amitjoey
04-19 01:07 PM
I understand that your intention is to get heard. I appreciate your effort at writing letter. However writing to the president will not help us much. Here is why:
In the USA, infact for that matter in most democracies, Laws are made by elected representatives unless it is an executive order to grant an immediate relief.
The composition and powers of the House and the Senate are established in Article One of the Constitution. The major power of the House is to pass federal legislation that affects the entire country, although its bills must also be passed by the Senate and further agreed to by the President before becoming law (unless both the House and Senate re-pass the legislation with a two-thirds majority in each chamber). The total number of voting representatives is fixed by law at no more than 435.[1] (United States congressional apportionment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_congressional_apportionment))
So, In our case, the president at the most can sympathise with our cause and the hardships we face because of the limbo, But he cannot really help until there is a bill that passes both the house and the senate.
So, Can I suggest that it will be even more worthwhile if you contact your congressman/woman and go meet them. We need them to understand our plight and anguish.
We all need to go meet our lawmakers, educate them.
In the USA, infact for that matter in most democracies, Laws are made by elected representatives unless it is an executive order to grant an immediate relief.
The composition and powers of the House and the Senate are established in Article One of the Constitution. The major power of the House is to pass federal legislation that affects the entire country, although its bills must also be passed by the Senate and further agreed to by the President before becoming law (unless both the House and Senate re-pass the legislation with a two-thirds majority in each chamber). The total number of voting representatives is fixed by law at no more than 435.[1] (United States congressional apportionment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_congressional_apportionment))
So, In our case, the president at the most can sympathise with our cause and the hardships we face because of the limbo, But he cannot really help until there is a bill that passes both the house and the senate.
So, Can I suggest that it will be even more worthwhile if you contact your congressman/woman and go meet them. We need them to understand our plight and anguish.
We all need to go meet our lawmakers, educate them.
wallpaper Indonesian officials pray over
WeShallOvercome
07-19 02:19 PM
My employer has always provided me the receipt numbers. I'm talking about the physical receipt notice which I might need just in case i need to invoke AC21.
IF you have used your personal checks the receipt is usually at the back of the checks. Esle just call the help desk and give all your information and if the guy is in good mood he can provide you the receipt number.
IF you have used your personal checks the receipt is usually at the back of the checks. Esle just call the help desk and give all your information and if the guy is in good mood he can provide you the receipt number.
GC08
08-26 11:04 AM
Have to agree that it appears to be the case. Look at I140... there is a 4 month difference between the 2 centers. How could that happen?! How come they did not balance the workload to ensure work is done in an orderly way? Probably it is pure mismanagement and incompetence???
2011 Asian tsunami death.jpg
arnab221
04-14 05:55 PM
Immigration: 'Birth Tourism' Industry Markets U.S. Citizenship Abroad - ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/birth-tourism-industry-markets-us-citizenship-abroad/story?id=10359956&partner=yahoo)
A New Baby Boom? Foreign 'Birth Tourists' Seek U.S. Citizenship for Children
More Foreign Mothers Live Abroad to Give Birth on U.S. Soil, Debate Over 14th Amendment
Millions of foreign tourists visit the United States every year, and a growing number return home with a brand new U.S. citizen in tow. housands of legal immigrants, who do not permanently reside in the United States but give birth here, have given their children the gift of citizenship, which the U.S. grants to anyone born on its soil.
The number of U.S. births to non-resident mothers rose 53 percent between 2000 and 2006, according to the most recent data from the National Center for Health Statistics. Total births rose 5 percent in the same period.
Among the foreigners who have given birth here, including international travelers passing through and foreign students studying at U.S. universities, are "birth tourists," women who travel to the United States with the explicit purpose of obtaining citizenship for their child.
Catering to the women is a nascent industry of travel agencies and hotel chains seeking to profit from the business. The Marmara Manhattan, a Turkish-owned luxury hotel on New York's City Upper East Side, markets birth tourism packages to expectant mothers abroad, luring more than a dozen pregnant guests and their families to the United States to give birth last year alone.
"What we offer is simply a one-bedroom suite accommodation for $7,750, plus taxes, for a month, with airport transfer, baby cradle and a gift set for the mother," Marmara Hotel spokeswoman Alexandra Ballantine said.
