Canuck
02-13 10:19 PM
Besides that, immigration is a privilege not a right, so if the US wants diversity and limit per country immigration, it is their right to do so.
What rights did the Natives have in the 18th and 19th centuries when Europeans invaded their lands, and massacred most of them? Did they respectfully ask the Natives if they could immigrate? No? They walked in as if they owned this land. As a Canadian, I'm ashamed to say that this happened in my country too.
Never think of immigration as a privilege - think of it as your birthright - this is your planet and you have the right to go wherever you want. Get into that mentality instead of the groveling "Please sir, I want some more" mentality.
What rights did the Natives have in the 18th and 19th centuries when Europeans invaded their lands, and massacred most of them? Did they respectfully ask the Natives if they could immigrate? No? They walked in as if they owned this land. As a Canadian, I'm ashamed to say that this happened in my country too.
Never think of immigration as a privilege - think of it as your birthright - this is your planet and you have the right to go wherever you want. Get into that mentality instead of the groveling "Please sir, I want some more" mentality.
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
mantric
12-13 12:36 PM
Here's the percentages of the top 10 populations of the world by nationality. How many of them are more than 7% ?
China 20.0 %
India 17.2 %
United States 4.6 %
Indonesia 3.4 %
Brazil 2.8 %
Pakistan 2.6 %
Nigeria 2.5 %
Russia 2.2 %
Bangladesh 2.1 %
Japan 2.0 %
Based on this one can conclude that the 7% nationality rule is a veiled effort to limit Indian and Chinese immigrants specifically. Does this not amount to discrimination by nationality ? In addition we as legal immigrants are taxed without any representation. Taxation without representation was the reason the US was created in the first place.
US history is full of examples where discrimination existed in one form or another and these discriminations were sucessfully challenged. A few examples are women's voting rights, minority voting rights and gerrymandering. These are good examples to study where the affected people had no legal voice to begin with.
The civil rights movement is a recent example. There were existing laws that limited people from voting based on their literacy levels in the southern states. The literacy requirement for voting was really a thinly veiled attempt to limit voting rights of african americans for as long as possible. The civil rights movement was about changing these artificial laws to give voting rights to people who legally had no voice.
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/voting/intro/intro_c.htm
You don't need to be a lawyer to speak up for your hardships as a law abiding resident. This country has tremendous protections for people living here which is what makes it great. We as an immigrant community need to build our awareness of US history and government if we expect things to change.
China 20.0 %
India 17.2 %
United States 4.6 %
Indonesia 3.4 %
Brazil 2.8 %
Pakistan 2.6 %
Nigeria 2.5 %
Russia 2.2 %
Bangladesh 2.1 %
Japan 2.0 %
Based on this one can conclude that the 7% nationality rule is a veiled effort to limit Indian and Chinese immigrants specifically. Does this not amount to discrimination by nationality ? In addition we as legal immigrants are taxed without any representation. Taxation without representation was the reason the US was created in the first place.
US history is full of examples where discrimination existed in one form or another and these discriminations were sucessfully challenged. A few examples are women's voting rights, minority voting rights and gerrymandering. These are good examples to study where the affected people had no legal voice to begin with.
The civil rights movement is a recent example. There were existing laws that limited people from voting based on their literacy levels in the southern states. The literacy requirement for voting was really a thinly veiled attempt to limit voting rights of african americans for as long as possible. The civil rights movement was about changing these artificial laws to give voting rights to people who legally had no voice.
http://www.usdoj.gov/crt/voting/intro/intro_c.htm
You don't need to be a lawyer to speak up for your hardships as a law abiding resident. This country has tremendous protections for people living here which is what makes it great. We as an immigrant community need to build our awareness of US history and government if we expect things to change.
Mount Soche
02-14 01:09 PM
Bestia,
I am not fighting with you believe it or not - just that some things said on this forum are just downright nasty. FYI though.. the Congo WAS colonized and terrorized by the Europeans. Hear of the Belgian Congo?? I don't know about Sierra Leone though.
I brought African countries not as scapegoats, but as examples of countries not colonized by Europeans. I didn't mean to insult anybody from Sierra Leone or Congo ;) But my point was that if there wouldn't be Europeans - there wouldn't be United States.
Man... you can't bring some example, not to be accused of something... Come on guys.
Happy Valentine's Day.
