sertasheep
07-03 05:28 PM
Can any IV member write to me with the following detials, if you have this info , please:
Of course, we need a reliable source to be cited.
1) Has it been reported anywhere in the media on how many applicants may have been approx. affected by the Visa Bulletin fiasco? All I have heard is "tens of thousands"
2) Any good estimate on how much expenditure may have been incurred..i saw somewhere that it was $300 mil?
email: sertasheep at immigrationvoice.org
Sertasheep
SuperModerator
Of course, we need a reliable source to be cited.
1) Has it been reported anywhere in the media on how many applicants may have been approx. affected by the Visa Bulletin fiasco? All I have heard is "tens of thousands"
2) Any good estimate on how much expenditure may have been incurred..i saw somewhere that it was $300 mil?
email: sertasheep at immigrationvoice.org
Sertasheep
SuperModerator
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
reddymjm
09-23 03:42 PM
Markus.Rose@mail.house.gov,
Committee@mail.house.gov,
Larry.Lavender@mail.house.gov,
Philip.Swartzfager@mail.house.gov,
Dave.Oxner@mail.house.gov,
Michael.Staley@mail.house.gov,
Scott_Hoeflich@Specter.senate.gov,
Thomas_Dower@Specter.senate.gov,
Lisa_Owings@Specter.senate.gov,
Matt_Kelly@Specter.senate.gov,
Sheryl_Cohen@Dodd.senate.gov,
Rebecca_Freedman@Dodd.senate.gov,
Jim_Fenton@Dodd.senate.gov,
Patrick_Grant@Dodd.senate.gov,
Lori_McGrogan@Dodd.senate.gov,
Alex_Sternhell@Dodd.senate.gov,
Laura_Friedel@Shelby.senate.gov,
Emily_Titlow@Shelby.senate.gov
Chad_Davis@Shelby.senate.gov,
Peter_Olson@Cornyn.senate.gov,
Beth_Jafari@Cornyn.senate.gov,
Reed_O'Connor@Cornyn.senate.gov,
Cynthia.Martin@mail.house.gov,
Matt.Thome@mail.house.gov,
Melody.Light@mail.house.gov,
Ed_Pagano@Leahy.senate.gov,
John_Dowd@Leahy.senate.gov,
Bruce_Cohen@Leahy.senate.gov,
Bill_Yeomans@Kennedy.senate.gov,
Carey_Parker@Kennedy.senate.gov,
Eric_Mogilnicki@Kennedy.senate.gov,
Stacey.Leavandosky@mail.house.gov,
Erik.Stallman@mail.house.gov
Committee@mail.house.gov,
Larry.Lavender@mail.house.gov,
Philip.Swartzfager@mail.house.gov,
Dave.Oxner@mail.house.gov,
Michael.Staley@mail.house.gov,
Scott_Hoeflich@Specter.senate.gov,
Thomas_Dower@Specter.senate.gov,
Lisa_Owings@Specter.senate.gov,
Matt_Kelly@Specter.senate.gov,
Sheryl_Cohen@Dodd.senate.gov,
Rebecca_Freedman@Dodd.senate.gov,
Jim_Fenton@Dodd.senate.gov,
Patrick_Grant@Dodd.senate.gov,
Lori_McGrogan@Dodd.senate.gov,
Alex_Sternhell@Dodd.senate.gov,
Laura_Friedel@Shelby.senate.gov,
Emily_Titlow@Shelby.senate.gov
Chad_Davis@Shelby.senate.gov,
Peter_Olson@Cornyn.senate.gov,
Beth_Jafari@Cornyn.senate.gov,
Reed_O'Connor@Cornyn.senate.gov,
Cynthia.Martin@mail.house.gov,
Matt.Thome@mail.house.gov,
Melody.Light@mail.house.gov,
Ed_Pagano@Leahy.senate.gov,
John_Dowd@Leahy.senate.gov,
Bruce_Cohen@Leahy.senate.gov,
Bill_Yeomans@Kennedy.senate.gov,
Carey_Parker@Kennedy.senate.gov,
Eric_Mogilnicki@Kennedy.senate.gov,
Stacey.Leavandosky@mail.house.gov,
Erik.Stallman@mail.house.gov
chanduv23
02-13 10:59 PM
you cannot sue for incompetence, or the courts would be full!
