn midnight oil.
This deadline is meaningless for them. We are not going anywhere. If dates retrogress, then we'll simply come back to them after 2 years or whatever.
Unless the senior folks in your HR department specifically ask them to file asap, they wont.
I bet they will come back with the former conclusion.
Apparently, these lawyers have been too conditioned to work 30 hours per week and now, having to work 60 hours per week is too tough. NEWSFLASH LAWYERS : We idiots in IT and software very often work long hours to meet project deadlines. Its a part of life. Get used to it or like I said before, find something else to do. Like basket weaving or poetry writing so that you dont have to see deadlines and dont have to burn midnight oil.
This deadline is meaningless for them. We are not going anywhere. If dates retrogress, then we'll simply come back to them after 2 years or whatever.
Unless the senior folks in your HR department specifically ask them to file asap, they wont.
more...
rajesh_kamisetty
07-10 11:17 AM
I need to hear more stories like this to realize I won't be alone when time comes for me to pack up.
Me and my wife really like to live and work in other parts of world and we have even asked my company to send us out of USA. The only reason for me at this point to pursue GC is for my wife be able to work part-time.
Otherwise, I am very content being on H1.
Me and my wife really like to live and work in other parts of world and we have even asked my company to send us out of USA. The only reason for me at this point to pursue GC is for my wife be able to work part-time.
Otherwise, I am very content being on H1.
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
django.stone
06-15 02:05 PM
dilip,
i am not debating you point of view, in fact i agree that with the darwinism concept and hope the down economy brings gc to good & talented folks. your rollercoaster ride was from Mar 2001 to May 2003, about 2 yrs. in the current scenario people are waiting for 8+ years and most of them like myself at least 3 yrs. the situation is indeed different this time around with labor substitution, L1, porting etc. causing delays for earlier people, that's why you see more venting this time around.
i am not debating you point of view, in fact i agree that with the darwinism concept and hope the down economy brings gc to good & talented folks. your rollercoaster ride was from Mar 2001 to May 2003, about 2 yrs. in the current scenario people are waiting for 8+ years and most of them like myself at least 3 yrs. the situation is indeed different this time around with labor substitution, L1, porting etc. causing delays for earlier people, that's why you see more venting this time around.
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
PlainSpeak
01-13 01:21 PM
Few questions for the self proclaimed expert analyst who started this thread -
1) How many lawmakers have you met to represent these provisions you claim to be so passionate about?
2) Have you visited capitol hill and tried to understand what the congress thinks about EB legislation? I did - during the IV advocacy event last year with hundreds of eb2 and eb3 members.
3) How many members here have you actually worked worked with? Because the people I know here who actually do the grass root work with me (both eb2 and eb3) do not care about theb category they belong to.
I know you do not have any real responses...only abuses which you responded with on the other thread.
Its funny how plainspeak is the one usually doling out the abuses but claims to be the victim.
Few questions for the self proclaimed expert analyst who started this thread -
1) How many lawmakers have you met to represent these provisions you claim to be so passionate about?
2) Have you visited capitol hill and tried to understand what the congress thinks about EB legislation? I did - during the IV advocacy event last year with hundreds of eb2 and eb3 members.
3) How many members here have you actually worked worked with? Because the people I know here who actually do the grass root work with me (both eb2 and eb3) do not care about theb category they belong to.
I know you do not have any real responses...only abuses which you responded with on the other thread.
Its funny how plainspeak is the one usually doling out the abuses but claims to be the victim.
Ahhh my friend forever_waiting, how are you. It is good to see your reply to the post. Will be do this the civilized way or the old way??
In direct response to your post
First i am not a expert nor an analyst musch less a self proclaimed expert analyst. Take that as a given and we can procced further
1) How many lawmakers have you met to represent these provisions you claim to be so passionate about?
None because i do not believe in supporting, representing or furthering the agenda of an organization which has loop holes in it and is determental to my case
2) Have you visited capitol hill and tried to understand what the congress thinks about EB legislation?
I did - during the IV advocacy event last year with hundreds of eb2 and eb3 members.
