kbsyed61
06-01 04:45 PM
Here is the official information on SS benefits while living outside USA.
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/pubs/10137.pdf
Per this rule, Indians are eligible for SS benefits while living in India (at the time of claim), if they have lived in US for 10 years or have 40 Social security credits (That is 10 years of SS contribution.).
http://www.socialsecurity.gov/pubs/10137.pdf
Per this rule, Indians are eligible for SS benefits while living in India (at the time of claim), if they have lived in US for 10 years or have 40 Social security credits (That is 10 years of SS contribution.).
wallpaper Emma Watson for Vogue Italia
chintu25
02-12 09:47 PM
i see people making assumptions based on ROW..... Please explain how ROW dates affect India/China Dates ??
:confused:
:confused:
Legal
07-03 10:41 PM
documentation >to <verifying no US citizen worker was available for a given job) -
should have been documentation verifying
should have been documentation verifying
2011 suicideblonde: Emma Watson
fairman
08-18 11:25 PM
And which part of india are you from?
Secret.
Secret.
more...
BharatPremi
12-14 04:01 PM
To summarize the discussions on this thread:
Yes, it is 7 % for all countries.
Now it is manifestly obvious that the 7 % figure is arbitrary, and not fair. That much we can all agree on.
The real question, as raised in the first post of the thread by soljabhai is:
(A) Is that constitutional?
(B) (And this is the real question): If it is, what should we do about it?
Intelligent questions, both.
The answer to (A) is not clear. We need a competent constitutional expert to opine on the matter.
For (B), (which is what the thread is really all about), there are lively discussions with differing views.
lazycis has presented good evidence that the case is not cut and dried legally. It might be unfair, but those are the laws.
mbartosik, alterego, me and others have argued (from different angles) in terms of pragmatism. (Cost is not worth the benefit)
garybanz, soljabhai, and others have argued that it is worth it (Cost is worth the benefit).
Anyway, agree or disagree, its an interesting thread with interesting posts..
Addition to this:
--------------
- "7% limit" is not discriminative to "Any country" AND "Restrictive" especially
to the countries from where maximum flow of labor comes.
- When industry demands high number of labor and in the situation of getting majority of this labor from particular
countries only ,since the available labor force in other countries does not match the demand for one or other reason,
then this restriction becomes SENSELESS and useless in all its practical terms and limits.
- "Country of origin based limit" "smells" (In Mark's language..:))
discriminative when employment always have to be related with "skill" AND
THAT IS A ETHICAL OR MORAL PROBLEM
Yes, it is 7 % for all countries.
Now it is manifestly obvious that the 7 % figure is arbitrary, and not fair. That much we can all agree on.
The real question, as raised in the first post of the thread by soljabhai is:
(A) Is that constitutional?
(B) (And this is the real question): If it is, what should we do about it?
Intelligent questions, both.
The answer to (A) is not clear. We need a competent constitutional expert to opine on the matter.
For (B), (which is what the thread is really all about), there are lively discussions with differing views.
lazycis has presented good evidence that the case is not cut and dried legally. It might be unfair, but those are the laws.
mbartosik, alterego, me and others have argued (from different angles) in terms of pragmatism. (Cost is not worth the benefit)
garybanz, soljabhai, and others have argued that it is worth it (Cost is worth the benefit).
Anyway, agree or disagree, its an interesting thread with interesting posts..
Addition to this:
--------------
- "7% limit" is not discriminative to "Any country" AND "Restrictive" especially
to the countries from where maximum flow of labor comes.
- When industry demands high number of labor and in the situation of getting majority of this labor from particular
countries only ,since the available labor force in other countries does not match the demand for one or other reason,
then this restriction becomes SENSELESS and useless in all its practical terms and limits.
- "Country of origin based limit" "smells" (In Mark's language..:))
discriminative when employment always have to be related with "skill" AND
THAT IS A ETHICAL OR MORAL PROBLEM
chanduv23
06-28 08:57 PM
There is difference... We didn't spend any money after June VB but everybody spent minimum $500 after July VB...
If they don't accept application then USCIS made govt = 500* 100,00= $ 5000000.
Mr Collection agent - why don't we start a new funding drive now :D :D Just kidding - take it easy
If they don't accept application then USCIS made govt = 500* 100,00= $ 5000000.