I am not fighting with you believe it or not - just that some things said on this forum are just downright nasty. FYI though.. the Congo WAS colonized and terrorized by the Europeans. Hear of the Belgian Congo?? I don't know about Sierra Leone though.
I brought African countries not as scapegoats, but as examples of countries not colonized by Europeans. I didn't mean to insult anybody from Sierra Leone or Congo ;) But my point was that if there wouldn't be Europeans - there wouldn't be United States.
Man... you can't bring some example, not to be accused of something... Come on guys.
Happy Valentine's Day.
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
snelakan
06-27 10:00 PM
cause state department made the dates current....USCIS can only request visa's from state department.....since they were not asking for a lot of visas, which were going to go waste, state department made everything current...
more...
alterego
07-25 05:50 PM
Yeah Ron Gotcher is speculating, but there is some credibility to what he is saying. He did predict the rapid movement of PDs toward the end of the year, in fact at one point he was extremely optimistic more than what happened to date. So he did have some insight into the inner workings (or rather non-workings!) of the USCIS. He also openly shared his interaction with Charlie Oppenheim.
This is why people should not get so excited now. What EB2I got is a little hope, for most it will be false hope, a select few have green hope, but we will only know them by Sept. in retrospect.
For the rest of us it will be back to the drawing board, oops message board. My feeling is things are likely to be somewhere between the extremely pessimistic projections of Ron Gotcher and the extremely optimistic projections of VLRao.
I suspect the PD will move back to the April 2004 cutoff and then move forward slowly as spillover allows, so in other words at a rate faster than in the past. I stand by my view that we will need most of next year and perhaps some of 2010 spillover to quench the thirst of EB2I and C.
I don't think the point Ron made that if everything was current it would take 5 plus years for USCIS to clear the back log is correct. If it really is the case then we are more badly screwed than any of us realise and it goes totally against the statistics the USCIS has been leaking about the number of pending cases. Which many of us have number crunched already.
This is why people should not get so excited now. What EB2I got is a little hope, for most it will be false hope, a select few have green hope, but we will only know them by Sept. in retrospect.
For the rest of us it will be back to the drawing board, oops message board. My feeling is things are likely to be somewhere between the extremely pessimistic projections of Ron Gotcher and the extremely optimistic projections of VLRao.
I suspect the PD will move back to the April 2004 cutoff and then move forward slowly as spillover allows, so in other words at a rate faster than in the past. I stand by my view that we will need most of next year and perhaps some of 2010 spillover to quench the thirst of EB2I and C.
I don't think the point Ron made that if everything was current it would take 5 plus years for USCIS to clear the back log is correct. If it really is the case then we are more badly screwed than any of us realise and it goes totally against the statistics the USCIS has been leaking about the number of pending cases. Which many of us have number crunched already.
JunRN
02-12 07:14 PM
We are all expecting that the VB will go back to June 2007 figure...it looks like that RoW has been so fast in getting the latest PD back which could come in a very few months time.
I was not expecting this to come too soon but in June 2008.
I was not expecting this to come too soon but in June 2008.
more...
dvb123
02-14 07:46 PM
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Why_Sania_wont_be_hounded_in_the_US_for_insulting_ flag/articleshow/2783772.cms
The Supreme court has the right to strike down laws effecting people
The Supreme court has the right to strike down laws effecting people
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
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.
more...
walking_dude
02-13 01:38 PM
It has been repeated 'Ad Nauseam' times. IVs agenda includes all of these -
1) Increasing GC numbers
2) Recapturing numbers and instituting permanent Rollover mechanisms
3) Eliminate country quotas.
IV understands that removing just the country quota will impact ROW badly if visa numbers are not increased in tandem. Hence you always see the three points being proposed together. These 3 have to go together. A compromise between ROW and oversubscribed countries.
But some ROW members keep trying to split the movement by opposing removal of country quotas ( which is point 2 in IV agenda) at every possible opportunity. Real way to build a coalition is through compromise. And in a compromise you can't get all you want. Don't expect the majority to heed all your demands.
Be a little appreciative of the sufferings of others. If you think a little extra time you need to spend in the queue is turning you so angry, what goes in the mind of a person who has to spend twice or thrice as much time in the same queue, for no fault of his/hers?
