vdlrao
09-17 02:18 PM
Hi VDLRAO,
Couple of months back you were very optimistic about EB2 I will be current soon, what were the things influencing your thoughts.
Do you think EB2 I, will not be crossing 2005 by September 2010 ?
By september 2010 EB2 India will surely enters into 2006.
Couple of months back you were very optimistic about EB2 I will be current soon, what were the things influencing your thoughts.
Do you think EB2 I, will not be crossing 2005 by September 2010 ?
By september 2010 EB2 India will surely enters into 2006.
wallpaper Dominique Strauss Kahn Arrest
chanduv23
06-08 11:03 AM
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).
employment based is just one part of the immigration thing. If you think EB immigration is important - there will be thousands of opinions from people who will say why other immigration is also important.
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).
employment based is just one part of the immigration thing. If you think EB immigration is important - there will be thousands of opinions from people who will say why other immigration is also important.
desi3933
06-15 03:54 PM
........
........
1. If the outsourcing companies would pay on an avg at 80K per head for the "well qualified" people, I am even ok with their dumping their dumping the L1s here. Why is it that you guys are ok with the L1s being dumped at 40K-60K salaries ? Shouldn't they get paid high too ? This is what I am arguing for. If the outsourcing cos don't want to pay this rate, then keep them in the country of origin. No need to depress wages here. Is this a wrong thing to ask ?
......
Where did you get that 80k number? You think 80k is good salary for that job, someone else may say 65k, I may say 90k. The salary, among other things, is determined by market forces. If you can't find enough people with xyz then company will be forced to offer more.
As long as there are people who are ready to work on salary 52k (example), employer will not pay 70k. As long as employer is following all the legal requirements, no one can dictate salary for the job.
I am a US citizen of Indian origin with background in Computer Science, Finance, and Business Laws. I have been in this country for 11+ years and I have seen so many changes in tech world. Nobody talks of sign-on bonus on H1B anymore. I am dot net architect and I am seeing lot of competition for jobs and this is causing downtrend pressure on salary. But, instead of, blaming someone else for the competition, I am taking it head on. We need to keep working on our skillset and employer will pay the salary. Like they say, for the right candidate salary is not a constraint.
Let us not forget our struggling days of H1. The least, we can do, is to encourage our fellow immigrants who are waiting for their green cards.
.
........
1. If the outsourcing companies would pay on an avg at 80K per head for the "well qualified" people, I am even ok with their dumping their dumping the L1s here. Why is it that you guys are ok with the L1s being dumped at 40K-60K salaries ? Shouldn't they get paid high too ? This is what I am arguing for. If the outsourcing cos don't want to pay this rate, then keep them in the country of origin. No need to depress wages here. Is this a wrong thing to ask ?
......
Where did you get that 80k number? You think 80k is good salary for that job, someone else may say 65k, I may say 90k. The salary, among other things, is determined by market forces. If you can't find enough people with xyz then company will be forced to offer more.
As long as there are people who are ready to work on salary 52k (example), employer will not pay 70k. As long as employer is following all the legal requirements, no one can dictate salary for the job.
I am a US citizen of Indian origin with background in Computer Science, Finance, and Business Laws. I have been in this country for 11+ years and I have seen so many changes in tech world. Nobody talks of sign-on bonus on H1B anymore. I am dot net architect and I am seeing lot of competition for jobs and this is causing downtrend pressure on salary. But, instead of, blaming someone else for the competition, I am taking it head on. We need to keep working on our skillset and employer will pay the salary. Like they say, for the right candidate salary is not a constraint.
Let us not forget our struggling days of H1. The least, we can do, is to encourage our fellow immigrants who are waiting for their green cards.
.
2011 dominique strauss kahn maid
Keeme
05-12 03:25 PM
I think this forum is the wrong place to discuss any of this. The thread must be deleted.
I'm sorry, forgot to say ' GOOD BYE" when you declared 3 weeks back - you won't visit IV site any more and wanted to denounce your IV membership.
May I ask, what made you to change your mind ?
Dear, you won't get a good farewell party here ! Pl help youself !