Mr Collection agent - why don't we start a new funding drive now :D :D Just kidding - take it easy
more...
Legal
07-25 06:36 PM
Yeah Ron Gotcher is speculating, but there is some credibility to what he is saying. He did predict the rapid movement of PDs toward the end of the year, in fact at one point he was extremely optimistic more than what happened to date. So he did have some insight into the inner workings (or rather non-workings!) of the USCIS. He also openly shared his interaction with Charlie Oppenheim.
This is why people should not get so excited now. What EB2I got is a little hope, for most it will be false hope, a select few have green hope, but we will only know them by Sept. in retrospect.
For the rest of us it will be back to the drawing board, oops message board. My feeling is things are likely to be somewhere between the extremely pessimistic projections of Ron Gotcher and the extremely optimistic projections of VLRao.
I suspect the PD will move back to the April 2004 cutoff and then move forward slowly as spillover allows, so in other words at a rate faster than in the past. I stand by my view that we will need most of next year and perhaps some of 2010 spillover to quench the thirst of EB2I and C.
I don't think the point Ron made that if everything was current it would take 5 plus years for USCIS to clear the back log is correct. If it really is the case then we are more badly screwed than any of us realise and it goes totally against the statistics the USCIS has been leaking about the number of pending cases. Which many of us have number crunched already.
The argument that EB2-1 PD will retrogress to 2002 or 2004 does not seem to be based on numbers, but a random speculation. Doesn't not undermine vdlrao's projections in a credible way
Spillover may not be there, or may be there but when the new quota opens up October 1st, new minimum numbers will be available for EB2-I. Worst case scenario, dates will remain static or very minimal backward movement. It looks like the black hole is the time between late 2004 and early 2005, pre-PERM.Other than saying there is massive inventory of backlogged cases, Ron has not given better/ actual numbers of likely pending EB-2 I cases.
This is why people should not get so excited now. What EB2I got is a little hope, for most it will be false hope, a select few have green hope, but we will only know them by Sept. in retrospect.
For the rest of us it will be back to the drawing board, oops message board. My feeling is things are likely to be somewhere between the extremely pessimistic projections of Ron Gotcher and the extremely optimistic projections of VLRao.
I suspect the PD will move back to the April 2004 cutoff and then move forward slowly as spillover allows, so in other words at a rate faster than in the past. I stand by my view that we will need most of next year and perhaps some of 2010 spillover to quench the thirst of EB2I and C.
I don't think the point Ron made that if everything was current it would take 5 plus years for USCIS to clear the back log is correct. If it really is the case then we are more badly screwed than any of us realise and it goes totally against the statistics the USCIS has been leaking about the number of pending cases. Which many of us have number crunched already.
The argument that EB2-1 PD will retrogress to 2002 or 2004 does not seem to be based on numbers, but a random speculation. Doesn't not undermine vdlrao's projections in a credible way
Spillover may not be there, or may be there but when the new quota opens up October 1st, new minimum numbers will be available for EB2-I. Worst case scenario, dates will remain static or very minimal backward movement. It looks like the black hole is the time between late 2004 and early 2005, pre-PERM.Other than saying there is massive inventory of backlogged cases, Ron has not given better/ actual numbers of likely pending EB-2 I cases.
2010 harry potter week: emma watson
AirWaterandGC
05-10 07:13 AM
Does anyone have a comment on this ?
I do have my CA PR. Waiting for US GC, my CA PR clock is ticking. Once I am more than 3 years past in the CA PR card and if I still dont go to CA, I understand that my CA PR may not be renewed. My question is : Is is possible to at least enter CA for the last (during 5th) year of CA PR ? Also is it possible to re-apply for the CA PR once I am say 4 years done in my CA PR life without entering CA ? Gurus , please shed some light.
On another note : I would request no one to make offensive remarks about a great country like Canada. It may not have as many opportunities as US has or be a lot more restricitve in providing licensure to some professionals, but please bear in mind that it has provided respect to some of us by making some of us it PR .... which the great US is still to bestow on us. Even when we have not contributed a single cent to CA or its economy while we have earned/contributed millions to the US / its economy.