Don't BS on 'diversity'. There is already a 'diversity visa' which Indians & Chinese cannot use. Want to come under diversity? Apply in the lottery. Be a little humane and think about the suffering of others. May be you'll see the light. You are not going to win many friends by alleging "an agenda by some country". It's preposturous, laughable and Dobbsian ( like Lou Dobbs alleged "invasion by Mexicans")
I don't think removing the per country cap will solve the problem. It will balance retrogression by giving each country equal share of misery while the visa number allocation per year stays the same. It also requires changes in the statute which is almost impossible to happen because the legislators, either Dem. or GOP, will not agree to removing the cap. So let's be realistic.
The best solution is to recapture unused visas from previous years and increase the quota per year.
1) Increasing GC numbers
2) Recapturing numbers and instituting permanent Rollover mechanisms
3) Eliminate country quotas.
IV understands that removing just the country quota will impact ROW badly if visa numbers are not increased in tandem. Hence you always see the three points being proposed together. These 3 have to go together. A compromise between ROW and oversubscribed countries.
But some ROW members keep trying to split the movement by opposing removal of country quotas ( which is point 2 in IV agenda) at every possible opportunity. Real way to build a coalition is through compromise. And in a compromise you can't get all you want. Don't expect the majority to heed all your demands.
Be a little appreciative of the sufferings of others. If you think a little extra time you need to spend in the queue is turning you so angry, what goes in the mind of a person who has to spend twice or thrice as much time in the same queue, for no fault of his/hers?
Don't BS on 'diversity'. There is already a 'diversity visa' which Indians & Chinese cannot use. Want to come under diversity? Apply in the lottery. Be a little humane and think about the suffering of others. May be you'll see the light. You are not going to win many friends by alleging "an agenda by some country". It's preposturous, laughable and Dobbsian ( like Lou Dobbs alleged "invasion by Mexicans")
I don't think removing the per country cap will solve the problem. It will balance retrogression by giving each country equal share of misery while the visa number allocation per year stays the same. It also requires changes in the statute which is almost impossible to happen because the legislators, either Dem. or GOP, will not agree to removing the cap. So let's be realistic.
The best solution is to recapture unused visas from previous years and increase the quota per year.
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
amitga
02-13 11:51 AM
Amit, noble thoughts. But that's not how majority of IV members think. We have members who think $50 contribution per month is too much. There is considerable opposition to making IV a paid forum (with even nominal fees of $10 or $20).
Do you think we can get 500 members ready to contribute $500 here? Create a poll on this and see, you'll be lucky if you get 20! Like Jefferson said "those who prefer convenience over freedom and liberty, deserve neither". We are bound to suffer since we aren't ready to act.
I wanted to make people aware of the reality. This is the harsh reality that we cannot get 500 people willing to pay $500 in the pool of 25,000 people who are spending 3000-5000 every year for EAD/AP/H1 and loosing another 10,000-15,000 in opportunity costs.
This Greencard battle can be won in just 3-6 months if we can just commitment (not monetary, only active support) from just 10,000 people.
Do you think we can get 500 members ready to contribute $500 here? Create a poll on this and see, you'll be lucky if you get 20! Like Jefferson said "those who prefer convenience over freedom and liberty, deserve neither". We are bound to suffer since we aren't ready to act.
I wanted to make people aware of the reality. This is the harsh reality that we cannot get 500 people willing to pay $500 in the pool of 25,000 people who are spending 3000-5000 every year for EAD/AP/H1 and loosing another 10,000-15,000 in opportunity costs.
This Greencard battle can be won in just 3-6 months if we can just commitment (not monetary, only active support) from just 10,000 people.
more...
thomachan72
03-27 03:14 PM
Indian democracy can throw many surprises
I think UPA will get 273 and if that's the case then MMS
If NDA get's 273 (which is highly unlikely) then Advani (no Modi...otherwise also Modi's communal qualifications are pretty widespread outside of Gujarat). I like the guy but seriously PM of India and CM of Gujarat are 2 different things.
And if Third front comes to power (they just need around 200 as once they get 200 there will be breakaway groups from UPA and NDA so they can touch 273)
then we will see real democracy (read lust for power)
First 6 month Mayawati >> Followed by Jayalalita / SASIKALA for 6 months >> Followed by some one from LEFT (comorades work in groups..not sure who will be graced by politburo)
Above cycle will be repetitive >> and Govt will collapse when Mayawati will complete her second 6 months Tenure.