The hotel estimates the total cost of the package at $45,000.
Most women stay for two months, Ballantine said, and they make medical arrangements on their own. "Guests arrange and pay for these by themselves," she said of hospital costs that can approach $30,000.
For those with the means to pay, it's a small price to give a child the full benefits of U.S. citizenship, including the ability to travel freely to and from the United States, easy access to a U.S. education and a chance to start a life here.
"We found a company on the Internet and decided to go to Austin [Texas] for our child's birth," Turkish mother Selin Burcuoglu told Istanbul's Hurriyet Daily News. "I don't want [my daughter] to deal with visa issues. American citizenship has so many advantages."
The greatest of those advantages may be the ability of the citizen child to later sponsor the legal immigration of his or her entire family permanently to this country, experts say.
The "birth tourism" industry, which is difficult to track and remains largely anecdotal, has been on the rise for years, according to government and participants reports. Of the 4,273,225 live births in the United States in 2006, the most recent data gathered by the National Center for Health Statistics, 7,670 were children born to mothers who said they do not live here.
Many, but not all, of those mothers could be "birth tourists," experts say, although it is difficult to know for sure. The government does not track the reasons non-resident mothers are in the United States at the time of the birth or their citizenship, meaning births to illegal immigrants who live in the United States are counted in the overall total.
In recent years, many women have come from Mexico, South Korea, China and Taiwan, but the trend now extends to countries in Eastern Europe, such as Turkey, where as many as 12,000 children were born in the United States to Turkish parents since 2003 by one estimate.
The business of birth tourism is perfectly legal as long as immigrants are able to pay their own way.
The State Department and Department of Homeland Security have no specific regulations banning pregnant foreigners from entering the United States. But officials say they can and do turn away pregnant women with obvious designs on coming to the United States to take advantage of free medical care. "When determining if an individual will be allowed to enter the U.S., Customs and Border Protection officers take into consideration the date the child is due for delivery and the length of time the individual intends to stay in the U.S.," a Department of Homeland Security spokesman said.
Still, critics say the practice largely goes unchecked and exploits the true meaning of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, enacted after the Civil War to grant citizenship to descendants of slaves.
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside," the amendment reads.
"It's really an incorrect interpretation of the 14th Amendment," said Jerome Corsi, a conservative author and columnist who has studied the issue of birth tourism. "Birthright citizenship is a loophole � [and] as it expands into a business for entrepreneurs in foreign countries who offer birth tourism packages, it markets the loophole to attract additional mothers to the U.S."
Lino Graglia of the University of Texas law school wrote in the Jan. 11 Texas Review of Law & Politics that the authors of the 14th Amendment never would have imagined their words bestowing citizenship to illegal or visiting immigrants.
"It is difficult to imagine a more irrational and self-defeating legal system than one which makes unauthorized entry into this country a criminal offense and simultaneously provides perhaps the greatest possible inducement to illegal entry," Graglia wrote of birthright citizenship. The Supreme Court has only addressed the issue once, ruling in 1898 that citizenship applies to U.S.-born children of legal immigrants who have yet to become citizens.
Some legislators, including U.S. Rep. Gary Miller, R-Calif., have called for revising the Constitution to forbid citizenship by birth alone and thereby end the attraction of birth tourists. But other politicos, from both sides of the aisle, say such an approach is politically unrealistic, not to mention unnecessary. "You just turn people down for being pregnant," said Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies. "That should be the default position and then there'd have to be some very good reason for an exception."
Krikorian acknowledged that some people might find a ban on pregnant visitors "outrageous," but questions the rationality of the alternative.
"Do you really think that's right that somebody here visiting Disneyland should have their children be U.S. citizens, which they'll then inevitably use to get access to the U.S.?" he asked.
Krikorian and others call the offspring of birth tourists "anchor babies," because they can serve as a foothold for future legal immigration of an entire family.
Ali Noorani, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, said he sees the debate about birth tourists in a different light, however, noting that arguments about citizenship of children ignore a fundamental question of humanity.
"If we're a country that cares about families and family values, then why are we blaming the children for a decision the parents made. Their only decision was to take a first breath," he said.