I'm sorry, forgot to say ' GOOD BYE" when you declared 3 weeks back - you won't visit IV site any more and wanted to denounce your IV membership.
May I ask, what made you to change your mind ?
Dear, you won't get a good farewell party here ! Pl help youself !
more...
pal351
07-21 02:09 PM
I hate their scheming means to rope you in. They keep calling you and bug you to death. Is there anything that you could do to repel Amway desis? Any sprays, creams, poison?
I came accross couple of people and I saved their number as Torture.com never answer their calls, even though one guy called me everyday 2-4 times for one month, gave up it seems. One couple gave us some samples from Amway in first meet, junky food never even look at them, :(:(
Lost one good friend with this.
All the best guys.
I came accross couple of people and I saved their number as Torture.com never answer their calls, even though one guy called me everyday 2-4 times for one month, gave up it seems. One couple gave us some samples from Amway in first meet, junky food never even look at them, :(:(
Lost one good friend with this.
All the best guys.
paskal
02-13 05:45 PM
friends,
you have 29 people in favor.
great! each one needs to put their time and money where their mouths (mouses) are.
i suggest: take up a collection, then go get top notch legal opinion.
until you do this, no point going forward, this is going to be a very
important step.
c'mon folks step up...get a collection plate out and open your pockets.
you have 29 people in favor.
great! each one needs to put their time and money where their mouths (mouses) are.
i suggest: take up a collection, then go get top notch legal opinion.
until you do this, no point going forward, this is going to be a very
important step.
c'mon folks step up...get a collection plate out and open your pockets.
more...
snathan
08-16 06:06 PM
Its just highlighting the profiling because of name of religion or skin color. I agree world is not going to end but Indians need to be assertive to protect their own dignity.
In that case we have to do it everyday...not only when SRk was detained. are you doing that...no. Why?
In that case we have to do it everyday...not only when SRk was detained. are you doing that...no. Why?
2010 Dominique Strauss-Kahn, chief
vpadman
02-13 10:17 AM
Somebody suggested earlier that we should all contact our lawyers , and ask why they have not filed lawsuits yet.
I think the reason for this is quite simple. Lawyers are happy with the current system, so that they can continue to charge money, consulting fees etc.
Do you guys really think lawyers care about it? They are happy charging $200 for a 15 minutes consultation.
I have nothing against the lawyers, they are running a business and need to maximize profit.
I think the reason for this is quite simple. Lawyers are happy with the current system, so that they can continue to charge money, consulting fees etc.
Do you guys really think lawyers care about it? They are happy charging $200 for a 15 minutes consultation.
I have nothing against the lawyers, they are running a business and need to maximize profit.
more...
akred
02-18 12:31 PM
Reason it was retrogressed is probably everyone was getting everyone of their relatives, etc., to come to USA through employment base. The country quota in my mind is designed to prevent such abuses of people making an end run and designing systems to get people from certain countries here.
You are theorizing based on circumstantial evidence, but the history and origin of the country quota does not support your conclusion. The fact that the DOL and UCCIS would not be able to keep abreast of illegal behavior is not something that would have been known at the time the country quota was introduced.
The other issue with your theory is that the abuse you are referring has its roots in the fact that the employer controls the green card process not the country quota. If I really want to abuse the country quota I would change my name and get a fake SSN / green card and wait for the periodic legalization initiatives or even simpler, get a birth certificate from the right country.
You are theorizing based on circumstantial evidence, but the history and origin of the country quota does not support your conclusion. The fact that the DOL and UCCIS would not be able to keep abreast of illegal behavior is not something that would have been known at the time the country quota was introduced.
The other issue with your theory is that the abuse you are referring has its roots in the fact that the employer controls the green card process not the country quota. If I really want to abuse the country quota I would change my name and get a fake SSN / green card and wait for the periodic legalization initiatives or even simpler, get a birth certificate from the right country.
hair Dominique Strauss-Kahn: Maid
dilipcr
06-16 02:24 PM
There's two themes in this thread that are interesting.