Just added something you forgot:D
I think UPA will get 273 and if that's the case then MMS
If NDA get's 273 (which is highly unlikely) then Advani (no Modi...otherwise also Modi's communal qualifications are pretty widespread outside of Gujarat). I like the guy but seriously PM of India and CM of Gujarat are 2 different things.
And if Third front comes to power (they just need around 200 as once they get 200 there will be breakaway groups from UPA and NDA so they can touch 273)
then we will see real democracy (read lust for power)
First 6 month Mayawati >> Followed by Jayalalita / SASIKALA for 6 months >> Followed by some one from LEFT (comorades work in groups..not sure who will be graced by politburo)
Above cycle will be repetitive >> and Govt will collapse when Mayawati will complete her second 6 months Tenure.
Just added something you forgot:D
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
rsdang1
10-16 11:42 AM
Guys,
I understand this is a simple estimate but - if and its a big if - it works then it would be a great Diwali gift for all EB2 folks and subsequently open spill over for EB3... Keep the faith...
I understand this is a simple estimate but - if and its a big if - it works then it would be a great Diwali gift for all EB2 folks and subsequently open spill over for EB3... Keep the faith...
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
vparam
01-23 05:16 PM
http://news.mainetoday.com/updates/008785.html
Our message to Narendra "Nick" Mandalapa : Enjoy prison. Maybe on the inside, you can sell contraband items just like on the outside you sold approved labor certs.
--------------------------------------
Like someone said on the news article thread, the only difference between this guy and other desi companies (Desi means "of Indian origin") is that this guy got caught, while hundreds of other companies still sell approved labor certs with earlier priority dates.
And all this illegal trade is much to the delight of AILA, who is pushing hard to keep labor substitution alive.
What's in it for AILA? : Additional business of labor substitution. Now, for a few extra pennies, AILA would not hesitate to screw thousands of GC applicants waiting in line and enable the "Cutting in line" that happens due to labor substitution.
So if you think AILA is a friend of immigrants (legal or illegal), think again. Its a friend of $$$. And there is nothing wrong with that. Everyone pursues self-interest. That is what AILA is doing. But dont misunderstand AILA as a champion of immigrants (legal or illegal). It represents immigration lawyers, not immigrants. On a rare occassion, the interests overlap, and that's good. But on many issues, AILA has a history of being very very employer friendly as far as immigration law is concerned, even if it comes at the cost of employees(immigrants).
Logiclife -
I would not say substitution of labor is totally wrong. I left my previous company after having waited for a labor over 2 years and helped find a suitable candidate, who also had the same level of education and experiance and was an exact replacement for me (Sr.Program Manager -designation). My (old) company which is fortune 100 company was not ware of this substitution business till i told them they should use it when they spent money filing it for me and i am not using it. while consulting companies also use it when the original person left and they have someone else to fill in that role..
The concept becomes wrong when it sold and not really used for a replacement and i think those guys have to be identified like Narendra Mandalapa and punished.
Our message to Narendra "Nick" Mandalapa : Enjoy prison. Maybe on the inside, you can sell contraband items just like on the outside you sold approved labor certs.
--------------------------------------
Like someone said on the news article thread, the only difference between this guy and other desi companies (Desi means "of Indian origin") is that this guy got caught, while hundreds of other companies still sell approved labor certs with earlier priority dates.
And all this illegal trade is much to the delight of AILA, who is pushing hard to keep labor substitution alive.
What's in it for AILA? : Additional business of labor substitution. Now, for a few extra pennies, AILA would not hesitate to screw thousands of GC applicants waiting in line and enable the "Cutting in line" that happens due to labor substitution.
So if you think AILA is a friend of immigrants (legal or illegal), think again. Its a friend of $$$. And there is nothing wrong with that. Everyone pursues self-interest. That is what AILA is doing. But dont misunderstand AILA as a champion of immigrants (legal or illegal). It represents immigration lawyers, not immigrants. On a rare occassion, the interests overlap, and that's good. But on many issues, AILA has a history of being very very employer friendly as far as immigration law is concerned, even if it comes at the cost of employees(immigrants).
Logiclife -
I would not say substitution of labor is totally wrong. I left my previous company after having waited for a labor over 2 years and helped find a suitable candidate, who also had the same level of education and experiance and was an exact replacement for me (Sr.Program Manager -designation). My (old) company which is fortune 100 company was not ware of this substitution business till i told them they should use it when they spent money filing it for me and i am not using it. while consulting companies also use it when the original person left and they have someone else to fill in that role..