No i have not. Why do i need to visit capitol hill and view in person what congress thinks about EB legislation when i can do the same by watching CSPAN(I am a regular watcher expecially when there is something immigrant related going on. All a process of expanding my knowlesge of immigration or do you think i got up yesterday morning and decided that i want to fight with IV. If you did then i am sorry i gave you more credit then that. And please do not start a new thread about how lazy i am and how i want others to work for me and how i just want the benefit without effort. That would be old and stale. If there is something to be done in which i believe i will be the first to jump in and volunteer
3) How many members here have you actually worked worked with? Because the people I know here who actually do the grass root work with me (both eb2 and eb3) do not care about theb category they belong to.
YES and i never said you are not fair. I know EB2 and EB23 owkr toghether in IV. My efforts of meeting people have been made outside the scope of what you and others do. I am being modest when i say this but i was the first person in my company to make generate awareness about what IV did and how it is helping immigrants like us and encouraged them to visit the website and read about what IV is all about. This is about 75 to 100 indains (EB2 and EB3) in an organization of size 500 during teh time period 2006 to 2007. Now most of them were EB2 so they got their green card and i am sure are no longer on the IV forum anymore. I am sure those who are still on IV forum are EB3 like me. How much they parrticipate, it is hard to tell. Maybe they were smarter than me and got dissalusioned with IV way before i did. They might be porting or they might not be for all i know
Besides that i am pretty much regular on Murthy where i have provided advise or tried to help people with information whne i could (O f course all of this was H1B/ Visit Visa stuff). Even today on IV forum i am trying my level best to help peopl ewith information related to AOS/EAD/140/485 etc
I am sorry because what i did till now is nowhere near what you and other IV volunteers are doing but i do what i can when i can.
My friend forever_waiting, I hope i answered everything to your satisfaction
As to the below
I know you do not have any real responses...only abuses which you responded with on the other thread. Its funny how plainspeak is the one usually doling out the abuses but claims to be the victim. I am sorry i am done trying to explain it to you all over again. May god grant you wisdom
1) How many lawmakers have you met to represent these provisions you claim to be so passionate about?
2) Have you visited capitol hill and tried to understand what the congress thinks about EB legislation? I did - during the IV advocacy event last year with hundreds of eb2 and eb3 members.
3) How many members here have you actually worked worked with? Because the people I know here who actually do the grass root work with me (both eb2 and eb3) do not care about theb category they belong to.
I know you do not have any real responses...only abuses which you responded with on the other thread.
Its funny how plainspeak is the one usually doling out the abuses but claims to be the victim.
Few questions for the self proclaimed expert analyst who started this thread -
1) How many lawmakers have you met to represent these provisions you claim to be so passionate about?
2) Have you visited capitol hill and tried to understand what the congress thinks about EB legislation? I did - during the IV advocacy event last year with hundreds of eb2 and eb3 members.
3) How many members here have you actually worked worked with? Because the people I know here who actually do the grass root work with me (both eb2 and eb3) do not care about theb category they belong to.
I know you do not have any real responses...only abuses which you responded with on the other thread.
Its funny how plainspeak is the one usually doling out the abuses but claims to be the victim.
Ahhh my friend forever_waiting, how are you. It is good to see your reply to the post. Will be do this the civilized way or the old way??
In direct response to your post
First i am not a expert nor an analyst musch less a self proclaimed expert analyst. Take that as a given and we can procced further
1) How many lawmakers have you met to represent these provisions you claim to be so passionate about?
None because i do not believe in supporting, representing or furthering the agenda of an organization which has loop holes in it and is determental to my case
2) Have you visited capitol hill and tried to understand what the congress thinks about EB legislation?
I did - during the IV advocacy event last year with hundreds of eb2 and eb3 members.
No i have not. Why do i need to visit capitol hill and view in person what congress thinks about EB legislation when i can do the same by watching CSPAN(I am a regular watcher expecially when there is something immigrant related going on. All a process of expanding my knowlesge of immigration or do you think i got up yesterday morning and decided that i want to fight with IV. If you did then i am sorry i gave you more credit then that. And please do not start a new thread about how lazy i am and how i want others to work for me and how i just want the benefit without effort. That would be old and stale. If there is something to be done in which i believe i will be the first to jump in and volunteer
3) How many members here have you actually worked worked with? Because the people I know here who actually do the grass root work with me (both eb2 and eb3) do not care about theb category they belong to.