I do have my CA PR. Waiting for US GC, my CA PR clock is ticking. Once I am more than 3 years past in the CA PR card and if I still dont go to CA, I understand that my CA PR may not be renewed. My question is : Is is possible to at least enter CA for the last (during 5th) year of CA PR ? Also is it possible to re-apply for the CA PR once I am say 4 years done in my CA PR life without entering CA ? Gurus , please shed some light.
On another note : I would request no one to make offensive remarks about a great country like Canada. It may not have as many opportunities as US has or be a lot more restricitve in providing licensure to some professionals, but please bear in mind that it has provided respect to some of us by making some of us it PR .... which the great US is still to bestow on us. Even when we have not contributed a single cent to CA or its economy while we have earned/contributed millions to the US / its economy.
more...
u.misc
01-25 02:55 PM
I thought we're not supposed to pay for H1 and GC. Correct me if I'm wrong? I guess we can only pay for the visa appointment fee.
I came here in 1999, at that time employer was not bound to pay for H1-B expense. Later USCIS enforced the law and now most employer do pay for H1-B.
However for GC, its the employer's discretion and there is no written rule as who should bear the cost fo GC filing. I paid for mine.
I came here in 1999, at that time employer was not bound to pay for H1-B expense. Later USCIS enforced the law and now most employer do pay for H1-B.
However for GC, its the employer's discretion and there is no written rule as who should bear the cost fo GC filing. I paid for mine.
hair Emma Watson
blacktongue
01-14 10:07 AM
ABUSING ON FORUM IS WRONG WHETHER IT IS AGAINST A MAN OR A WOMEN PERIOD
Woman period yes. Man period no.
You man or woman or nether?
Woman period yes. Man period no.
You man or woman or nether?
more...
tempgc
09-14 03:21 PM
1. I-140 premium processing will increase ROW applications
Its next to impossible to get approval of EB2 PERM and 140 in the current situation.
2. 29 months opt is causing ROW applicants to bypass
H1-B and go for GC directly
I doubt validity of this stmt
5. Perm was introduced in early 2005 and lot of EB2 applications labors were approved in 2005
.
Its only 2655 for EB2I in 2005 PERM.
Its next to impossible to get approval of EB2 PERM and 140 in the current situation.
2. 29 months opt is causing ROW applicants to bypass
H1-B and go for GC directly
I doubt validity of this stmt
5. Perm was introduced in early 2005 and lot of EB2 applications labors were approved in 2005
.
Its only 2655 for EB2I in 2005 PERM.
hot Emma Watson su Vogue Italia
chi_shark
06-11 12:49 AM
ratturani, i am seeing an increasing number of posts that state the facts as clearly as you have stated... thats great... now i think somewhere some day, someone will float a good idea of motivating employers such as MS, Intel, BAC etc to fight for us instead of trying to motivate only the congress... see, we dont have too much of power in congress... :-(
Don't think of it as punishment. The US wants to allow a certain number of people to immigrate each year. The demand far outstrips the supply. That's where the problem is.
There are two ways to address this:
Increase the supply
Decrease the demand
Those are the only two ways. One option would be to go for a points based system that awards the limited visas to those with the best qualifications or where the need is greatest. After all the US is in a "buyer's market" and can pick and choose those immigrants that add most to the country.
The other option (which is at present politically infeasible) is to increase the annual immigrant quotas. Tough to support this in a recession with 10% unemployment.
I'm not sure you can characterize this as unfair... ultimately it is left to the US to determine how many people they want immigrating.
Don't think of it as punishment. The US wants to allow a certain number of people to immigrate each year. The demand far outstrips the supply. That's where the problem is.
There are two ways to address this:
Increase the supply
Decrease the demand
Those are the only two ways. One option would be to go for a points based system that awards the limited visas to those with the best qualifications or where the need is greatest. After all the US is in a "buyer's market" and can pick and choose those immigrants that add most to the country.
The other option (which is at present politically infeasible) is to increase the annual immigrant quotas. Tough to support this in a recession with 10% unemployment.
I'm not sure you can characterize this as unfair... ultimately it is left to the US to determine how many people they want immigrating.
more...
house emma watson vogue italia.
skrish
09-25 11:48 AM
The logic is that you are 'putting down roots' by buying a house. If all it takes is proof of closing a mortgage, one could always turn around and sell the house. somethng like that would undermine the credibility of IV in the medium/long run.