1. A couple of members advanced the argument that retrogression is good since it weeds out the supposedly undeserving. Here's a startling quote:
2. The question of luck.
I would like to share our story, because it touches on both these themes: I have two US graduate degrees; so does my wife. We've paid over 100K in federal income taxes in each of the past several years and I'm now a partner at my firm; the idea that folks are stuck in retrogression because they are undereducated low-cost workers is not realistic. And there are many cases similar to ours (some of which I read about on IV). We are stuck in retrogression because we have no answer to the country-quota bottleneck.
So, sure, retreogression may provide perverse pleasure to a select few greencard holders, but the inconvenience that retrogression causes most of us does not serve a greater Darwinian good.
What of luck? While luck has put us in retrogression, it has favored us in many ways --- we have a great family, a lovely home, and a bunch of good friends. I am sure all of us have seen similar plus sides of luck. But luck is stubborn when it comes to the greencard: when the window opened up last year, many folks with PD 2006 were approved, while many like us with older PD were left waiting. Luck is a strange animal -- it lets you see the map of the world in your handheld, but won't let you travel freely because of retrogression.
There's this story about luck and how one can get around it in some cases. It is not very relevant here, but here's the story: A wise man came to a village and observed a family living in great poverty. All the family had was a cow and a sack of grain. They would work very hard, but their net worth never rose beyond the "cow + sack of grain" level. The wise man, being wise, figured out what's going on. He asked the family to give away the cow and have a party with whatever grain they had. The family initially thought this advice was daft, but eventually complied out of respect for the wise man. The night after they had squandered everything, Brahma could be seen quietly bringing the family another cow and a sack of grain. What the wise man had figured out was that this level of net worth was preordained for that family -- whether they work hard or party. Not a great story to tell your kids to teach them about hard work; but provides an alternate perspective when you're stuck in line.
To be honest, you are the kind of people, with the right attitude and qualifications, who deserve the GC and should not be subject to these mindless wait times. I am truly sorry for you. Hope the best for you
1. A couple of members advanced the argument that retrogression is good since it weeds out the supposedly undeserving. Here's a startling quote:
2. The question of luck.
I would like to share our story, because it touches on both these themes: I have two US graduate degrees; so does my wife. We've paid over 100K in federal income taxes in each of the past several years and I'm now a partner at my firm; the idea that folks are stuck in retrogression because they are undereducated low-cost workers is not realistic. And there are many cases similar to ours (some of which I read about on IV). We are stuck in retrogression because we have no answer to the country-quota bottleneck.
So, sure, retreogression may provide perverse pleasure to a select few greencard holders, but the inconvenience that retrogression causes most of us does not serve a greater Darwinian good.
What of luck? While luck has put us in retrogression, it has favored us in many ways --- we have a great family, a lovely home, and a bunch of good friends. I am sure all of us have seen similar plus sides of luck. But luck is stubborn when it comes to the greencard: when the window opened up last year, many folks with PD 2006 were approved, while many like us with older PD were left waiting. Luck is a strange animal -- it lets you see the map of the world in your handheld, but won't let you travel freely because of retrogression.
There's this story about luck and how one can get around it in some cases. It is not very relevant here, but here's the story: A wise man came to a village and observed a family living in great poverty. All the family had was a cow and a sack of grain. They would work very hard, but their net worth never rose beyond the "cow + sack of grain" level. The wise man, being wise, figured out what's going on. He asked the family to give away the cow and have a party with whatever grain they had. The family initially thought this advice was daft, but eventually complied out of respect for the wise man. The night after they had squandered everything, Brahma could be seen quietly bringing the family another cow and a sack of grain. What the wise man had figured out was that this level of net worth was preordained for that family -- whether they work hard or party. Not a great story to tell your kids to teach them about hard work; but provides an alternate perspective when you're stuck in line.
To be honest, you are the kind of people, with the right attitude and qualifications, who deserve the GC and should not be subject to these mindless wait times. I am truly sorry for you. Hope the best for you
more...
Lasantha
12-14 04:20 PM
Well said !!!
