vikki76
05-10 04:33 PM
Australia is backup option for me. For various personal reasons-I didn't chose Canada.
Cons of immigration to Canada
-Weather
-Dependency on US
-not very diverse society
Pros of Australia
-Weather
-Trading partners with N America,Europe,Asia
-Very very diverse society with east europeans,south east asians
As for job scene,I am thinking that both are almost same, but in Australia,indian firms have a major presence.It is cheaper to open an office in Melbourne than in Bangalore!.
Cons of immigration to Canada
-Weather
-Dependency on US
-not very diverse society
Pros of Australia
-Weather
-Trading partners with N America,Europe,Asia
-Very very diverse society with east europeans,south east asians
As for job scene,I am thinking that both are almost same, but in Australia,indian firms have a major presence.It is cheaper to open an office in Melbourne than in Bangalore!.
wallpaper Face Tattoo Design For Hot
tammman
09-23 09:18 PM
I think its worth giving it a short, I support this.
weasley
01-17 09:49 AM
Agree wth you.
Nearly all laws/regulations originate from such garbage.
Hira/Matloff's US born donkeys scavange these blogs 24/7. The garbage is then processed by Hira/Matloff.
It is very unfortunate that USICS/lawmakers (other than Dustbin, Grassley, Sanders) pander to these scumbags. Such laws/regulations will not provide any relief to these donkeys.
Nearly all laws/regulations originate from such garbage.
Hira/Matloff's US born donkeys scavange these blogs 24/7. The garbage is then processed by Hira/Matloff.
It is very unfortunate that USICS/lawmakers (other than Dustbin, Grassley, Sanders) pander to these scumbags. Such laws/regulations will not provide any relief to these donkeys.
2011 hot tattoo girls. wallpaper
onemorecame
07-24 06:23 PM
I do send money because I have a dialysis patient at home for 6 years now. and at this time I don't want to point to the healthcare system at all, but my best wishes that you don't have to go there.
I do have properties and business properties in India from before I came to US. I don't want to make this personal by naming the IT businesses I sold but am sure if you are from 90's and from India you are aware of those names.
I am sold those one by one, and that is another line buddy. Capital Assets Line. IT Enquiry Lines, Company liquidation issues (specially if you were a LTD. company), Commerical Property Tribunals, Service Tax lines, State Tax Issues, Central Sales Tax issues. And god forbid if there is a lawsuit filed.
And yes I am in GC line for 8 years. This is the Last line hopefully other than immigration line at India every year. (which is painful for Indian Citizens) but easy for PIO's and Non Citizens.
You are good to be here and i'll pry for your GC line/wiait finish soon.
In future if you face any other line in US then please don't start blaming US....
...good luck dude
I will pray with god that he will never put you line.....;)
BEST WISHES
I do have properties and business properties in India from before I came to US. I don't want to make this personal by naming the IT businesses I sold but am sure if you are from 90's and from India you are aware of those names.
I am sold those one by one, and that is another line buddy. Capital Assets Line. IT Enquiry Lines, Company liquidation issues (specially if you were a LTD. company), Commerical Property Tribunals, Service Tax lines, State Tax Issues, Central Sales Tax issues. And god forbid if there is a lawsuit filed.
And yes I am in GC line for 8 years. This is the Last line hopefully other than immigration line at India every year. (which is painful for Indian Citizens) but easy for PIO's and Non Citizens.
You are good to be here and i'll pry for your GC line/wiait finish soon.
In future if you face any other line in US then please don't start blaming US....
...good luck dude
I will pray with god that he will never put you line.....;)
BEST WISHES
more...
anai
06-28 03:38 PM
Based on this, I have again (yes, again) emailed by immigration lawyer and sent him the AILA's URL (although I cant see it coz I am not member of AILA).
IF AILA reports that they stopped accepting new 485 petitions for EB3-other, then it is pretty freaking scary and that means that what my lawyer told me "I cant happen, bla bla bla..." is really not 100% accurate. If it happened in June, it can happen in July. This is now REALLLLY SCARY, coz my lawyer has plans for July-end for filing.
Ever since the dates got current, it has been more stressful than the time when dates were retrogressed and almost makes me miss the retrogression days when I didnt have to depend on the lawyers for my career.
So, what did your lawyer say? Would sure love to know, once you hear back.