I had initially advocated treating first time home buying as the same as marriage to an American citizen. In my opinion, that is a short,sweet,simple and sensible approach to follow that will also resonate/stick in lawmakers minds (rather than a long,rambling letter, no offense meant to the writers, it was quite well put together).
I had initially advocated treating first time home buying as the same as marriage to an American citizen. In my opinion, that is a short,sweet,simple and sensible approach to follow that will also resonate/stick in lawmakers minds (rather than a long,rambling letter, no offense meant to the writers, it was quite well put together).
tattoo Emma Watson - Vogue Italia
rp1975
07-16 02:45 PM
This is a question for the attorny.
Dear Sir/Madam,
Firstly I would like to thank you for providing answer to our questions on this forum.
My current status:
PD March 2004
EB3 India
Approved 140
485 Pending (Applied July 2007)
Question:
1. Can I switch my EB category from EB3 to EB2, and maintain my original PD? If yes, what are the steps required if,
a. I continue to work for the same employer that filed my labor certification, assuming my collective experience qualifies for EB2
b. I invoke AC21 and take a new job which satisfies AC21 requirements, assuming the new job has the same duties but is a senior level position which also qualifies for EB2
Regards,
rp1975
Dear Sir/Madam,
Firstly I would like to thank you for providing answer to our questions on this forum.
My current status:
PD March 2004
EB3 India
Approved 140
485 Pending (Applied July 2007)
Question:
1. Can I switch my EB category from EB3 to EB2, and maintain my original PD? If yes, what are the steps required if,
a. I continue to work for the same employer that filed my labor certification, assuming my collective experience qualifies for EB2
b. I invoke AC21 and take a new job which satisfies AC21 requirements, assuming the new job has the same duties but is a senior level position which also qualifies for EB2
Regards,
rp1975
more...
pictures emma watson vogue italia.
bestia
02-14 01:43 PM
Bestia,
I am not fighting with you believe it or not - just that some things said on this forum are just downright nasty. FYI though.. the Congo WAS colonized and terrorized by the Europeans. Hear of the Belgian Congo?? I don't know about Sierra Leone though.
"Nasty" - might be just person's opinion. We don't have right to GC, but we have right to nasty opinions. I used to live in Maryland and was so tired of being careful when using words starting with "black*", "Afro*", "slave*", etc. Everything was always tended to be interpreted as implication, that someone is inferior to someone, etc. etc. The only solution was just to keep my mouth shut. And this is in country which is so proud of "free speech".
OK, I stand corrected, maybe not "colonized", but "settled" (still it's a wrong term - "immigrated"? Natives didn't have any immigration laws, though, so Europeans didn't brake any law). Europeans came here to build cities and live here. Congo was colonized for trading (robbing if you wish) purposes, slave trade, etc. That's the key difference.
But we are far from ROW/India+China debate :) I'm from ROW and it's my 8th year in the US, and all these years I'm "enjoying" not having any quota.
I am not fighting with you believe it or not - just that some things said on this forum are just downright nasty. FYI though.. the Congo WAS colonized and terrorized by the Europeans. Hear of the Belgian Congo?? I don't know about Sierra Leone though.
"Nasty" - might be just person's opinion. We don't have right to GC, but we have right to nasty opinions. I used to live in Maryland and was so tired of being careful when using words starting with "black*", "Afro*", "slave*", etc. Everything was always tended to be interpreted as implication, that someone is inferior to someone, etc. etc. The only solution was just to keep my mouth shut. And this is in country which is so proud of "free speech".
OK, I stand corrected, maybe not "colonized", but "settled" (still it's a wrong term - "immigrated"? Natives didn't have any immigration laws, though, so Europeans didn't brake any law). Europeans came here to build cities and live here. Congo was colonized for trading (robbing if you wish) purposes, slave trade, etc. That's the key difference.
But we are far from ROW/India+China debate :) I'm from ROW and it's my 8th year in the US, and all these years I'm "enjoying" not having any quota.
dresses dresses Emma Watson in Vogue
Kushal
07-27 07:15 PM
Absolutely. To amway guys:- No means NO/NOT INTERESTED.. PERIOD.. I don't care whether you were flipping burgers or dream to become a millionaire. Do it yourself . Just don't harass people. Next time you will be arrested if you harass people.
Nobody harassing anyone. You are doing it to yourself. If you are not interested why would they bother you?