"What is the State Department going to do? To fill out a visa application have a woman pee on a stick?"
The United States is one of the few remaining countries to grant citizenship to all children born on its soil. The United Kingdom, Ireland, India and Australia, among others, have since revised their birthright laws, no longer allowing every child born on their soil to get citizenship.
A New Baby Boom? Foreign 'Birth Tourists' Seek U.S. Citizenship for Children
More Foreign Mothers Live Abroad to Give Birth on U.S. Soil, Debate Over 14th Amendment
Millions of foreign tourists visit the United States every year, and a growing number return home with a brand new U.S. citizen in tow. housands of legal immigrants, who do not permanently reside in the United States but give birth here, have given their children the gift of citizenship, which the U.S. grants to anyone born on its soil.
The number of U.S. births to non-resident mothers rose 53 percent between 2000 and 2006, according to the most recent data from the National Center for Health Statistics. Total births rose 5 percent in the same period.
Among the foreigners who have given birth here, including international travelers passing through and foreign students studying at U.S. universities, are "birth tourists," women who travel to the United States with the explicit purpose of obtaining citizenship for their child.
Catering to the women is a nascent industry of travel agencies and hotel chains seeking to profit from the business. The Marmara Manhattan, a Turkish-owned luxury hotel on New York's City Upper East Side, markets birth tourism packages to expectant mothers abroad, luring more than a dozen pregnant guests and their families to the United States to give birth last year alone.
"What we offer is simply a one-bedroom suite accommodation for $7,750, plus taxes, for a month, with airport transfer, baby cradle and a gift set for the mother," Marmara Hotel spokeswoman Alexandra Ballantine said.
The hotel estimates the total cost of the package at $45,000.
Most women stay for two months, Ballantine said, and they make medical arrangements on their own. "Guests arrange and pay for these by themselves," she said of hospital costs that can approach $30,000.
For those with the means to pay, it's a small price to give a child the full benefits of U.S. citizenship, including the ability to travel freely to and from the United States, easy access to a U.S. education and a chance to start a life here.
"We found a company on the Internet and decided to go to Austin [Texas] for our child's birth," Turkish mother Selin Burcuoglu told Istanbul's Hurriyet Daily News. "I don't want [my daughter] to deal with visa issues. American citizenship has so many advantages."
The greatest of those advantages may be the ability of the citizen child to later sponsor the legal immigration of his or her entire family permanently to this country, experts say.
The "birth tourism" industry, which is difficult to track and remains largely anecdotal, has been on the rise for years, according to government and participants reports. Of the 4,273,225 live births in the United States in 2006, the most recent data gathered by the National Center for Health Statistics, 7,670 were children born to mothers who said they do not live here.
Many, but not all, of those mothers could be "birth tourists," experts say, although it is difficult to know for sure. The government does not track the reasons non-resident mothers are in the United States at the time of the birth or their citizenship, meaning births to illegal immigrants who live in the United States are counted in the overall total.
In recent years, many women have come from Mexico, South Korea, China and Taiwan, but the trend now extends to countries in Eastern Europe, such as Turkey, where as many as 12,000 children were born in the United States to Turkish parents since 2003 by one estimate.
The business of birth tourism is perfectly legal as long as immigrants are able to pay their own way.
The State Department and Department of Homeland Security have no specific regulations banning pregnant foreigners from entering the United States. But officials say they can and do turn away pregnant women with obvious designs on coming to the United States to take advantage of free medical care. "When determining if an individual will be allowed to enter the U.S., Customs and Border Protection officers take into consideration the date the child is due for delivery and the length of time the individual intends to stay in the U.S.," a Department of Homeland Security spokesman said.
Still, critics say the practice largely goes unchecked and exploits the true meaning of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, enacted after the Civil War to grant citizenship to descendants of slaves.
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside," the amendment reads.
"It's really an incorrect interpretation of the 14th Amendment," said Jerome Corsi, a conservative author and columnist who has studied the issue of birth tourism. "Birthright citizenship is a loophole � [and] as it expands into a business for entrepreneurs in foreign countries who offer birth tourism packages, it markets the loophole to attract additional mothers to the U.S."