YES and i never said you are not fair. I know EB2 and EB23 owkr toghether in IV. My efforts of meeting people have been made outside the scope of what you and others do. I am being modest when i say this but i was the first person in my company to make generate awareness about what IV did and how it is helping immigrants like us and encouraged them to visit the website and read about what IV is all about. This is about 75 to 100 indains (EB2 and EB3) in an organization of size 500 during teh time period 2006 to 2007. Now most of them were EB2 so they got their green card and i am sure are no longer on the IV forum anymore. I am sure those who are still on IV forum are EB3 like me. How much they parrticipate, it is hard to tell. Maybe they were smarter than me and got dissalusioned with IV way before i did. They might be porting or they might not be for all i know
Besides that i am pretty much regular on Murthy where i have provided advise or tried to help people with information whne i could (O f course all of this was H1B/ Visit Visa stuff). Even today on IV forum i am trying my level best to help peopl ewith information related to AOS/EAD/140/485 etc
I am sorry because what i did till now is nowhere near what you and other IV volunteers are doing but i do what i can when i can.
My friend forever_waiting, I hope i answered everything to your satisfaction
As to the below
I know you do not have any real responses...only abuses which you responded with on the other thread. Its funny how plainspeak is the one usually doling out the abuses but claims to be the victim. I am sorry i am done trying to explain it to you all over again. May god grant you wisdom
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
msp1976
02-14 06:55 PM
On the USCIS site there is a statistics section and there are many xls files there that you can refer to....
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
okuzmin
05-09 04:37 PM
pmat, a word of caution and experience on FBI fingerprints/background checks.
If you're submitting fingerprints for yourself and your spouse, make sure you have certified funds of $18 (I believe that's the correct amount, but I might be wrong) PER PERSON, i.e., $36 for two people. In the instructions they just say "$18 for the background check" and give you a form to list yourself and any other adults in your family. I had to call and confirm that it's $18 a person.
They have a backlog of these background checks now; in the instructions it says the process takes up to 8 weeks, while nowadays it's up to 3 months and sometimes even longer.
It might take about a year for the Canadian Consulate to process your first batch of documents. In my case, it took 11 months. Then they notified us that our interviews were waived. In the same letter they requested the following docs:
updated letters of experience from my current employer;
updated financial docs (tax returns, pay stubs, W2's, and bank funds confirmation);
updated FBI certificates.
It doesn't say anywhere in the instructions that your fingerprint cards are only good for 1 year. When I sent my "old" fingerprints (I had two sets of those made the first time we applied), FBI returned them unprocessed after 3 months and asked for the updated fingerprint cards. Then it took them another 2 months to process those.
If you're submitting fingerprints for yourself and your spouse, make sure you have certified funds of $18 (I believe that's the correct amount, but I might be wrong) PER PERSON, i.e., $36 for two people. In the instructions they just say "$18 for the background check" and give you a form to list yourself and any other adults in your family. I had to call and confirm that it's $18 a person.
They have a backlog of these background checks now; in the instructions it says the process takes up to 8 weeks, while nowadays it's up to 3 months and sometimes even longer.
It might take about a year for the Canadian Consulate to process your first batch of documents. In my case, it took 11 months. Then they notified us that our interviews were waived. In the same letter they requested the following docs:
updated letters of experience from my current employer;
updated financial docs (tax returns, pay stubs, W2's, and bank funds confirmation);
updated FBI certificates.
It doesn't say anywhere in the instructions that your fingerprint cards are only good for 1 year. When I sent my "old" fingerprints (I had two sets of those made the first time we applied), FBI returned them unprocessed after 3 months and asked for the updated fingerprint cards. Then it took them another 2 months to process those.
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
eb3_nepa
05-10 05:27 PM
Thanks for the clarification. Actually what i meant was, we did highlight to the lawmakers at some point that the points based system is better. I know it was never IV's policy to ask for a points based system.