IF AILA reports that they stopped accepting new 485 petitions for EB3-other, then it is pretty freaking scary and that means that what my lawyer told me "I cant happen, bla bla bla..." is really not 100% accurate. If it happened in June, it can happen in July. This is now REALLLLY SCARY, coz my lawyer has plans for July-end for filing.
Ever since the dates got current, it has been more stressful than the time when dates were retrogressed and almost makes me miss the retrogression days when I didnt have to depend on the lawyers for my career.
So, what did your lawyer say? Would sure love to know, once you hear back.
ilwaiting
03-17 10:33 AM
The sooner LC substitution goes away the lesser we have to deal with such questions. And the sooner we would get our green cards.
hi All,
Can someone give me advice on this:
I have 4 yrs Bachelors + 6.5 yrs of IT exp. i am being offered a Pre- approved labor(EB3-PD-Nov.2003), which was filed for someone with a condition-Bachelors + 4 years exp., at the time of filing.
i graduated in June 2000, so i am about 1 year short for the 2003 PD. However i did some part time work during college in India and the lawyer says if i can get exp. letter from that company on a letter head, that should suffice.
i am concerned if that India exp. during graduation will work or not.
Has anyone faced a situation like this?
the (part time exp)company was very small, can this be risky? what do you guys think?
Thanks.
hi All,
Can someone give me advice on this:
I have 4 yrs Bachelors + 6.5 yrs of IT exp. i am being offered a Pre- approved labor(EB3-PD-Nov.2003), which was filed for someone with a condition-Bachelors + 4 years exp., at the time of filing.
i graduated in June 2000, so i am about 1 year short for the 2003 PD. However i did some part time work during college in India and the lawyer says if i can get exp. letter from that company on a letter head, that should suffice.
i am concerned if that India exp. during graduation will work or not.
Has anyone faced a situation like this?
the (part time exp)company was very small, can this be risky? what do you guys think?
Thanks.
more...
akottai
07-22 02:10 PM
When we moved from MN to NJ, we were so happy to find so many Indians around. In an Indian store I found a fellow native and I introduced myself. We were so happy that we found a good neighbor whom we can befriend. I gave them my number and got their number back. I never got any response from them whenever I called - ever. Later, I found the menace of Amway in these parts of world(among desis). I was so ashamed just by knowing that they mistook us for Amway people.
I have been approached by many in Walmart, Macy's and other stores with questions like "are your from Mumbai?", "I have seen your somewhere"... types...
At one point of time, it became very difficult to distinguish between a genuine smile and the e-commerce business smile! I can now understand why they never attended my calls! :)
Anyways, I moved to NC - and no more Amways in this part. Not until now!
I have been approached by many in Walmart, Macy's and other stores with questions like "are your from Mumbai?", "I have seen your somewhere"... types...
At one point of time, it became very difficult to distinguish between a genuine smile and the e-commerce business smile! I can now understand why they never attended my calls! :)
Anyways, I moved to NC - and no more Amways in this part. Not until now!
2010 ITT we hate tats on girls.
okuzmin
08-31 07:11 PM
We applied for Canadian immigration through Buffalo, NY in December 2005. I got a letter later in February 2006 stating that the principal applicant (me) must take IELTS. Yes, I sent all the experience letters and a letter of explanation that I have enough English proficiency having stayed in the US for about 11 years, with two bachelor's degrees from a US university, many years of experience, blah-blah-blah. Apparently, that was not enough. So, you better plan on taking IELTS. :)
more...
sumagiri
07-25 11:00 AM
What you say can certainly happen, but I beleive that the pressure on USCIS is exponentially greater after last summer. People are watching their every step very closely. They got away with their inefficiency in prior years because the bottleneck was not USCIS - it was DOL that took a zillion years to clear labor petitions. Additionally the visa recapture of 2000 ensured no retrogression until 2005. Even after 2005 there were very few 485's to approve because of a) very low perm applications/approvals in 2005 and early 2006 and b) all the 2003/2004 labors were stuck in BEC's and were approved only in late 2006 or early 2007 (like your truly - mine was actually an RIR but the BEC classified it as Traditional Recruitment and began recruiting for the position - but thats another story).
Net net; USCIS inefficiency was masked under DOL's backlog - but now their transgressions are out in the open and they cant hide anymore behind DOL especially after last summer.