Lino Graglia of the University of Texas law school wrote in the Jan. 11 Texas Review of Law & Politics that the authors of the 14th Amendment never would have imagined their words bestowing citizenship to illegal or visiting immigrants.
"It is difficult to imagine a more irrational and self-defeating legal system than one which makes unauthorized entry into this country a criminal offense and simultaneously provides perhaps the greatest possible inducement to illegal entry," Graglia wrote of birthright citizenship. The Supreme Court has only addressed the issue once, ruling in 1898 that citizenship applies to U.S.-born children of legal immigrants who have yet to become citizens.
Some legislators, including U.S. Rep. Gary Miller, R-Calif., have called for revising the Constitution to forbid citizenship by birth alone and thereby end the attraction of birth tourists. But other politicos, from both sides of the aisle, say such an approach is politically unrealistic, not to mention unnecessary. "You just turn people down for being pregnant," said Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies. "That should be the default position and then there'd have to be some very good reason for an exception."
Krikorian acknowledged that some people might find a ban on pregnant visitors "outrageous," but questions the rationality of the alternative.
"Do you really think that's right that somebody here visiting Disneyland should have their children be U.S. citizens, which they'll then inevitably use to get access to the U.S.?" he asked.
Krikorian and others call the offspring of birth tourists "anchor babies," because they can serve as a foothold for future legal immigration of an entire family.
Ali Noorani, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, said he sees the debate about birth tourists in a different light, however, noting that arguments about citizenship of children ignore a fundamental question of humanity.
"If we're a country that cares about families and family values, then why are we blaming the children for a decision the parents made. Their only decision was to take a first breath," he said.
"What is the State Department going to do? To fill out a visa application have a woman pee on a stick?"
The United States is one of the few remaining countries to grant citizenship to all children born on its soil. The United Kingdom, Ireland, India and Australia, among others, have since revised their birthright laws, no longer allowing every child born on their soil to get citizenship.
more...
hopefulgc
08-13 11:23 PM
not offensive at all... in fact i welcome your suggestion.
btw.. i just started meditating today.. really works.
i guess analyzing these incidents is better than calling uscis.. which i am totally itching to do this week (one per week .. within my quota).
Friend,
Relax a little. Donot worry its not gonna fix any problem.
My theory of life is ..."every one needs a problem to stay busy, if they
donot have any problems, they will find one".
Think about it, and find a constructive problem.
if you donot like my words, leave it ...please donot be offended.
btw.. i just started meditating today.. really works.
i guess analyzing these incidents is better than calling uscis.. which i am totally itching to do this week (one per week .. within my quota).
Friend,
Relax a little. Donot worry its not gonna fix any problem.
My theory of life is ..."every one needs a problem to stay busy, if they
donot have any problems, they will find one".
Think about it, and find a constructive problem.
if you donot like my words, leave it ...please donot be offended.
singhsa3
10-05 04:02 PM
So what you are saying is that INS and IRS systems are connected?
I can back that one up. We received audit August 13 for 2005. Had to prove we are married & kids live with us. When called and spoke to officer she said it was an "INS flag"! Honest to God that is what she said. She then asked if we had applied in the last couple of months for 485's??? She knew all about the USCIS system and said one way of telling is if you file jointly at the same address each year then why would IRS be asking for proof of marriage and kids living there etc. She was great and confirmed they had received all paperwork. Had to resend due to liquid being spilled on copies.... Even H&R Block said it was INS based.
Then we get 4 out of 5 EAD's approved, but spouse gets RFE and it is proof of name change please resubmit marriage certificate!
Cheers,
LRIndy
I can back that one up. We received audit August 13 for 2005. Had to prove we are married & kids live with us. When called and spoke to officer she said it was an "INS flag"! Honest to God that is what she said. She then asked if we had applied in the last couple of months for 485's??? She knew all about the USCIS system and said one way of telling is if you file jointly at the same address each year then why would IRS be asking for proof of marriage and kids living there etc. She was great and confirmed they had received all paperwork. Had to resend due to liquid being spilled on copies.... Even H&R Block said it was INS based.