Yes, this is what IV core had told us before.
But members seem to be enthuiastic about having a case, so it may not hurt to consult an Attorney for legal opinion.
Yes, this is what IV core had told us before.
But members seem to be enthuiastic about having a case, so it may not hurt to consult an Attorney for legal opinion.
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
PlainSpeak
01-13 01:19 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.
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.
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
more...
unseenguy
08-16 02:35 PM
So what has that to do with supporting SRK here?
He is saying he is hurt and he even said there were fans calling him and still the officers did not understand he is SharRukh Khan. Now that is funny.
That sounds like if some xyz is detained and people start calling him by his name POE officers should understand who he is!
Well, explain to me, if an american celebrity, such as Brad Pitt or George Clooney is detained at IGI for 66 mins, taken aside for secondary in another chamber, made to wait,
if robert gates (defense secretary), is asked to remove his shirt
if ex president bush or clinton is frisked for secondary, would that be acceptable to americans?
NO. We agree on the answer atleast. Do people in India have to KNOW them?
He is saying he is hurt and he even said there were fans calling him and still the officers did not understand he is SharRukh Khan. Now that is funny.
That sounds like if some xyz is detained and people start calling him by his name POE officers should understand who he is!
Well, explain to me, if an american celebrity, such as Brad Pitt or George Clooney is detained at IGI for 66 mins, taken aside for secondary in another chamber, made to wait,
if robert gates (defense secretary), is asked to remove his shirt
if ex president bush or clinton is frisked for secondary, would that be acceptable to americans?
NO. We agree on the answer atleast. Do people in India have to KNOW them?
Pineapple
12-14 05:45 PM
Read my previous post explaining how things would work without country limits.
All you need to do is recall basic probability theory from school. No country quotas is the only fair way to go, as it would give any individual a fair go, regardless of nationality. I thought this premise was self evident.. but evidently, I'm wrong, and there is some explanation to do.
I hope explaining the facts and reasoning helps, and the feeling that "country quotas protect smaller countries" has nothing to do with the old saying:
"When you rob Peter to pay Paul, you can always rely on support from Paul"
:rolleyes:
We are all in this together, guys... As per the original intent of the thread, we were supposed to discuss whether the 7 % quota is constitutional. That discussion is not yet settled.
The main point is, based on current caps and quotas, all of us are stuck.
One way or another, we need to (A) raise number of EB visas, and (B) Eliminate quotas which distort the market and give unfair advantage to one nationality over another.
--What you said sounds very interesting. But it got me thinking, what if the merit is equally distributed by the country of origin and there is a limit to the opportunities this country can provide?
Let us say there are 140,000 EB visas given every year. Based on pure merit and sans any regard to nationality. Don't you think it could potentially lead to more visas being consumed by one country?
What if this country wants to ensure diversity to its social fabric?? How do they go about doing that?
All you need to do is recall basic probability theory from school. No country quotas is the only fair way to go, as it would give any individual a fair go, regardless of nationality. I thought this premise was self evident.. but evidently, I'm wrong, and there is some explanation to do.
I hope explaining the facts and reasoning helps, and the feeling that "country quotas protect smaller countries" has nothing to do with the old saying:
"When you rob Peter to pay Paul, you can always rely on support from Paul"
:rolleyes:
We are all in this together, guys... As per the original intent of the thread, we were supposed to discuss whether the 7 % quota is constitutional. That discussion is not yet settled.
The main point is, based on current caps and quotas, all of us are stuck.
One way or another, we need to (A) raise number of EB visas, and (B) Eliminate quotas which distort the market and give unfair advantage to one nationality over another.
--What you said sounds very interesting. But it got me thinking, what if the merit is equally distributed by the country of origin and there is a limit to the opportunities this country can provide?
Let us say there are 140,000 EB visas given every year. Based on pure merit and sans any regard to nationality. Don't you think it could potentially lead to more visas being consumed by one country?