I know what I am about to say will trigger a lot of reaction and some resentment, but it has to be said on behalf of those who are not Indian. I think the per country limit is to ensure that people of all nationalities and races have an equal opportunity to obtain a green card and to ensure that no one nationality, group, or even sector (i.e. IT) monopolizes the so few visas that are available. In fact, in the visa lottery, countries become excluded when the number of immigrants from them reach a certain point, so we are lucky they do not do that in the Employment-based system!
I think that by wanting to remove the per country limit so more Indians can avail of the green card quota is both asking for "special treatment" and a slap in the face for all the non-Indian IV members. The more I read the threads on this site, the more I feel that this organization is geared just to one ethnic group. I am sure that Indians probably make up the majority of members, but the founders of IV (I hope) did not want this organization to become one-sided! Please be considerate of ALL members and try to come up with suggestions that would benefit ALL members!!!:mad:
I know what I am about to say will trigger a lot of reaction and some resentment, but it has to be said on behalf of those who are not Indian. I think the per country limit is to ensure that people of all nationalities and races have an equal opportunity to obtain a green card and to ensure that no one nationality, group, or even sector (i.e. IT) monopolizes the so few visas that are available. In fact, in the visa lottery, countries become excluded when the number of immigrants from them reach a certain point, so we are lucky they do not do that in the Employment-based system!
I think that by wanting to remove the per country limit so more Indians can avail of the green card quota is both asking for "special treatment" and a slap in the face for all the non-Indian IV members. The more I read the threads on this site, the more I feel that this organization is geared just to one ethnic group. I am sure that Indians probably make up the majority of members, but the founders of IV (I hope) did not want this organization to become one-sided! Please be considerate of ALL members and try to come up with suggestions that would benefit ALL members!!!:mad:
hot Dominique Strauss-Kahn after
Kodi
05-12 04:22 PM
Read my previous posts where I said tamils that doesn't live in the war areas lead life just as other nationalities. Its my fault that I didn't mention it again.
Ofcourse people in yalpanam and triconmole are leading a hard life due to the war. Yes, I was in trincomalee just 3 years ago when they re-opened A9. I'm not talking about tamils in the areas where the war is going on. Who chased the sinhala and muslims from those areas? Its was the LTTE that pretty much ruled those areas till now.
Are you saying tamils are discriminated in Colombo?
What I'm saying is if tamils are discriminated then they would be all over the country.
Ofcourse people in yalpanam and triconmole are leading a hard life due to the war. Yes, I was in trincomalee just 3 years ago when they re-opened A9. I'm not talking about tamils in the areas where the war is going on. Who chased the sinhala and muslims from those areas? Its was the LTTE that pretty much ruled those areas till now.
Are you saying tamils are discriminated in Colombo?
What I'm saying is if tamils are discriminated then they would be all over the country.
more...
house Dominique Strauss-Kahn
leo2606
09-23 04:41 PM
I got mine approved 2 months back from countrywide with out any issues.and I got good interest rate too.
Has anybody really tried to get a mortgage recently? I have been denied by 8 lenders so far simply because I don't have a green card. Most lenders have tightened their underwriting guidelines. They will give mortgages only to U.S.Citizens or somebody who is a permanent resident aka having a green card. There are very very few lenders who will give mortgages to somebody on a visa and the rates may not be very favorable.
Has anybody really tried to get a mortgage recently? I have been denied by 8 lenders so far simply because I don't have a green card. Most lenders have tightened their underwriting guidelines. They will give mortgages only to U.S.Citizens or somebody who is a permanent resident aka having a green card. There are very very few lenders who will give mortgages to somebody on a visa and the rates may not be very favorable.
tattoo DOMINIQUE Strauss-Kahn
PlainSpeak
01-13 01:18 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...
pictures dominique strauss-kahn maid
panini
05-11 05:11 PM
It is easy to spit out numbers like this. Do you have independent proof of these? Please don't point us to LTTE run web sites. Provide hard proof if you can.
As for "formerly superior Tamil competitiveness", I am sure what you refer to is, the fact that during the British period, the Tamils were given the lion's share (pardon my pun) of all the civil service and other administrative jobs as part of their divide and Rule policy. When SL gained independence of course, things changed so that formerly discriminated Sinhalese started getting their fair share of thse opportunities. Mind you that Sinhalese are after all 75% of SL. Are you saying it is fair to ask 12% of the population (SL Tamils) to have 50% of all the opportuniies and land and the resources reserved for them???
