saps
10-29 01:50 PM
I don't think waiting for GC will be such a big problem if we can get relief from Government related to flexibility in job change (just like after getting GC), option to opt for FT school, etc... We can request immediate relief to GC community that if their I-485 is pending for more than 2 years (say), they should be granted a temp. intermediate status which should allow them to change jobs which are not neccessarily similar or on same payscale, flexibility to opt as FT student if they want to..... If we get this flexibility, I don't think waiting for GC is going to hurt so much. We have tried so much to get the GC quota increased but nothing has worked. May be we should focus on small things like this first. Just thinking aloud.
wallpaper kate moss style book.
msp1976
02-13 04:04 PM
This is why I mean USCIS/DOS was lazy. If there is total visas for the year (hypothetical 160,000). then only 40,000 are available by quarter. If there is 50,000 applications in the que then there is retrogression. Remember if there is more demand then what can be approved by quarter then retrogression.
So what this means is that if there is 400,000 approved I-140's but only 300,000 greencards then 7% limit would apply because there are more people in the que then what can be approved by quarter. Therefore, ROW people would still be able to file throughout the year and then whatever is left in the fourth quarter that ROW hasn't used then it would spillover. Therefore, it would still give ROW people to continue filing and taking the visas while the 7% countires have to sit and wait for breadcrumbs until the fourth quarter.
In the first three quarter the 'heavy' countries(India/China) would get numbers until the 7% caps hits and in the fourth quarter they would get the big chunck...
If the law contains a 'continous recapture' provision( anything not used this year get recaptured again immediately for next year...) then it would not be long befor e all categories become current....By the way 'continous recapture' is one of the IV goals...
Pl. Correct me if I am wrong....
Now I have really started to appreciate the IV goals listed on the front page.....
IV core team have gone through all this junk long before we got started and the goals take care of every point raised until now....
So what this means is that if there is 400,000 approved I-140's but only 300,000 greencards then 7% limit would apply because there are more people in the que then what can be approved by quarter. Therefore, ROW people would still be able to file throughout the year and then whatever is left in the fourth quarter that ROW hasn't used then it would spillover. Therefore, it would still give ROW people to continue filing and taking the visas while the 7% countires have to sit and wait for breadcrumbs until the fourth quarter.
In the first three quarter the 'heavy' countries(India/China) would get numbers until the 7% caps hits and in the fourth quarter they would get the big chunck...
If the law contains a 'continous recapture' provision( anything not used this year get recaptured again immediately for next year...) then it would not be long befor e all categories become current....By the way 'continous recapture' is one of the IV goals...
Pl. Correct me if I am wrong....
Now I have really started to appreciate the IV goals listed on the front page.....
IV core team have gone through all this junk long before we got started and the goals take care of every point raised until now....
ita
03-30 01:13 PM
I didn't know Lord Rama was part of BJP's manifesto this time.
You are so stuck with 90's. MMS brought economic reforms in 90's so he's reforms guy even though he didn't bring any in his current term.
LK was Lord Rama guy in 90's so he is Lord Rama guy even now.Just check BJP manifesto this time.
Santhan and the like(s)...I'm just breaking it down here...
Like I said in my previous posts religion is played heavily by MMS govt (read as Sonia...I'm sure MMS is a nice person) 4000 Missionaries came to India in last 5 years.More 4000 may come if you give them chance.Now nothing wrong with it generally speaking (except that only christian missionaries were granted visas and Jewsih groups were denied visas) but something wrong if we go by your 'I'don't care if Sankaracharya is jailed,I don't care for lord Rama guys' attitude.
Now these missionaries are setting up miracle boxes ,so far in rural areas, where poor people that drop their wishes in the box see miracles happening.Only hitch is entire family has to convert to Christianity.Yeah abuse of poverty.But there is discrimination (hoping that when you speak of poor you speak of poor of all religions)even in miracles.Some how these missionaries don't dare to mess with Muslim poor.So Muslim poor are left alone. Neither your MMS wrapped State does anything to alleviate their poverty nor these missionaries shower their miracles on them.
BTW it's not poor and Sankaracharya alone there are also other religious(for now Hindu) leaders in their list(Satya Sai Baba, Mata Amritanandamayee, Shri Shri Ravi Shanker Maharaj and many more) Now what's common in them apart from being Hindu leaders they are also immensely into helping your favorite poor people (no conversions though,you don't want to believe me just check out Mata Amritanandamayee's social service camps not for just Hindus all over the world.)
Now if a doctor doesn't get patients how will he survive?