Then we get 4 out of 5 EAD's approved, but spouse gets RFE and it is proof of name change please resubmit marriage certificate!
Cheers,
LRIndy
more...
Dhundhun
03-01 11:37 PM
When money is in excess of $10,000, there are several applicable rules.
~ It must be reported to treasury, it transfer in a year is more than $10,000.
~ It must be reported to treasury, at any time foreign bank account had money in excess of $10,000.
And of course:
~ Interest in foreign banks and earning in foreign stocks must be reported as income on US returns (any world-wide income).
There are many violations, and perhaps IRS is unable to chase defaulters. People enjoy defaulting and not reporting.
~ It must be reported to treasury, it transfer in a year is more than $10,000.
~ It must be reported to treasury, at any time foreign bank account had money in excess of $10,000.
And of course:
~ Interest in foreign banks and earning in foreign stocks must be reported as income on US returns (any world-wide income).
There are many violations, and perhaps IRS is unable to chase defaulters. People enjoy defaulting and not reporting.
2010 Japan tsunami, 2000 odies
loudobbs
08-23 05:38 PM
I havent got the physical card yet though...
Status online says card production requested....
Labor Approval Date: 8/13/2007
I-140 Approved sept 2005 Attorney incorrectly applied EB3
Applied second I-140 EB2 May 2007 EB2
I-485 applied June 29th
I-485 receipt notice received Aug 15
EAD approved Aug 17
YOU APPLIED ON JUNE 29TH AND GOT EAD ON AUGUST 17?. WOW!:eek:
SO WHO FILED IN JULY, CAN WE EXPECT EAD IN SEPT?.
Status online says card production requested....
Labor Approval Date: 8/13/2007
I-140 Approved sept 2005 Attorney incorrectly applied EB3
Applied second I-140 EB2 May 2007 EB2
I-485 applied June 29th
I-485 receipt notice received Aug 15
EAD approved Aug 17
YOU APPLIED ON JUNE 29TH AND GOT EAD ON AUGUST 17?. WOW!:eek:
SO WHO FILED IN JULY, CAN WE EXPECT EAD IN SEPT?.
more...
helpful_leo
02-23 02:53 PM
For the pessimists among us who doubt the utility of what we can achieve, I have compiled the following FAQs:
1/ Isnt it very unlikely that a senator or congressman will listen to us or care about our agenda?
It is extremely likely -almost guaranteed- that US lawmakers will listen to us and incorporate our amendments, as long as they are reasonable, fair and not inimical to US interests (which our suggestions most certainly fit with). The system here works very differently than what several of us may be used to in our own home countries, where it might be near impossible to get things through to lawmakers without �connections�. Several of those here who witnessed the S1932 campaign in December were surprised at how easily accessible the lawmakers and their staff were, and how receptive they were to our requests and suggestions. We have to make sure that we present our arguments intelligently, and show them how closely they are linked to long term US interests.
(to be continued)
1/ Isnt it very unlikely that a senator or congressman will listen to us or care about our agenda?
It is extremely likely -almost guaranteed- that US lawmakers will listen to us and incorporate our amendments, as long as they are reasonable, fair and not inimical to US interests (which our suggestions most certainly fit with). The system here works very differently than what several of us may be used to in our own home countries, where it might be near impossible to get things through to lawmakers without �connections�. Several of those here who witnessed the S1932 campaign in December were surprised at how easily accessible the lawmakers and their staff were, and how receptive they were to our requests and suggestions. We have to make sure that we present our arguments intelligently, and show them how closely they are linked to long term US interests.
(to be continued)
hair odies
rajuram
09-11 07:28 AM
yes finger printing is not required, mine was issued recetly without FP. You can take a chance and send the photos. At the most they will ask for it again.
more...
matreen
08-04 12:33 PM
Thanks Snathan. But do you think I may get my 140 cleared on the basis of 3 year degree?
Its tough at I-140. But you wont have any issues with EB3
Its tough at I-140. But you wont have any issues with EB3
hot for odies Wednesday among
kittu1991
03-17 09:00 PM
Sorry, forgot to mention the MTR. If your I-485 AND MTR is rejected, my point still stands.