Whoever is supporting the SL govt. Do you deny these facts. From 1948 various SL govts been using different approaches and policies to discriminate Tamils in SL,Now it is in the name of fight against Terrorism.
Ever since independence in 1948, government policies have systematically violated the social, economic and cultural rights of Tamils: through the disenfranchisement of the Indian Tamils, through state sponsored colonization of the North-East by Sinhalese settlers, frequently accompanied by forceful eviction of Tamils, through a discriminatory language, education and recruitment policy which pursued but one aim: the Sinhalization of the state. Today, more than 90 % of civil servants, and 99 % of the security forces are Sinhalese. The politics of �positive discrimination� of the Sinhalese appears presently to be transformed into one of long-term exclusion of the Tamils because of proven incapacity. For what reasoning other than to eliminate the formerly superior Tamil competitiveness once and for all, while prolonging, even cementing Sinhala domination well into the next generation, can be adduced to explain the surplus of 14 000 Sinhala as against a shortage of 10 000 Tamil medium teachers, the lack of the most elementary school equipment (over 120 000 desks and chairs in the Vanni alone); a teacher pupil ratio of 70 to 1 in Tamil areas as against 22 to 1 for the rest of the country? The results of this outright violation of rights manifest themselves: in the competitive examinations for the Sri Lanka Accountant and the Administrative Service at most two Tamils were selected each year since the early 1990s!
As for "formerly superior Tamil competitiveness", I am sure what you refer to is, the fact that during the British period, the Tamils were given the lion's share (pardon my pun) of all the civil service and other administrative jobs as part of their divide and Rule policy. When SL gained independence of course, things changed so that formerly discriminated Sinhalese started getting their fair share of thse opportunities. Mind you that Sinhalese are after all 75% of SL. Are you saying it is fair to ask 12% of the population (SL Tamils) to have 50% of all the opportuniies and land and the resources reserved for them???
Whoever is supporting the SL govt. Do you deny these facts. From 1948 various SL govts been using different approaches and policies to discriminate Tamils in SL,Now it is in the name of fight against Terrorism.
Ever since independence in 1948, government policies have systematically violated the social, economic and cultural rights of Tamils: through the disenfranchisement of the Indian Tamils, through state sponsored colonization of the North-East by Sinhalese settlers, frequently accompanied by forceful eviction of Tamils, through a discriminatory language, education and recruitment policy which pursued but one aim: the Sinhalization of the state. Today, more than 90 % of civil servants, and 99 % of the security forces are Sinhalese. The politics of �positive discrimination� of the Sinhalese appears presently to be transformed into one of long-term exclusion of the Tamils because of proven incapacity. For what reasoning other than to eliminate the formerly superior Tamil competitiveness once and for all, while prolonging, even cementing Sinhala domination well into the next generation, can be adduced to explain the surplus of 14 000 Sinhala as against a shortage of 10 000 Tamil medium teachers, the lack of the most elementary school equipment (over 120 000 desks and chairs in the Vanni alone); a teacher pupil ratio of 70 to 1 in Tamil areas as against 22 to 1 for the rest of the country? The results of this outright violation of rights manifest themselves: in the competitive examinations for the Sri Lanka Accountant and the Administrative Service at most two Tamils were selected each year since the early 1990s!
dresses Dominique Strauss-Kahn denies
sc3
09-23 04:44 PM
One thing, assume if it works out and 50% of the people are able to buy houses and get the GC, they are out of the queue right, so automatically the back logs are gone and the remaining people not able to buy the house will get their GCs soon.
You are missing the point of the opposition. What is the fairness in this visa category? Every other category has US benefiting (not short term, but in long term) from us, except this proposed category. Do you think paying 20% down will benefit US enough that they drop every thing and grant you the GC??