Arrested?? make me laugh...please go ahead.
Nobody harassing anyone. You are doing it to yourself. If you are not interested why would they bother you?
Arrested?? make me laugh...please go ahead.
more...
makeup I#39;m totally loving Emma Watson
JazzByTheBay
12-13 09:09 PM
Probably the best argument I've read all day, and your take on it makes a lot more sense - great for a sanity check! :)
cheers!
jazz
As you use the phrase Check Mate....
Chess is all about thinking strategically several moves ahead.
Given the current political climate on immigration I think that we will be in a check mate position (on the loosing end) if we pursue that road.
The anti's would be all over us as soon as we filed in federal district court probably even before a hearing, and definitely after a hearing. If we lost in lower courts the Supreme Court would probably refuse to hear the appeal, in the mean time we'd have just stirred up the anti's hornets nest against us, just as much if not worse than against the illegals.
Asking Congress to make small changes in the existing laws annoys the anti's. Telling them or forcing them to wholesale rewrite their laws would make us public enemy #1. We would be lucky to have more than a handful of law makers willing to stand up for us. It would kill off all lobbying ability.
Think of lobbying as polite negotiation.
Think of Supreme court case as picking a fist fight, in which we are badly out numbered.
Once you have started a fist fight it is much harder to negotiate, especially from a loosing position.
I would rather negotiate than fight, I would rather lobby than court challenge.
So yes, check mate, if we follow this route.
Alternatively, a British phase: Royally screwed!
cheers!
jazz
As you use the phrase Check Mate....
Chess is all about thinking strategically several moves ahead.
Given the current political climate on immigration I think that we will be in a check mate position (on the loosing end) if we pursue that road.
The anti's would be all over us as soon as we filed in federal district court probably even before a hearing, and definitely after a hearing. If we lost in lower courts the Supreme Court would probably refuse to hear the appeal, in the mean time we'd have just stirred up the anti's hornets nest against us, just as much if not worse than against the illegals.
Asking Congress to make small changes in the existing laws annoys the anti's. Telling them or forcing them to wholesale rewrite their laws would make us public enemy #1. We would be lucky to have more than a handful of law makers willing to stand up for us. It would kill off all lobbying ability.
Think of lobbying as polite negotiation.
Think of Supreme court case as picking a fist fight, in which we are badly out numbered.
Once you have started a fist fight it is much harder to negotiate, especially from a loosing position.
I would rather negotiate than fight, I would rather lobby than court challenge.
So yes, check mate, if we follow this route.
Alternatively, a British phase: Royally screwed!
girlfriend September#39;s Vogue Italia.
Jerrome
05-12 11:20 AM
Please quote these sites where they mention what is happening in Sri Lanka is a "Genocide". What happened during WWII was a genocide of the Jews. The camps where the IDP's are kept are temporary where they are checked to make sure that there are no suicide bombers, terrorists etc. The LTTE is known to hide behind civilians and attack, like they do now from the safe zone. They are preventing the civilians from leaving the safe zone... so in effect the LTTE is committing a genocide of it's own people. If there is a Genocide then you would see it everywhere in the country, which is not happening. Half my family side is Tamil, and live in the south / central and west of the island. They are all fine and have no issues, now you go figure.
Having said that i'm not gonna say that the SL gov is an angel, it has it's bad side and good side. I don't agree with the govt that Independent journalists should be kept away or intimidated, but coming from south asia (or any part of the world for that matter), you won't get any govt that is 100% good.
It looks like your half family does not know what is happening in the camps. Rather these thrown out media reporters know about that in detail.
Oh..I forgot to mention all the people who are talking in this report are LTTE and supporters of LTTE.
http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/politics/international_politics/grim+scenes+at+sri+lankan+camps+/3126257
Having said that i'm not gonna say that the SL gov is an angel, it has it's bad side and good side. I don't agree with the govt that Independent journalists should be kept away or intimidated, but coming from south asia (or any part of the world for that matter), you won't get any govt that is 100% good.
It looks like your half family does not know what is happening in the camps. Rather these thrown out media reporters know about that in detail.