What if this country wants to ensure diversity to its social fabric?? How do they go about doing that?
more...
franklin
02-14 04:44 PM
Wow - yes, I obviously wasn't getting the point! Thanks UN for clarifying it.
My earlier comments were more questioning why we debating what I thought was a hypothetical problem, ie "if there were unused visas, there wouldn't be retrogression", and I was missing the bigger picture.
I certainly wasn't "one of those EB3 WOW guys" just arguing that we should get all the extras, if you know any history about my posting on this board, you'll know that I am concerned with everyone's fight, not just mine.
My earlier comments were more questioning why we debating what I thought was a hypothetical problem, ie "if there were unused visas, there wouldn't be retrogression", and I was missing the bigger picture.
I certainly wasn't "one of those EB3 WOW guys" just arguing that we should get all the extras, if you know any history about my posting on this board, you'll know that I am concerned with everyone's fight, not just mine.
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
angelfire76
01-14 03:38 PM
I agree completely. I fail to understand why people are so upset with this development. Your life will be better in the long run. Cant you all see ?
cinqsit
Nobody's arguing against cracking down on these layers of contracting. The "third-party worksite" applies to almost all IT services companies nowadays. That is what is not very clear about the memo.
cinqsit
Nobody's arguing against cracking down on these layers of contracting. The "third-party worksite" applies to almost all IT services companies nowadays. That is what is not very clear about the memo.
more...
villamonte6100
12-14 01:03 PM
--Although I agree with what you said in earlier post (I had to debate with someone who thinks otherwise), I find this post in poor taste.
Please guild your temper while expressing yourself and refrain from bursting out. Looks bad to the outsiders if they visit these forums.
Ofcourse, humor is always welcome.
Don't be upset dude. I'm just trying to suggest so that we could think out of the box. I don't think I have a bad taste.
Honestly, we tend to be discuss to much the law here. We are not experts of law and I think we should start calling our lawyers and talk to them about this idea. Let's see what our lawyers will say and then we can share those comments from lawyers.
Please don't be upset.
Please guild your temper while expressing yourself and refrain from bursting out. Looks bad to the outsiders if they visit these forums.
Ofcourse, humor is always welcome.
Don't be upset dude. I'm just trying to suggest so that we could think out of the box. I don't think I have a bad taste.
Honestly, we tend to be discuss to much the law here. We are not experts of law and I think we should start calling our lawyers and talk to them about this idea. Let's see what our lawyers will say and then we can share those comments from lawyers.
Please don't be upset.
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
mbawa2574
02-15 06:49 PM
No. I can't understand fairshot and equality when major bodyshops from a certain nationality flood the market here with people from that certain nationality, u keep ignoring that and coming back to the stupid suggestion that it's only because u have more talent
suit urself, anyone who argues with you reasonably, tell them they are wrong and make assumptions about their motives and insult and alienate more members of your organization
good luck
Reality is that you don't want to see Indians and Chinese around you. I am sure IV does not need people like you. IV does not promote nationality and we are against all the bad pracitices of the body shoppers but we don't want someone to label Indians and Chinese in this country product of bodyshopping immigration.
Most of the population are well educated , skilled professionals and labelling them that they are flooding the market is insulting. If you think that you don't have marketable skills and is difficult for you to play due to Indians and Chinese, please feel free not to come back to this website. There are many Anti-Chinese and Anti-India blogs for your agenda. I am not sure whose side you are on and who has planted you here.
suit urself, anyone who argues with you reasonably, tell them they are wrong and make assumptions about their motives and insult and alienate more members of your organization
good luck
Reality is that you don't want to see Indians and Chinese around you. I am sure IV does not need people like you. IV does not promote nationality and we are against all the bad pracitices of the body shoppers but we don't want someone to label Indians and Chinese in this country product of bodyshopping immigration.
Most of the population are well educated , skilled professionals and labelling them that they are flooding the market is insulting. If you think that you don't have marketable skills and is difficult for you to play due to Indians and Chinese, please feel free not to come back to this website. There are many Anti-Chinese and Anti-India blogs for your agenda. I am not sure whose side you are on and who has planted you here.
more...