And yes if the system worked fine, the US is definitely better than aus and canada combined. Money and everything wise. I guess someone on here correctly pointed out that it is the sheer volume of immigrants combined with the fact that there is no real incentive to speed things up. The employer is happy coz there is no need to raise wages and new h1's can always be hired, the immigration attorneys are happy coz they make money due to slowness, the American techie population is happy coz there is no mass influx of tech workers to "drive the wages lower", Anti-immigrant organizations are happy coz once again no mass influx which may lead to "chain migration", the Apartment industry is happy coz if u cant buy u HAVE to rent, and lastly UCSIS/DOL people are happy coz they get more time to review each case. If there is no point to granting you the GC faster why will they? You will pay the same amt of tax b4 and after ur GC. Now in the Canadian system, there is a Fixed Path AND it is QUICK. Both have to go hand in hand. Like one of my friends pointed out, in the US ur spouse cannot work and ur uncertain. In the UK/AUS/Canada, you make less money but we are more secure coz you can both work and we can buy a house etc. Once again this sounds like a broken record, but it is true.
And yes if the system worked fine, the US is definitely better than aus and canada combined. Money and everything wise. I guess someone on here correctly pointed out that it is the sheer volume of immigrants combined with the fact that there is no real incentive to speed things up. The employer is happy coz there is no need to raise wages and new h1's can always be hired, the immigration attorneys are happy coz they make money due to slowness, the American techie population is happy coz there is no mass influx of tech workers to "drive the wages lower", Anti-immigrant organizations are happy coz once again no mass influx which may lead to "chain migration", the Apartment industry is happy coz if u cant buy u HAVE to rent, and lastly UCSIS/DOL people are happy coz they get more time to review each case. If there is no point to granting you the GC faster why will they? You will pay the same amt of tax b4 and after ur GC. Now in the Canadian system, there is a Fixed Path AND it is QUICK. Both have to go hand in hand. Like one of my friends pointed out, in the US ur spouse cannot work and ur uncertain. In the UK/AUS/Canada, you make less money but we are more secure coz you can both work and we can buy a house etc. Once again this sounds like a broken record, but it is true.
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
Kushal
07-27 03:16 PM
So now you say Amway gives you 1099-INT ? Didn't you earlier say they give a 1099-MISC ?
BTW, Amway cannot issue you a 1099-INT -- that is for bank interest. Look who do not know things (and still try to open mouth ) :rolleyes:
Bottomline -- you are NOT allowed to do ANY type of business on H1. If you think I am wrong , just share your name and address and I will be happy to send the info to CIS.
Your mouthfull of garbage does not change the law
Oh yeahhh..."1099-int" was a rhetorical statement as you mentioned it.
Don't worry I have already done my homework with law offices or CIS, as I had to show all incomes during interviews. Keep on squeaking.
BTW, Amway cannot issue you a 1099-INT -- that is for bank interest. Look who do not know things (and still try to open mouth ) :rolleyes:
Bottomline -- you are NOT allowed to do ANY type of business on H1. If you think I am wrong , just share your name and address and I will be happy to send the info to CIS.
Your mouthfull of garbage does not change the law
Oh yeahhh..."1099-int" was a rhetorical statement as you mentioned it.
Don't worry I have already done my homework with law offices or CIS, as I had to show all incomes during interviews. Keep on squeaking.
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
logiclife
02-15 07:03 PM
A couple of points. Firstly it's usually a good idea when quoting wikipedia to include the primary reference that the quote or opinion is based on. A contentious issue like immigration reform produces lots of opinion but not all of it is based on fact. Secondly, there are shocking racial elements in the history of immigration laws in the US. Perhaps it's not that shocking when one considers the racial history of the country. Many people will be familiar with the supreme court case 1923 of Bhagat Singh Thind, a Sikh man who fought for the US in World War I. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Bhagat_Singh_Thind
The immigration laws at the time said that only Caucasians could become US citizens. The framers of the law assumed that Caucasian meant "white" while Singh Thind relied on science to prove that people of South Asian origin were also Caucasian. He lost the case with one judge stating "the average man knows perfectly well that there are unmistakable and profound differences".