By MTR did you mean appeal. Still you are wrong.:D
By MTR did you mean appeal. Still you are wrong.:D
more...
house VOLUNTEERS REMOVE BODIES
bitu72
04-18 07:52 PM
thanks for the response.
do they tell before hand what is the reason for interview . what question to expect.
will they look through tax filling and other stuff.
-- my earlier labor had a issue because of education- 3yr BSC course problem--but new one is fine. I think becasue i have 2 I 140 i have some problem.
do they tell before hand what is the reason for interview . what question to expect.
will they look through tax filling and other stuff.
-- my earlier labor had a issue because of education- 3yr BSC course problem--but new one is fine. I think becasue i have 2 I 140 i have some problem.
tattoo Tsunami survivor
jnicklo
04-17 11:36 PM
OK lets pretend Mr Stiffer is not here and get back on topic.
I definately feel that IF the talent is there a 15 year old can get a part time design job. :)
I definately feel that IF the talent is there a 15 year old can get a part time design job. :)
more...
pictures The death toll from a tsunami
glus
01-24 12:29 PM
exactly, and also, each member could add a signature to his posts to show his contributions and related items. This will not add any work to the IV, who is focusing on the imm relief now....
G
G
dresses Tsunami death toll tops 300
logiclife
06-30 02:32 PM
This is an opportunity for anyone to call in into the program tommorow(Jul 1) at 4:15 EST to vent your frustration on radio.
Use this opportunity to voice your pain over your labor backlog or 485 slowness or expiring fingerprints or the abysmal FBI namecheck.
Public dialogue is the linchpin of Democracry, exercise your freedom and stand up and speak for yourself.
-------------------
The number to call in would be announced during the show by Debo.
Use this opportunity to voice your pain over your labor backlog or 485 slowness or expiring fingerprints or the abysmal FBI namecheck.
Public dialogue is the linchpin of Democracry, exercise your freedom and stand up and speak for yourself.
-------------------
The number to call in would be announced during the show by Debo.
more...
makeup by Monday#39;s tsunami,
efzuniga
08-26 09:47 PM
Same happened to us. The checks were cashed and we have even received the appointment notices for biometrics. My lawyer told me that there have been several cases lake this one. He is going to submit proof of the checks being cashed and copy of the notices to the USCIS.
girlfriend Children ride their bicycles
h1techSlave
02-17 01:18 PM
bump
hairstyles Indonesia tsunami toll hits
latina
04-10 11:17 AM
I only have something to say, everyone is looking for its own turf, and if you really want diversity in the forum, the hard count will not attract anyone else other than Indians and Chinese. I am few months from working due to EB2- Worlwide category (current), so any change on the hard count is not on my benefit, same for anyone who is not from India or China, the EB3 is not current worlwide but the line of all the other countries is still shorter, if you really want to reach more than Indians and Chinese the goal has to be good for everyone, and the hard count is not. Thanks.
The request for the hard cap conversion to soft cap DOES NOT CANNIBALIZE non-Indians/non-Chinese. You are missing a key point here.
What the hard cap does is that say for example in the EB2 category the Indians and Chinese use up their quota. On the other hand the rest of the world uses only 50% of their quota (about 10K EB2 visas leftover, just a guesstimate).
1) With the soft quota, this leftover is given to the over subscribed countries in the SAME CATEGORY (Eb2). As a result, other EB2 candidates from India/China benefit
2) With the hard quota, this 10K now goes to UNSKILLED immigrants.
This amendment DOES NOT TAKE AWAY anything from the rest of the world at all! All it does is benefit SKILLED workers. Isn't IV about skilled workers? Why are some folks whose quota will NOT be CANNIBALIZED against this and consider this an issue of Indians/Chinese Vs Rest is beyond me. It is a matter of EB1 vs unskilled, EB2 vs unskilled and EB3 vs unskilled!
Can I be any clearer?
The request for the hard cap conversion to soft cap DOES NOT CANNIBALIZE non-Indians/non-Chinese. You are missing a key point here.
What the hard cap does is that say for example in the EB2 category the Indians and Chinese use up their quota. On the other hand the rest of the world uses only 50% of their quota (about 10K EB2 visas leftover, just a guesstimate).