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.
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
jsb
06-08 10:59 AM
:) I thought it was understood by now, that without changes in law, there is no "speedup" (for 485 approvals). USCIS has been super efficient recently, what is missing is the "visa number".
Trying to change laws sensitive to long term residents and citizens, by those wanting to be residents is a tough task. What is possible, which we should keep trying for, is to make suitable interpretive changes, in the form of clarifications, which do not appear to be a major shift to what have been US long term policies.
For example, trying to do away with country quota would be very hard, as it is so sensitive for the main stream residents. Making it apply in overall immigration from a country rather than I-485 cases might work. Strong argument could be that EB I-485 candidates are highly qualified and are living in the US anyway. Therefore, applying any diversity rule on them does not make sense. However, country quota may continue to be applied for those who are not yet in the US, i.e. family based cases, or those EB candidates applying from their home countries with appropriate prioritization (for example, spouse joining may get highest priority).
Trying to change laws sensitive to long term residents and citizens, by those wanting to be residents is a tough task. What is possible, which we should keep trying for, is to make suitable interpretive changes, in the form of clarifications, which do not appear to be a major shift to what have been US long term policies.
For example, trying to do away with country quota would be very hard, as it is so sensitive for the main stream residents. Making it apply in overall immigration from a country rather than I-485 cases might work. Strong argument could be that EB I-485 candidates are highly qualified and are living in the US anyway. Therefore, applying any diversity rule on them does not make sense. However, country quota may continue to be applied for those who are not yet in the US, i.e. family based cases, or those EB candidates applying from their home countries with appropriate prioritization (for example, spouse joining may get highest priority).
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
easygoer
07-23 01:51 PM
vldrao has done good job and we are thankful to him
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
binadh
07-11 12:45 PM
BharatPremi,
Same applies to you.. If you are so crazy about Bharat, what are you doing here.... HEHEHE. Just thought that it was kinda funny statement because of your name....BharatPremi --- :D
Chanduv23,
Even that Angelina seemed to be crazy about USA. If S/he would be happy about everything in Canada why the hell s/he even visit immigration related boards meant for USA?
Same applies to you.. If you are so crazy about Bharat, what are you doing here.... HEHEHE. Just thought that it was kinda funny statement because of your name....BharatPremi --- :D
Chanduv23,
Even that Angelina seemed to be crazy about USA. If S/he would be happy about everything in Canada why the hell s/he even visit immigration related boards meant for USA?
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
mallu
02-15 07:00 PM
....
H4 people going to college is just a miniscule compared to the number of desi students who come here with a good GRE and GMAT scores.
People would like to see India as land of snake charmers, cows blocking roads etc.
They can't digest IITians coming to MIT, Stanford etc. :-)
H4 people going to college is just a miniscule compared to the number of desi students who come here with a good GRE and GMAT scores.
People would like to see India as land of snake charmers, cows blocking roads etc.
They can't digest IITians coming to MIT, Stanford etc. :-)
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
Picasa
07-27 03:27 PM
Lets see how much money you have donated. Please provide details and then we will compare.
As far as action items are concerned... Here is the latest example:
I have just send the email regarding EAD issues...Did you send the email?
Also as requested by one of the member, give your mailing address so that CIS can be notified.:D
I have been donating more money to IV over 4 years then you do, and will keep on doing. Do you?
There are lot of action items to meeting lawmakers. Why don't get your focus on that?
As far as action items are concerned... Here is the latest example:
I have just send the email regarding EAD issues...Did you send the email?
Also as requested by one of the member, give your mailing address so that CIS can be notified.:D
I have been donating more money to IV over 4 years then you do, and will keep on doing. Do you?
There are lot of action items to meeting lawmakers. Why don't get your focus on that?
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
gc28262
09-26 11:13 AM
I sent the email to my local congress man who has an anti-immigrant stance.
Here is the response I got from him( It is probably a standard response for financial crisis)
---message starts------
Thank you for contacting me regarding our country's financial crisis and the administration's bailout proposal. It is good to hear your thoughts on this very important situation facing our country and I share in your concerns.