As much as Ron Gotcher has been accurate in the past, I think he is missing the point this time. At an ulterior level he needs to show USCIS in poor light because he only recommends CP for his clients. If I were his client and I hear him say that this year USCIS is different then I am bound to switch over from CP to AOS!
I know. That is what I am exactly saying. All our calculations will be true when USCIS works efficiently for this year and continues to do so. And we all are hoping for that.
Net net; USCIS inefficiency was masked under DOL's backlog - but now their transgressions are out in the open and they cant hide anymore behind DOL especially after last summer.
As much as Ron Gotcher has been accurate in the past, I think he is missing the point this time. At an ulterior level he needs to show USCIS in poor light because he only recommends CP for his clients. If I were his client and I hear him say that this year USCIS is different then I am bound to switch over from CP to AOS!
I know. That is what I am exactly saying. All our calculations will be true when USCIS works efficiently for this year and continues to do so. And we all are hoping for that.
hair love quotes tattoos for girls.
Vishal2007
05-02 01:12 AM
I think judging Gandhiji in the context of Indian History is beyond my pay grade. I am sure about the fact that his ideology would remain relevant for much more time in human history.
I like this (read as a good humor), his ideology would remain relevant for much more time in human history. you go by , Gandhi is father of our nation, I am thinking beyond that, he had power to influence British gov. to avoid death penalty for Bhagat Singh, he never used his power, because he was jealous of Bhagat
I like this (read as a good humor), his ideology would remain relevant for much more time in human history. you go by , Gandhi is father of our nation, I am thinking beyond that, he had power to influence British gov. to avoid death penalty for Bhagat Singh, he never used his power, because he was jealous of Bhagat
more...
garybanz
12-14 02:15 PM
Federal Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) Laws
The Federal laws prohibiting job discrimination are:
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin;
the Equal Pay Act of 1963 (EPA), which protects men and women who perform substantially equal work in the same establishment from sex-based wage discrimination;
the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), which protects individuals who are 40 years of age or older;
Title I and Title V of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), which prohibit employment discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities in the private sector, and in state and local governments;
Sections 501 and 505 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which prohibit discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities who work in the federal government;
and
the Civil Rights Act of 1991, which, among other things, provides monetary damages in cases of intentional employment discrimination.
If no one (including the Govt.) is allowed to discriminate based on national origin then how can the Govt. discriminate on EB Emigration based on national origin ?
I think this is a fair question and most Americans in my work place agree with me. I don't know if we will win the case or not but if we win we can get
1) Removal of country based quotas
2) recapture of Visa's lost due to country based quotas
If we lose the case we will at least get more attention of the national media, it's up to us how we manage the media attention and have a positive effect on the popularity of our cause.
IMHO taking the opinion of the best attorney on constitutional law can not hurt. :)
The Federal laws prohibiting job discrimination are:
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII), which prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, or national origin;
the Equal Pay Act of 1963 (EPA), which protects men and women who perform substantially equal work in the same establishment from sex-based wage discrimination;
the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967 (ADEA), which protects individuals who are 40 years of age or older;
Title I and Title V of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (ADA), which prohibit employment discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities in the private sector, and in state and local governments;
Sections 501 and 505 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, which prohibit discrimination against qualified individuals with disabilities who work in the federal government;
and
the Civil Rights Act of 1991, which, among other things, provides monetary damages in cases of intentional employment discrimination.
If no one (including the Govt.) is allowed to discriminate based on national origin then how can the Govt. discriminate on EB Emigration based on national origin ?
I think this is a fair question and most Americans in my work place agree with me. I don't know if we will win the case or not but if we win we can get
1) Removal of country based quotas
2) recapture of Visa's lost due to country based quotas
If we lose the case we will at least get more attention of the national media, it's up to us how we manage the media attention and have a positive effect on the popularity of our cause.
IMHO taking the opinion of the best attorney on constitutional law can not hurt. :)
hot girlswithtattoos29 Hot Girls
katrina
02-01 02:34 PM
US news has covered a book by David Heenan -- "Flight Capital" that essentially deals with the fact that high powered immigrants are leaving this country -- for whatever reason -- and how its bad for America. BAD FOR AMERICA. forget about it being bad of GC aspirants. ITS BAD FOR AMERICA. And we have one of america's own high powered former CEO saying that
http://www.flight-capital.com/
This man has no vested interested in talking about this. Obviously he does not need a GC and he is not on H1. He makes our case. How anti-immigration congressional measure are hurting America as a nation as much as it hurts aspiring immigrants.