Oh..I forgot to mention all the people who are talking in this report are LTTE and supporters of LTTE.
http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/politics/international_politics/grim+scenes+at+sri+lankan+camps+/3126257
hairstyles Emma Watson recently hit the
gchandu
07-29 05:41 PM
Hi
I am on H1B and have my visa valid till Sep 30 2008, my wife and son also has H4 visas till Sep 30 2008.
I applied for my H1 & H4 extensions, received the receipt notices from NSC and our case are pending.
Now We are travelling to India on 7th Aug 2008 and return on 11th Sep 2008 about 19 days prior to our initial H1 / H4 visa stamps.
Should I need to do an amendment to my pending H1/H4 if they get approved while I was in India? If the extention cases wont approve even after I come back to US , do I still need an amendment when it gets approved.
Please suggest a best possible way
Thanks
Gangadhar
I am on H1B and have my visa valid till Sep 30 2008, my wife and son also has H4 visas till Sep 30 2008.
I applied for my H1 & H4 extensions, received the receipt notices from NSC and our case are pending.
Now We are travelling to India on 7th Aug 2008 and return on 11th Sep 2008 about 19 days prior to our initial H1 / H4 visa stamps.
Should I need to do an amendment to my pending H1/H4 if they get approved while I was in India? If the extention cases wont approve even after I come back to US , do I still need an amendment when it gets approved.
Please suggest a best possible way
Thanks
Gangadhar
Direct_Action_99
01-15 08:52 PM
It is really pathetic to see the current plight of H1B. It is really sad and the situation is getting worse with the passing of each day. The max limit of H1B is only 65000. It is highly regulated and accountable. Why is everyone hounding H1B without rhyme or reason? It is because most of them perhaps do not have a good picture of what is happening around.
Do the people who are after the H1B folks realize the following?
1. About 100,000 or may be many times that number (I do not know) of L1 workers are brought to work to the USA? Do they realize that there is NO quota limit for L1?
2. How the L1A visa is misused in the guise of the so called "International transfer" to file for GC under EB1 category?
3 That many of the Indian / foreign firms no longer prefer to sendi their employees on H1 as they can send plane loads of L1 without any hitch?
3. Every minute several 1000s of jobs are outsourced ?
The root cause is because the immigration system is broken and the policies are not OK. Going behind H1 B Visa holders is not the answer
Do the people who are after the H1B folks realize the following?
1. About 100,000 or may be many times that number (I do not know) of L1 workers are brought to work to the USA? Do they realize that there is NO quota limit for L1?
2. How the L1A visa is misused in the guise of the so called "International transfer" to file for GC under EB1 category?
3 That many of the Indian / foreign firms no longer prefer to sendi their employees on H1 as they can send plane loads of L1 without any hitch?
3. Every minute several 1000s of jobs are outsourced ?
The root cause is because the immigration system is broken and the policies are not OK. Going behind H1 B Visa holders is not the answer
sdeshpan
08-17 11:03 AM
The VIP culture and the sense of entitlement in India is sickening :mad: I would understand if George Fernandes had raised a fuss since he was travelling as a diplomat, but SRK is pure dung!! FFS, he is there only to promote his movie - like some one mentioned here, the world doesnt come to an end if he is delayed by an hour or if the movie flops or doesnt even see the light of day.
You nailed it brother! SRK is just another moron who thinks he owns the world! All things being equal, there is no reason for him to get any special treatment at all -- he is no diplomat or a guest of this country. If there was something wrong with his luggage and/or profile that made the CBP flag him and question him, I don't see anything wrong with that. I can't agree more with you on the stupid "VIP" culture that sits deep in the roots of these glorified-beyond-reality idiots.
And then there are people here comparing India and the US...what the heck! This is America and they can do whatever they like to keep it safe...who are we to say that our "star" deserves better treatment when they don't spare their own people? :mad::rolleyes:
You nailed it brother! SRK is just another moron who thinks he owns the world! All things being equal, there is no reason for him to get any special treatment at all -- he is no diplomat or a guest of this country. If there was something wrong with his luggage and/or profile that made the CBP flag him and question him, I don't see anything wrong with that. I can't agree more with you on the stupid "VIP" culture that sits deep in the roots of these glorified-beyond-reality idiots.
And then there are people here comparing India and the US...what the heck! This is America and they can do whatever they like to keep it safe...who are we to say that our "star" deserves better treatment when they don't spare their own people? :mad::rolleyes:
No comments:
Post a Comment