As you know, Treasury Secretary Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke testified recently before Congress about their proposal to spend $700 billion to purchase the debt of financial institutions, improve our credit situation, and stabilize our economy. I reviewed the proposal carefully and, like you, I had serious concerns about this proposal such as the blanket authority removing Congressional or legal oversight, the implied reward for unwise financial behaviors at the expense of honest Americans, and the long-term expense to tax payers without a mechanism to press criminal charges upon those who are responsible for this situation.
As a consequence, I offered an alternative measure. According to the Department of Treasury, there are two problems that need to be addressed: the short term liquidity emergency, and the long-term toxic mortgage asset holdings. To address the liquidity emergency, my plan would reduce all personal and corporate capital gains taxes to zero percent for one year, reduce the Federal Funds Rate (FFR) to zero percent for one month with a reoccurring month to month option, and allow the Department of Treasury to loan current funds to lending institutions at the rate of inflation plus three percent or LIBOR plus three percent. This plan would get the markets moving and allow Congress adequate time to address the mortgage assets situation while we investigate those corporations or government regulators who may be criminally negligent.
One of my most important roles as your Congressman is to be a responsible steward of tax payer funds and, while my proposal remains an option, there are many proposals still being debated and it is unclear what the final product will look like. I will be sure to keep you informed of what happens as we move forward.
---message ends------
Here is the response I got from him( It is probably a standard response for financial crisis)
---message starts------
Thank you for contacting me regarding our country's financial crisis and the administration's bailout proposal. It is good to hear your thoughts on this very important situation facing our country and I share in your concerns.
As you know, Treasury Secretary Paulson and Federal Reserve Chairman Bernanke testified recently before Congress about their proposal to spend $700 billion to purchase the debt of financial institutions, improve our credit situation, and stabilize our economy. I reviewed the proposal carefully and, like you, I had serious concerns about this proposal such as the blanket authority removing Congressional or legal oversight, the implied reward for unwise financial behaviors at the expense of honest Americans, and the long-term expense to tax payers without a mechanism to press criminal charges upon those who are responsible for this situation.
As a consequence, I offered an alternative measure. According to the Department of Treasury, there are two problems that need to be addressed: the short term liquidity emergency, and the long-term toxic mortgage asset holdings. To address the liquidity emergency, my plan would reduce all personal and corporate capital gains taxes to zero percent for one year, reduce the Federal Funds Rate (FFR) to zero percent for one month with a reoccurring month to month option, and allow the Department of Treasury to loan current funds to lending institutions at the rate of inflation plus three percent or LIBOR plus three percent. This plan would get the markets moving and allow Congress adequate time to address the mortgage assets situation while we investigate those corporations or government regulators who may be criminally negligent.
One of my most important roles as your Congressman is to be a responsible steward of tax payer funds and, while my proposal remains an option, there are many proposals still being debated and it is unclear what the final product will look like. I will be sure to keep you informed of what happens as we move forward.
---message ends------
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
AirWaterandGC
05-10 09:05 PM
Thanks cableman.
I did read that part and hence my question was if I am in the fourth/fifth year of my CA PR when I decide to go to CA, will I be allowed at least in the country.
Another question was if I am in my 4th/5th year and know that it might take me another year before I go to CA, can I apply for CA PR again, even when I already have my CA PR OR if I apply for my CA PR immediately after my current CA PR expires, would I get it again (assuming I have the necessary points)
Thanks again to everyone who tries to shed some light.
I got this from: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/pub/imm-law.html#act12
Permanent residents
Persons who have been admitted to Canada as permanent residents have the right to come to the country and remain here, provided they have not lost that status or it has not been established that they have engaged in activities, such as criminal acts, that would otherwise subject them to removal.
Conditions may be imposed for a certain period on some permanent residents, such as entrepreneurs. A permanent resident must live in Canada for at least 730 days (two years) within a five-year period. In some situations, time spent outside Canada may count. All permanent residents must comply with this residency requirement or risk losing their status.