This is an independent non-partisan source who can be quoted in our cause.
http://www.greatandhra.com/business/greencard_usa.html
and there is another good article with the same topic.
Check out this article in the Wall Street Journal - by Gary Becker, a Nobel Price Winner..alas this administration in immune to such logic
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
By GARY S. BECKER
November 30, 2005; Page A18
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
* * *
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
* * *
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
http://www.flight-capital.com/
This man has no vested interested in talking about this. Obviously he does not need a GC and he is not on H1. He makes our case. How anti-immigration congressional measure are hurting America as a nation as much as it hurts aspiring immigrants.
This is an independent non-partisan source who can be quoted in our cause.
http://www.greatandhra.com/business/greencard_usa.html
and there is another good article with the same topic.
Check out this article in the Wall Street Journal - by Gary Becker, a Nobel Price Winner..alas this administration in immune to such logic
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
By GARY S. BECKER
November 30, 2005; Page A18
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
* * *
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
* * *
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
more...
house Hardcore dames with hot
luncheSpecials
02-15 04:38 PM
I totally blame bodyshoppers for the mess
tattoo Re: ONE nude/hot girl Thread
vdlrao
07-26 04:26 PM
I dont think the situation is that bleak. What would happen when EB3 ROW is unable to use up all the spillovers from EB2? The excess would go to EB3 I, right?
In the past 4+ years, the annual H1 queue is just 65K. So the input into the EB queue must have moderated quite a bit.
right point to note.
In the past 4+ years, the annual H1 queue is just 65K. So the input into the EB queue must have moderated quite a bit.
right point to note.
more...
pictures Girls-Tattoos-Hot-Tattoos-For-
sunny1000
12-13 05:06 PM
Good point. But point what we are discussing is whether the rules (per country based) made to process GC can be challenged in US Courts within its constitutional limits? If tomorrow US decides to shut down EB/FB we do not have problem. Certainly it has that right. But when US wishes to have those immigrants than do we (applicants - non -immigrants) have a right to challenge particular rule (here per country based limit) in Court?
The U.S government absolutely has that discretion to make any rule/law under the Foreign Policy doctrine which no Court will interfere. The analogy for this would be the rule - wet/dry policy - they follow with the Cuban immigrants who get a GC just based on landing on the U.S soil. Nobody can challenge that rule (which favors only migrants from Cuba - when Mexicans do the same, it is considered illegal) but, a cuban immigrant can challenge what constitutes U.S soil which the courts can decide.
In short, you cannot challenge the law itself but, can challenge how the law is interpreted.
The U.S government absolutely has that discretion to make any rule/law under the Foreign Policy doctrine which no Court will interfere. The analogy for this would be the rule - wet/dry policy - they follow with the Cuban immigrants who get a GC just based on landing on the U.S soil. Nobody can challenge that rule (which favors only migrants from Cuba - when Mexicans do the same, it is considered illegal) but, a cuban immigrant can challenge what constitutes U.S soil which the courts can decide.
In short, you cannot challenge the law itself but, can challenge how the law is interpreted.
dresses Hot Girls with Tattoos ITT
gcgoingon
06-14 05:33 PM
I guess my 9 months old prediction is coming true (off by a month).
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/1049939-post209.html
I hope your predictions for the coming months also come true..
I do not know why the bulletin is so conservative about the EB2-I estimates for the year 2010 (March/April 2006)?
The reason I am saying this is the initial estimate they gave for EB2-I in Jan '10 bulletin is Feb/March 2005.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/1049939-post209.html
I hope your predictions for the coming months also come true..
I do not know why the bulletin is so conservative about the EB2-I estimates for the year 2010 (March/April 2006)?