1) With the soft quota, this leftover is given to the over subscribed countries in the SAME CATEGORY (Eb2). As a result, other EB2 candidates from India/China benefit
2) With the hard quota, this 10K now goes to UNSKILLED immigrants.
This amendment DOES NOT TAKE AWAY anything from the rest of the world at all! All it does is benefit SKILLED workers. Isn't IV about skilled workers? Why are some folks whose quota will NOT be CANNIBALIZED against this and consider this an issue of Indians/Chinese Vs Rest is beyond me. It is a matter of EB1 vs unskilled, EB2 vs unskilled and EB3 vs unskilled!
Can I be any clearer?
swamy
04-14 08:52 PM
its all some variation of 'the brownies are multiplying & will outnumber us in our backyard'
Immigration Officer Guilty in Sexual Coercion Case - NYTimes.com (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/nyregion/15agent.html)
Immigration Officer Guilty in Sexual Coercion Case - NYTimes.com (http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/15/nyregion/15agent.html)
meridiani.planum
01-18 01:38 PM
whoa
I did not know it can be that bad
r u working in the USA now?
:confused:
yes I am working in the bay area.
Back in 2001/2002/2003 I have seen many friends having to return to India (from the bay area) because they could not get another job. All the desi consulting companies that everyone bashes so often? they are the saviours. They are typically the only ones who hire in those times. All the big companies will have hiring freeze's and massive layoffs.
Its already started in the US (Sprint:4k, Lehman Bros 1300, Motorola 7500+1600, applied-materials 1000) but this is the mere tip of the iceberg.
Its starting from the financial sector:
http://news.google.com/news?q=%22cut+jobs%22&sourceid=navclient-ff&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS230US230&um=1&sa=N&tab=in
but will probably spread all over.
The real mess will start in Q3 (thats when we'll know if we are really sunk or some last minute stimulus is goign to keep this recession short and quick). Most probably this time its going to take much longer than 2001/2002 to recover. Back then the dollar was strong, there was a huge fiscal surplus and inflation was not a risk. This time none of those things are there and stimulating the economy is going to take much much longer. Also, to an extent in 2001/2002 it was only tech that imploded. The rest of the economy (& consumers by extension who are the main drivers of the economy) was ok. This time its widespread, consumers across the board are hit.
The July VB was a huge blessing in disguise for lots and lots of people who will be able to maintain status even if they are jobless for a few months. Back in 2001/2002/2003 the option was to be out-of-status of return home. Many chose the latter. This time they can atleast get a job offer from a desi consulting company and keep looking for some consulting gig.
I did not know it can be that bad
r u working in the USA now?
:confused:
yes I am working in the bay area.
Back in 2001/2002/2003 I have seen many friends having to return to India (from the bay area) because they could not get another job. All the desi consulting companies that everyone bashes so often? they are the saviours. They are typically the only ones who hire in those times. All the big companies will have hiring freeze's and massive layoffs.
Its already started in the US (Sprint:4k, Lehman Bros 1300, Motorola 7500+1600, applied-materials 1000) but this is the mere tip of the iceberg.
Its starting from the financial sector:
http://news.google.com/news?q=%22cut+jobs%22&sourceid=navclient-ff&ie=UTF-8&rlz=1B3GGGL_enUS230US230&um=1&sa=N&tab=in
but will probably spread all over.
The real mess will start in Q3 (thats when we'll know if we are really sunk or some last minute stimulus is goign to keep this recession short and quick). Most probably this time its going to take much longer than 2001/2002 to recover. Back then the dollar was strong, there was a huge fiscal surplus and inflation was not a risk. This time none of those things are there and stimulating the economy is going to take much much longer. Also, to an extent in 2001/2002 it was only tech that imploded. The rest of the economy (& consumers by extension who are the main drivers of the economy) was ok. This time its widespread, consumers across the board are hit.
The July VB was a huge blessing in disguise for lots and lots of people who will be able to maintain status even if they are jobless for a few months. Back in 2001/2002/2003 the option was to be out-of-status of return home. Many chose the latter. This time they can atleast get a job offer from a desi consulting company and keep looking for some consulting gig.
No comments:
Post a Comment