According to the website, you will lose your status if you go to Canada in the 5th year because you won't be able to attain the requirement of living in Canada for at least 730 days (two years) within a five-year period. Actually, after you pass your 3rd year, you will be in risk for the permanent status.
I did read that part and hence my question was if I am in the fourth/fifth year of my CA PR when I decide to go to CA, will I be allowed at least in the country.
Another question was if I am in my 4th/5th year and know that it might take me another year before I go to CA, can I apply for CA PR again, even when I already have my CA PR OR if I apply for my CA PR immediately after my current CA PR expires, would I get it again (assuming I have the necessary points)
Thanks again to everyone who tries to shed some light.
I got this from: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/pub/imm-law.html#act12
Permanent residents
Persons who have been admitted to Canada as permanent residents have the right to come to the country and remain here, provided they have not lost that status or it has not been established that they have engaged in activities, such as criminal acts, that would otherwise subject them to removal.
Conditions may be imposed for a certain period on some permanent residents, such as entrepreneurs. A permanent resident must live in Canada for at least 730 days (two years) within a five-year period. In some situations, time spent outside Canada may count. All permanent residents must comply with this residency requirement or risk losing their status.
According to the website, you will lose your status if you go to Canada in the 5th year because you won't be able to attain the requirement of living in Canada for at least 730 days (two years) within a five-year period. Actually, after you pass your 3rd year, you will be in risk for the permanent status.
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
kumjay
06-27 01:04 PM
I would love to ask Lou Dobbs the same question!!
Three facts, followed by one interpretation.
First: several members (incl self) have checked with their own lawyers and these lawyers tend to agree with the common interpretation of validity for entire month. And at least some of these are lawyers with many years of practice.
Second: Fragomen, the largest immigration law firm, on its website mentions the mid-month possibility; so while there is no government source, the whole topic cannot be dismissed as an unfounded rumor.
Third: Macaca keeps cutting and pasting from the ombudsman's report in many different colors.
My interpretation:
The mid-month concept seems to be a matter of opinion. Multicolor posts notwithstanding, there's nothing official on this matter so far. (I emailed the state department seeking an answer; not surprisingly, I haven't heard back. If anyone else can get something from the horse's mouth, then post it here. If you can get stuff only from the other end of the horse, then maybe there's isn't much pointing in driving a general panic.)
Three facts, followed by one interpretation.
First: several members (incl self) have checked with their own lawyers and these lawyers tend to agree with the common interpretation of validity for entire month. And at least some of these are lawyers with many years of practice.
Second: Fragomen, the largest immigration law firm, on its website mentions the mid-month possibility; so while there is no government source, the whole topic cannot be dismissed as an unfounded rumor.
Third: Macaca keeps cutting and pasting from the ombudsman's report in many different colors.
My interpretation:
The mid-month concept seems to be a matter of opinion. Multicolor posts notwithstanding, there's nothing official on this matter so far. (I emailed the state department seeking an answer; not surprisingly, I haven't heard back. If anyone else can get something from the horse's mouth, then post it here. If you can get stuff only from the other end of the horse, then maybe there's isn't much pointing in driving a general panic.)
Keeme
03-31 10:05 AM
Kancha Ilaya(Sonia appointed ) is being allowed by the Indian Government to lobby with the UN and US Congress so that caste discrimination in India is taken-up by these bodies. (Indians on their own have come a long way in reducing these caste discrimination but alas these people won't want that dying)It shouldn't be any surprise if we see bunch of International articles on India's disgusting caste issues soon.
Rahul Gandhi/Govt of India invites British politician to Amethi on poverty tourism.Putting it in their own words they were trying to show this foreign minister real India (meaning 'sinking India not shining India' or may be they were trying to tell this British guy look we have managed to keep the country at the same state you left it , if anything we took it to another low level).Amethi has been a constituency represented by that family for generations in Priyanka's words. Forget about country they didn't do much good to their own constituency .
This British guy before he left the country said that Mumbai attacks could have happened because India didn't hand over Kashmir to Pak.He also gave a free although unasked advice ,if such future attacks are not to happen India should reconsider it's stance on Kashmir.