The reason I am saying this is the initial estimate they gave for EB2-I in Jan '10 bulletin is Feb/March 2005.
more...
makeup Hot New Tattoo Ideas For Girls
ash27
03-31 11:16 PM
Sk2006, I don't understand why would you like this thread to be deleted. I understand that this is immigration forum but I do not see any issues discussing other topics that other people are interested.... Please do not discourage people from discussing other issues that may be relevant. If you are not interested, you are more than welcome to not go through this thread....
girlfriend on Chest for Hot Girls
dilipcr
06-11 11:49 PM
People need to understand that you need to give some to win some. I would like to propose to IV a kind of proposal that would be a win win for both the immigrants and the US.
1. It is meaningless to fight for the rights of ALL the visa holders. Any such attempts would always be resisted by the anti immigrant lobby.
2. Acknowledge their fundamental point of view that jobs are being stolen due to wage destruction and perpetual visa fraud by these outsourcing companies. Of course resist all these racist BS types. They are the just the noise in the immigration debate.
My Proposal
1. Support the Grassley bill in its entirety. If you notice it is those outsourcing companies that are making all the noise but not the genuine companies that use H1B for innovation purposes. These outsourcing neither follow the rules or spirit of the H1B/L1 visas nor provide much of innovation to the market place. There is no point in expecting them to police themselves. We have tried this and they are not here to play by the rules.
2. In fact, provide the concessions to eliminate the H1/L1 visas for these outsourcers. In return, request visa number recapture for the H1Bs who are employed directly by the companies. I strongly believe that if you are a H1B employed directly by the company (not outsourcing cos), it is unlikely that you would be underskilled or underpaid. A few minor expections may be there but we can safely ignore these exceptions.
3. Again, people may argue that some of the consultants are highly skilled too. If that were the case, they would have been or would be hired into a permenant position soon once the Grassley bill passes. No company would like to let go of a good performer irrespective of whether they are permenant employees or contractors.
If you notice, some people echo the sentiment that the Grassley bill would lead to more offshoring. That in my opinion is absolute BS. Only low level jobs would be offshored and in my opinion a h1b visa should not be used for these low level jobs. The high skilled jobs would always stay here and they would not be under wage pressure. The best and the fittest would survive and get the same.
I strongly believe that by providing these concessions, atleast the skilled immigrants would be sparred the trauma of this mindless wait for a GC. I wish to reiterate here that I am neither anti immigration nor anti any ethnicity. I am simply trying to reiterate that we need to lose some to win some. There is no point in the Indian style of negotiations of win all or win none. Let us adapt to the give some take some style of concession building. In this process, it is okay to give up on the interests of those blood sucking outsourcers. For this, I am willing to provide financial, logistical and intellectual support.
By following this route, we prevent wage destruction which is what the anti immigrant lobby is clamouring about. It is a win win for all and a lose situation for the blood suckers
1. It is meaningless to fight for the rights of ALL the visa holders. Any such attempts would always be resisted by the anti immigrant lobby.
2. Acknowledge their fundamental point of view that jobs are being stolen due to wage destruction and perpetual visa fraud by these outsourcing companies. Of course resist all these racist BS types. They are the just the noise in the immigration debate.
My Proposal
1. Support the Grassley bill in its entirety. If you notice it is those outsourcing companies that are making all the noise but not the genuine companies that use H1B for innovation purposes. These outsourcing neither follow the rules or spirit of the H1B/L1 visas nor provide much of innovation to the market place. There is no point in expecting them to police themselves. We have tried this and they are not here to play by the rules.
2. In fact, provide the concessions to eliminate the H1/L1 visas for these outsourcers. In return, request visa number recapture for the H1Bs who are employed directly by the companies. I strongly believe that if you are a H1B employed directly by the company (not outsourcing cos), it is unlikely that you would be underskilled or underpaid. A few minor expections may be there but we can safely ignore these exceptions.
3. Again, people may argue that some of the consultants are highly skilled too. If that were the case, they would have been or would be hired into a permenant position soon once the Grassley bill passes. No company would like to let go of a good performer irrespective of whether they are permenant employees or contractors.
If you notice, some people echo the sentiment that the Grassley bill would lead to more offshoring. That in my opinion is absolute BS. Only low level jobs would be offshored and in my opinion a h1b visa should not be used for these low level jobs. The high skilled jobs would always stay here and they would not be under wage pressure. The best and the fittest would survive and get the same.