My point is that the immigration laws of the United States were racist until the 1952 INA act. They specifically placed quotas on people based on the color of their skin. Today's restrictions, while bizarre, unreasonable and unfair in many ways, cannot be defined as racist.
In 1917, this Sikh man, for immigration, went to the Supreme court to fight his battle.
And today, some of our members, when they call us, block their caller ID. God knows what they are afraid of. But certainly not the kind of person who would go as far as Thind went.
If Thind had been fighting today for USA in Iraq, he would have gotten greencard and citizenship. If he made it alive back. There is a program where non-citizens can enlist in the millitary and become citizens.
The immigration laws at the time said that only Caucasians could become US citizens. The framers of the law assumed that Caucasian meant "white" while Singh Thind relied on science to prove that people of South Asian origin were also Caucasian. He lost the case with one judge stating "the average man knows perfectly well that there are unmistakable and profound differences".
My point is that the immigration laws of the United States were racist until the 1952 INA act. They specifically placed quotas on people based on the color of their skin. Today's restrictions, while bizarre, unreasonable and unfair in many ways, cannot be defined as racist.
In 1917, this Sikh man, for immigration, went to the Supreme court to fight his battle.
And today, some of our members, when they call us, block their caller ID. God knows what they are afraid of. But certainly not the kind of person who would go as far as Thind went.
If Thind had been fighting today for USA in Iraq, he would have gotten greencard and citizenship. If he made it alive back. There is a program where non-citizens can enlist in the millitary and become citizens.
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
grupak
12-14 05:05 PM
Simple. If it wasn't for that ceiling the vast majority of the visas will go to applicants from the oversubscribed countries. Now this is not a bad thing if the visas are in unlimited supply. But since that's not the case, the country ceiling ensures that even people from smaller nations will get an equal oportunity to claim a visa before all the visa are grabbed by their BIG brothers and sisters. And what's more what ever is left is given back to the oversubscribed countries.
How can you call that unfair? Is it fair to deprive a person from a smaller country, equal chance to have go at his GC?
Country quota for family based immigration prevents giving any nationality a head start in cornering all the GC for themselves. And country quota to promote diversity makes sense because the basis of GC is family ties.
Employment based GC is based on employer filing for GC. Skilled people can come from all over the globe. The basis is skill. Even without a country quota, a small country with educated and skilled workers are not at any disadvantage compared to a large country with poorly trained workers. So, I do not understand your argument how the BIG countries are going to monopolize employment based GC. No nationality has a birth claim on skill. We are here because of our skills not our nationality.
Let us not repeat the arguments of anti-immigrant restrictionist groups like PG.
How can you call that unfair? Is it fair to deprive a person from a smaller country, equal chance to have go at his GC?
Country quota for family based immigration prevents giving any nationality a head start in cornering all the GC for themselves. And country quota to promote diversity makes sense because the basis of GC is family ties.
Employment based GC is based on employer filing for GC. Skilled people can come from all over the globe. The basis is skill. Even without a country quota, a small country with educated and skilled workers are not at any disadvantage compared to a large country with poorly trained workers. So, I do not understand your argument how the BIG countries are going to monopolize employment based GC. No nationality has a birth claim on skill. We are here because of our skills not our nationality.
Let us not repeat the arguments of anti-immigrant restrictionist groups like PG.
Dyana
02-15 12:27 PM
Thank U all for your quick answers&good advice.It feels good to know I have new friends who can help me with my questions.
About the cheques u're right, that's how we have done it. Separate personnal cheques for each of us, easy to track online.
Hopefully we are not out-of-status and my husband's employer is not on th black list.
How couldn't I figure it out by myself what IV means????Shame,shame...
About the cheques u're right, that's how we have done it. Separate personnal cheques for each of us, easy to track online.
Hopefully we are not out-of-status and my husband's employer is not on th black list.
How couldn't I figure it out by myself what IV means????Shame,shame...
i-luv-tofu
07-27 12:40 PM
I am extremely interested in this business. Can somebody please refer me, I am in LA?
No comments:
Post a Comment