Also, how do you define this 20%? A 20% down in CA will get your 5 homes in Alaskan tundra (ok exaggerating, but not by much). This proposal basically comes down to haves and have nots. By expending time on such misguided legislation, you are not only making the immigrants look like cheap opportunistic ****, but also giving enough fodder for the anti-immigrants that we are only looking for our GC without any tangible long term benefit for US (I could pay 20% down, get my GC, and then become a burden on the state).
You are missing the point of the opposition. What is the fairness in this visa category? Every other category has US benefiting (not short term, but in long term) from us, except this proposed category. Do you think paying 20% down will benefit US enough that they drop every thing and grant you the GC??
Also, how do you define this 20%? A 20% down in CA will get your 5 homes in Alaskan tundra (ok exaggerating, but not by much). This proposal basically comes down to haves and have nots. By expending time on such misguided legislation, you are not only making the immigrants look like cheap opportunistic ****, but also giving enough fodder for the anti-immigrants that we are only looking for our GC without any tangible long term benefit for US (I could pay 20% down, get my GC, and then become a burden on the state).
more...
makeup Dominique Strauss Kahn Maid:
waiting4gc
02-13 02:12 PM
Again, there are no guarantees which of the 3 will get passed or accepted. 1 & 2 benefit you more than 3. Will be combined effect of those be more than enough to offset 3 (which I doubt will ever happen since that will require a change in law) is up to anyone's imagination.
Will you stop supporting IV which is trying to improve ALL legal immigrants prospects of getting a green card because one item on their agenda MAY DO more harm to you than good is your prerogative.
However, IMHO saying that 3 hurts you and hence you will not support IV is the same as those people who in July were crying because everyone was getting to file 485s and hence would lengthen the GC processing queue. I was in fact not benefiting too much from that but I supported it since having been in the queue for long enough I know how painful it is.
Like lot of other people on this forum said, try to rise above what is GOOD FOR ME and I will only support IV if it does ONLY that. Someday there might be a law that affects you more than the majority and you will need the all legal immigrants voice to help you out.
Is the cumulative effect of all three measures good for me (reduced wait time, or no change in wait time), or bad for me (increased wait time.)?
I read this, and I was referring to this:
So, does recapture and the increase in quota and the removal of the country limits, result in a greater wait time for me, as the comment above seems to imply. It would, if the recapture and the increase are not large enough to offset the effects of the removal of the per-country limit on ROW.
Coz if it does, then I don't have an incentive to support your goals, do I?
Will you stop supporting IV which is trying to improve ALL legal immigrants prospects of getting a green card because one item on their agenda MAY DO more harm to you than good is your prerogative.
However, IMHO saying that 3 hurts you and hence you will not support IV is the same as those people who in July were crying because everyone was getting to file 485s and hence would lengthen the GC processing queue. I was in fact not benefiting too much from that but I supported it since having been in the queue for long enough I know how painful it is.
Like lot of other people on this forum said, try to rise above what is GOOD FOR ME and I will only support IV if it does ONLY that. Someday there might be a law that affects you more than the majority and you will need the all legal immigrants voice to help you out.
Is the cumulative effect of all three measures good for me (reduced wait time, or no change in wait time), or bad for me (increased wait time.)?
I read this, and I was referring to this:
So, does recapture and the increase in quota and the removal of the country limits, result in a greater wait time for me, as the comment above seems to imply. It would, if the recapture and the increase are not large enough to offset the effects of the removal of the per-country limit on ROW.
Coz if it does, then I don't have an incentive to support your goals, do I?
girlfriend How The Maid In The Dominique Strauss-Kahn Case Lost Her Credibility
PlainSpeak
01-13 12:44 PM
I think you should start EB3India.org (not affiliated to IV) similar to EB3Chinese.org
There is an old chinese saying
Be careful what you wish for it just might come true
There is an old chinese saying
Be careful what you wish for it just might come true
hairstyles dominique strauss-kahn maid
alisa
06-27 10:00 PM
Yes I agree.. But if they don't move date foward then they can't approve those backlog applications.And they don't want to loose 40,000 visas . Now when they made all date current, they can approve all those pending application which are complete and just waiting for date to become current. Now we don't know real number and don't know how long it will take USCIS to do all approvals. But if they approve 40,000 in 2 weeks, I won't be surprised if they make it 'U' like other workers.