I strongly believe that by providing these concessions, atleast the skilled immigrants would be sparred the trauma of this mindless wait for a GC. I wish to reiterate here that I am neither anti immigration nor anti any ethnicity. I am simply trying to reiterate that we need to lose some to win some. There is no point in the Indian style of negotiations of win all or win none. Let us adapt to the give some take some style of concession building. In this process, it is okay to give up on the interests of those blood sucking outsourcers. For this, I am willing to provide financial, logistical and intellectual support.
By following this route, we prevent wage destruction which is what the anti immigrant lobby is clamouring about. It is a win win for all and a lose situation for the blood suckers
hairstyles for new hot sexy tattoos girls
srkamath
07-30 09:10 AM
this makes no sense (with all due respect to Mr Gotcher). He basically claims that PD has been moved to allow CP cases to be processed faster to avoid visa number wastage.. However he also says that there is a huge backlog of AOS cases. Looking at how many CP cases are being called for interview in mumbai and delhi (low hundreds) I dont see how CP alone can help avoid a big wastage of visas. If USCIS is still 20k short, then its the massive pile of AOS cases they should be using, just like they did last year.
Also, if they waste visa numbers this year, it would be really gross incompetence. EB2-India has gone all the way from 2000 to 2006 this year. They slack off at the start of the year, then scramble in the end. I dont know why they follow this approach knowing full well that right at the end it puts them in a soup.
This Ron Gotcher guy does not seem to get it.... he has an agenda, I dont buy his logic. It is unlikely that ~ 50 cases at consular posts are enough motivation to move dates forward by two years.
It took roughly one year for EB2-I dates to advance beyond April04 from the time it first got to April 04.
We know 2005 is a lean year.
It is likely that it will take almost a year before EB2-I dates advance beyond June06.
Those with PD < June06 that do not get a GC by Sep08 can expect to get it by Sep 09. Until then we will see some short term swings between 2003 and 2006.
Also, if they waste visa numbers this year, it would be really gross incompetence. EB2-India has gone all the way from 2000 to 2006 this year. They slack off at the start of the year, then scramble in the end. I dont know why they follow this approach knowing full well that right at the end it puts them in a soup.
This Ron Gotcher guy does not seem to get it.... he has an agenda, I dont buy his logic. It is unlikely that ~ 50 cases at consular posts are enough motivation to move dates forward by two years.
It took roughly one year for EB2-I dates to advance beyond April04 from the time it first got to April 04.
We know 2005 is a lean year.
It is likely that it will take almost a year before EB2-I dates advance beyond June06.
Those with PD < June06 that do not get a GC by Sep08 can expect to get it by Sep 09. Until then we will see some short term swings between 2003 and 2006.
villamonte6100
12-14 01:12 PM
I know. I work for a prestigious law firm and I know how hard it is to become a lawyer.
There was a thread some time back about people considering going to law school and becoming their own lawyers. What I took out of it was that its not that easy. Besides going to school, you have to pass some tough state exams. I am quite happy with my lawyer. I paid some dough but its much cheaper than going to law school, and saves me time and headache.
Going to law school is not for everyone, definitely not for me (fat books scares me :eek:). I like the suggestion by garybanz about getting a qualified opinion. Just so that we know.
There was a thread some time back about people considering going to law school and becoming their own lawyers. What I took out of it was that its not that easy. Besides going to school, you have to pass some tough state exams. I am quite happy with my lawyer. I paid some dough but its much cheaper than going to law school, and saves me time and headache.
Going to law school is not for everyone, definitely not for me (fat books scares me :eek:). I like the suggestion by garybanz about getting a qualified opinion. Just so that we know.
ilikekilo
07-10 11:31 AM
I need to hear more stories like this to realize I won't be alone when time comes for me to pack up.
I am from A.P. Lot of folks from my state in India can't accept anything but USA outside A.P. 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.
please dont speak on behalf of everyone....speak for urself....and do us a favor...did all those folks from AP came to you and suggested that they can only breathe,live and die in usa....congratulations...you just became eligible to join the elite club of stereotypes with your narrow minded mentality........thankx...
I am from A.P. Lot of folks from my state in India can't accept anything but USA outside A.P. 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.
please dont speak on behalf of everyone....speak for urself....and do us a favor...did all those folks from AP came to you and suggested that they can only breathe,live and die in usa....congratulations...you just became eligible to join the elite club of stereotypes with your narrow minded mentality........thankx...
No comments:
Post a Comment