British media was surprised to see that Rahul Gandhi touted as future PM by the party and Indian media with equal excitement didn't want to comment on foreign affairs.Mumbai issue or anything else.
Now every country has it's share of problems..be it poverty or something else.Can you imagine U.S politician inviting French/German politician to view America's worst and media giving it huge coverage?Just imagine what would happen then.
There are 2 ways you have to be in Indian politics. Bottom-to-top and Top-to-bottom. Sanjay Dutt, Murli Devra's son, Rajesh Pilot's son, MadhavRao SIndhia's son are some good example of Top-to-bottom. They can be MPs and MLAs but again can't go in heart of general public. Many of them would have short tem political life. Mamta Benergee, Mayavati, Mulayam, lalu, Narendra Modi, Sharad Yadav and many others are example of bottom-to-top.
Rahul Gandhi doesn't want to be labeled as top-to-bottom. It won't last long.
Rahul Gandhi/Govt of India invites British politician to Amethi on poverty tourism.Putting it in their own words they were trying to show this foreign minister real India (meaning 'sinking India not shining India' or may be they were trying to tell this British guy look we have managed to keep the country at the same state you left it , if anything we took it to another low level).Amethi has been a constituency represented by that family for generations in Priyanka's words. Forget about country they didn't do much good to their own constituency .
This British guy before he left the country said that Mumbai attacks could have happened because India didn't hand over Kashmir to Pak.He also gave a free although unasked advice ,if such future attacks are not to happen India should reconsider it's stance on Kashmir.
British media was surprised to see that Rahul Gandhi touted as future PM by the party and Indian media with equal excitement didn't want to comment on foreign affairs.Mumbai issue or anything else.
Now every country has it's share of problems..be it poverty or something else.Can you imagine U.S politician inviting French/German politician to view America's worst and media giving it huge coverage?Just imagine what would happen then.
There are 2 ways you have to be in Indian politics. Bottom-to-top and Top-to-bottom. Sanjay Dutt, Murli Devra's son, Rajesh Pilot's son, MadhavRao SIndhia's son are some good example of Top-to-bottom. They can be MPs and MLAs but again can't go in heart of general public. Many of them would have short tem political life. Mamta Benergee, Mayavati, Mulayam, lalu, Narendra Modi, Sharad Yadav and many others are example of bottom-to-top.
Rahul Gandhi doesn't want to be labeled as top-to-bottom. It won't last long.
sri1309
10-30 06:52 AM
instead of dividing those who have house and those who will buy if they get gc ..we should focus on more visas and faster approvals (maybe temporary green cards !!) ..no need for more divisions ..there will be congress session for second stimulus bill ..IS THERE any chance that we can push for recapture by telling the congress that 200K highly skilled immigrants are waiting for GC and after that most likely they will buy a house ???? (give a rough figure ..no one will verify the exact number) please think about this !!! lets have another campaign as soon as possible
-------------
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. state leaders, trade groups and economists descended on the House of Representatives on Wednesday to help work out a second economic stimulus bill that one influential Congressional member said would be introduced on November 17.
Representative Jim Oberstar, the Minnesota Democrat who chairs the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, told a hearing on jump-starting the stalled economy that Congressional staff would be meeting throughout the month and a stimulus bill would be introduced when Congress reconvenes next month.
Time to push it.. 200K will buy houses is quite believable given the points that we have monies to do it, and given the market. We need a campaign. Also once the new President wins, never forget to congratulate him and at the same time request help.
-------------
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. state leaders, trade groups and economists descended on the House of Representatives on Wednesday to help work out a second economic stimulus bill that one influential Congressional member said would be introduced on November 17.
Representative Jim Oberstar, the Minnesota Democrat who chairs the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, told a hearing on jump-starting the stalled economy that Congressional staff would be meeting throughout the month and a stimulus bill would be introduced when Congress reconvenes next month.
Time to push it.. 200K will buy houses is quite believable given the points that we have monies to do it, and given the market. We need a campaign. Also once the new President wins, never forget to congratulate him and at the same time request help.
No comments:
Post a Comment