But then question still remains why they made all current. They could have just moved it by year or so.. And I am sure they know how many application they can expect in July.. I already saw some where that we have around more then 80,000 approved perm.. All they going to apply.. And what about all whose labor just got approved fro Backlog centers?
Its making everybody confused.. But its not in our hand and we can't do anything. Best thing is to file asap and just hope for best and we are always ready for worst..
Just think if they make date 'U' in middle of july, how many member going to loose money. Each of us spent so much money this month and if nothing happens that we loose all of it.
Are you sure about 80000 PERM?
I recall seeing somewhere that for the entire 2006, there were about 6000 PERMs.
But then question still remains why they made all current. They could have just moved it by year or so.. And I am sure they know how many application they can expect in July.. I already saw some where that we have around more then 80,000 approved perm.. All they going to apply.. And what about all whose labor just got approved fro Backlog centers?
Its making everybody confused.. But its not in our hand and we can't do anything. Best thing is to file asap and just hope for best and we are always ready for worst..
Just think if they make date 'U' in middle of july, how many member going to loose money. Each of us spent so much money this month and if nothing happens that we loose all of it.
Are you sure about 80000 PERM?
I recall seeing somewhere that for the entire 2006, there were about 6000 PERMs.
gimme_GC2006
05-03 09:12 AM
as long as puppet Mannu and ring mistress sonia are in New delhi, Indian govt will do nothing...I dont support LTTE at any cost but condemn civilian killing.
:mad:
:mad:
qvadis
02-13 06:44 PM
Before AC21, the spill over goes vertically.
After AC21, the spill over should go horizontally.
Now ROW experts, post your comment for this hypothitical example ..
Lets assume there are 100 unused visas in EB2 catagory in a calender quarter. Worldwide EB damand is more than 140,000. Now, how will you assisn those numbers if it is before AC21 period and if it is after AC21 period.
If you say in both cases it goes to EB3-ROW, then we are not stupid to listien.
(a) INA 202(a)(3) states that the total number of visas available under both subsections (a) and (b) [...] exceeds the number of qualified immigrants [...] (2) shall not apply [...]. In your case, there are no excess visas available for FB immigrants.
(b) INA 202(e) Special Rules for Countries at Ceiling. requires that additional visas are distributed according to the world-wide distribution across FB and EB categories. Of the 100 unused visas 77 would have to be alloted to FB, and only 22 to EB categories. Assuming a 1/3 distribution in EB categories EB1, EB2, EB3, 7 would go to EB2.
If USCIS cannot follow this rule, those 100 visas would be unused for that fiscal year.
With AC21, the 100 can be assigned to oversubscribed countries, if Visas are available, ie. demand in all categories is less than supply. With EB3-ROW retrogressed, that is not the case.
Just the way I see it....
After AC21, the spill over should go horizontally.
Now ROW experts, post your comment for this hypothitical example ..
Lets assume there are 100 unused visas in EB2 catagory in a calender quarter. Worldwide EB damand is more than 140,000. Now, how will you assisn those numbers if it is before AC21 period and if it is after AC21 period.
If you say in both cases it goes to EB3-ROW, then we are not stupid to listien.
(a) INA 202(a)(3) states that the total number of visas available under both subsections (a) and (b) [...] exceeds the number of qualified immigrants [...] (2) shall not apply [...]. In your case, there are no excess visas available for FB immigrants.
(b) INA 202(e) Special Rules for Countries at Ceiling. requires that additional visas are distributed according to the world-wide distribution across FB and EB categories. Of the 100 unused visas 77 would have to be alloted to FB, and only 22 to EB categories. Assuming a 1/3 distribution in EB categories EB1, EB2, EB3, 7 would go to EB2.
If USCIS cannot follow this rule, those 100 visas would be unused for that fiscal year.
With AC21, the 100 can be assigned to oversubscribed countries, if Visas are available, ie. demand in all categories is less than supply. With EB3-ROW retrogressed, that is not the case.
Just the way I see it....
No comments:
Post a Comment