The concept becomes wrong when it sold and not really used for a replacement and i think those guys have to be identified like Narendra Mandalapa and punished.
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
jayleno
09-23 11:10 AM
What an irony my friend. I'm arguing for people like you...who can afford to buy a home in this economy and you arguing for people(bodies in your "not every body") like me who cannot afford. Thank you for your concern, but I think it is a very good idea.
:D
What a Twister !!!
Jayleno,
You are not really interested in helping, otherwise you would have bought a house and put economy back on track. But you are taking advantage of the current situation. My point is not every body has money at present in hand to buy a house. Every body likes to spend their money and settle down here, otherwise no body would have applied for green card. This plan is proposed all of the sudden and it is not fair. If i consider people, who lost jobs because of this worst market, you are twisting the story by talking prevailing wages and illegal status. FYI, I have potential to buy a home here and currently working and making enough money here. I request you answer the question only, not twist.
aps
:D
What a Twister !!!
Jayleno,
You are not really interested in helping, otherwise you would have bought a house and put economy back on track. But you are taking advantage of the current situation. My point is not every body has money at present in hand to buy a house. Every body likes to spend their money and settle down here, otherwise no body would have applied for green card. This plan is proposed all of the sudden and it is not fair. If i consider people, who lost jobs because of this worst market, you are twisting the story by talking prevailing wages and illegal status. FYI, I have potential to buy a home here and currently working and making enough money here. I request you answer the question only, not twist.
aps
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
Macaca
06-27 11:03 AM
From pages 36-37 of CIS Ombudsman's 2007 Annual Report to Congress (http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOMB_Annual%20Report_2007.pdf).
In the 2006 Annual Report (at p. 16, AR 2006 -- 02), the Ombudsman also recommended that USCIS assign visa numbers to employment-based green card applications as applicants file them. The Ombudsman continues to recommend that USCIS work with DOS to reinstate that process which existed in the early 1980s, wherein DOS issued visa numbers for both employment and family-based applications for applicants as they applied rather than as they were approved. This process would ensure that USCIS does not accept more applications than the number of visas available.
With respect to the recommendation that USCIS assign visa numbers to cases as they are received, the process the Ombudsman describes was the process in place a number of years ago. DOS, which manages overall visa number allocations, modified that process to the procedure in effect today. It is their policy to allocate visa numbers to USCIS adjustment cases only as the point of approval is reached.
However, through the tri-agency meetings, DOS explained that the modification to the program occurred in the early 1980s because INS could not adhere to the requirements to return unused visa numbers immediately. The Ombudsman understands that DOS prefers that cases are reported qualified for a visa earlier than at approval. In the last several months, there have been several suggestions on how to accomplish that task, but operational concerns remain. The Ombudsman hopes that USCIS and DOS can reestablish the older program with improved processing and technology to ensure timely and accurate reporting of cases ready-to-issue and to prevent the future loss of visa numbers.
In the 2006 Annual Report (at p. 16, AR 2006 -- 02), the Ombudsman also recommended that USCIS assign visa numbers to employment-based green card applications as applicants file them. The Ombudsman continues to recommend that USCIS work with DOS to reinstate that process which existed in the early 1980s, wherein DOS issued visa numbers for both employment and family-based applications for applicants as they applied rather than as they were approved. This process would ensure that USCIS does not accept more applications than the number of visas available.
With respect to the recommendation that USCIS assign visa numbers to cases as they are received, the process the Ombudsman describes was the process in place a number of years ago. DOS, which manages overall visa number allocations, modified that process to the procedure in effect today. It is their policy to allocate visa numbers to USCIS adjustment cases only as the point of approval is reached.
However, through the tri-agency meetings, DOS explained that the modification to the program occurred in the early 1980s because INS could not adhere to the requirements to return unused visa numbers immediately. The Ombudsman understands that DOS prefers that cases are reported qualified for a visa earlier than at approval. In the last several months, there have been several suggestions on how to accomplish that task, but operational concerns remain. The Ombudsman hopes that USCIS and DOS can reestablish the older program with improved processing and technology to ensure timely and accurate reporting of cases ready-to-issue and to prevent the future loss of visa numbers.
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
skrish
09-25 11:48 AM
The logic is that you are 'putting down roots' by buying a house. If all it takes is proof of closing a mortgage, one could always turn around and sell the house. somethng like that would undermine the credibility of IV in the medium/long run.
I had initially advocated treating first time home buying as the same as marriage to an American citizen. In my opinion, that is a short,sweet,simple and sensible approach to follow that will also resonate/stick in lawmakers minds (rather than a long,rambling letter, no offense meant to the writers, it was quite well put together).
I had initially advocated treating first time home buying as the same as marriage to an American citizen. In my opinion, that is a short,sweet,simple and sensible approach to follow that will also resonate/stick in lawmakers minds (rather than a long,rambling letter, no offense meant to the writers, it was quite well put together).
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
sunny1000
06-28 06:21 PM
Still, just because DOS told USCIS "Visas are exhausted" doesnt mean they should stop ACCEPTING new petitions. They can stop APPROVING new ones, but why stop ACCEPTING new petitions. Visa bulletins guide the filing as well as approval of petitions. If visa bulletins is current, then they can both accept and approve petitions.
They can definitely accept I-140. But, I485 acceptance will stop as soon as DOS tells USCIS that the visas are exausted..... isn't that is one of the provisions that we are fighting for...:D :D :D :D
They can definitely accept I-140. But, I485 acceptance will stop as soon as DOS tells USCIS that the visas are exausted..... isn't that is one of the provisions that we are fighting for...:D :D :D :D
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
anilsal
11-09 09:33 AM
This discussion can go on and on. Here is my take.
* US is one of the countries people are flocking into. Even lots of people from UK, Australia and Canada come here to settle.
* Given this, whenever there are opportunities to lure people in, there will be takers and people who sell (like preapproved labor). If USCIS puts a stop on preapproved labor, then there will be other avenues to take advantage of.
You may have others in your field/company who are less-educated than you, younger than you and earning more than you, so can you lose sleep over it? No! It is part of life.
Just focus your energies on IV and its adoption. :)
* US is one of the countries people are flocking into. Even lots of people from UK, Australia and Canada come here to settle.
* Given this, whenever there are opportunities to lure people in, there will be takers and people who sell (like preapproved labor). If USCIS puts a stop on preapproved labor, then there will be other avenues to take advantage of.
You may have others in your field/company who are less-educated than you, younger than you and earning more than you, so can you lose sleep over it? No! It is part of life.
Just focus your energies on IV and its adoption. :)
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
gc_check
01-13 10:33 PM
The memo certainly appears to make life a lot difficult for genuine LEGAL non-immigrants and future immigrants taking the EB route. No questions, there were many mistakes made in the past, by the so called "Consulting Company's and also the employees/non-immigrants themselves, who willing joined hands with these greedy companies for their own benefits, (Ex. --> Converting H4 -> H1 through the so called startup's, etc.. with false experience, etc) are the cause for all this in a way. USCIS should have a better way to punish these folks, but still they are many many genuine cases, people who have come with real experience from their home countries, people graduated from US Universities and then pursed their career here, etc... should be considered when drafting memo's like this. These people, I am sure are a large percentage here and should not be punished for following every single law and trying to make life better for them and for all. Also, it they make it so difficult for people to come here /work, Well, at least IT/ Software sector is not in the early days any more and this is well matured and BRIC countries have more qualified people getting out of colleges and more experienced people, going back, will do more good for business's already looking to outsource and this would promote more outsourcing and eventually work against the better interest of the citizens.
shreekhand
08-15 01:40 PM
Couldn't have agreed any more than this:
Don't make a big deal of Shah Rukh's detention:One For The Road:Anand Soondas's blog-The Times Of India (http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/onefortheroad/entry/don-t-make-a-big)
Don't make a big deal of Shah Rukh's detention:One For The Road:Anand Soondas's blog-The Times Of India (http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/onefortheroad/entry/don-t-make-a-big)
snram4
01-22 05:48 PM
That is always one of the option for me. You do not need to tell that. Similarly everyone has the same choice. If some thing does not work out in USA anyone can find an excellent opportunity in India. Not just, if anyone like to go to India they can go anytime. No need to worry about GC or H1b issues
Then please pack your bags and leave the country in the next flight.
Then please pack your bags and leave the country in the next flight.
No comments:
Post a Comment