Same way how will missionaries conduct their business if the poor and needy are helped .It's assured State won't help these poor population.Those who are helping them should go to jails so their popularity gets a dent among the masses.(not that their service stops anyways) So you MMS wrapper is facilitating all this.
I know too much stuff but our biased/bought media won't highlight these facts.Remember how A.P High court held media for setting up a 'media trial' even before anything was proved in Sankaracharya case?(nothing was proved till date but since you don't care let's not go there)
So your favorite MMS govt was busy with such things so far.
I know ignorance is bliss but know that bliss will not last long.
I am not saying MMS is the best....but better than others. Do you believe the so called Left the savior of our country. I am not bothering who is ruling or not. My only worry - what is done for our future. I strongly believe Left was the speed bump to the development of the country. Mr.Advani dont have anything but Ram Temple. I hardly see any value in that. He runs his politics based on religon and Ram temple. Let him put the plan and vision for out future, to build stronger India....I will be the first one to vote for him.
You are so stuck with 90's. MMS brought economic reforms in 90's so he's reforms guy even though he didn't bring any in his current term.
LK was Lord Rama guy in 90's so he is Lord Rama guy even now.Just check BJP manifesto this time.
Santhan and the like(s)...I'm just breaking it down here...
Like I said in my previous posts religion is played heavily by MMS govt (read as Sonia...I'm sure MMS is a nice person) 4000 Missionaries came to India in last 5 years.More 4000 may come if you give them chance.Now nothing wrong with it generally speaking (except that only christian missionaries were granted visas and Jewsih groups were denied visas) but something wrong if we go by your 'I'don't care if Sankaracharya is jailed,I don't care for lord Rama guys' attitude.
Now these missionaries are setting up miracle boxes ,so far in rural areas, where poor people that drop their wishes in the box see miracles happening.Only hitch is entire family has to convert to Christianity.Yeah abuse of poverty.But there is discrimination (hoping that when you speak of poor you speak of poor of all religions)even in miracles.Some how these missionaries don't dare to mess with Muslim poor.So Muslim poor are left alone. Neither your MMS wrapped State does anything to alleviate their poverty nor these missionaries shower their miracles on them.
BTW it's not poor and Sankaracharya alone there are also other religious(for now Hindu) leaders in their list(Satya Sai Baba, Mata Amritanandamayee, Shri Shri Ravi Shanker Maharaj and many more) Now what's common in them apart from being Hindu leaders they are also immensely into helping your favorite poor people (no conversions though,you don't want to believe me just check out Mata Amritanandamayee's social service camps not for just Hindus all over the world.)
Now if a doctor doesn't get patients how will he survive?
Same way how will missionaries conduct their business if the poor and needy are helped .It's assured State won't help these poor population.Those who are helping them should go to jails so their popularity gets a dent among the masses.(not that their service stops anyways) So you MMS wrapper is facilitating all this.
I know too much stuff but our biased/bought media won't highlight these facts.Remember how A.P High court held media for setting up a 'media trial' even before anything was proved in Sankaracharya case?(nothing was proved till date but since you don't care let's not go there)
So your favorite MMS govt was busy with such things so far.
I know ignorance is bliss but know that bliss will not last long.
I am not saying MMS is the best....but better than others. Do you believe the so called Left the savior of our country. I am not bothering who is ruling or not. My only worry - what is done for our future. I strongly believe Left was the speed bump to the development of the country. Mr.Advani dont have anything but Ram Temple. I hardly see any value in that. He runs his politics based on religon and Ram temple. Let him put the plan and vision for out future, to build stronger India....I will be the first one to vote for him.
2011 makeup Kate Moss Fashion Style
admin
12-31 07:22 PM
Very good find logiclife. Hope we can get such good points across to our legislators.
more...
bayarea07
07-26 01:54 PM
I have been to just one of their meetings in bay area and found it to be a bit childish and full of fake people, people trying hard to portray themselve to be your best friend when in reality they are not
unseenguy
01-09 02:44 PM
Hello Gurus,
My priority date is Aug 11 , 2006(EB2) and my 6 year H1B ends Sept 2011. Is there any chance the priority dates will move to Aug 2006 levels in FY2010? Or in FY2011? I am really worried because these days people are getting rejections for H1 renewals. When my time comes for renewal I want to have the EAD as a backup in case H1 renewal gets rejected.
Please let me know your thoughts on movement to Aug 2006 before Sept 2011.
Thanks.
Why are you so worried? Dont be scared, make enough money and dont make silly financial decision. You can take your kitty back if push comes to shove. Economies in India and China are booming and you wont die hungry. I guarantee you that.
My priority date is Aug 11 , 2006(EB2) and my 6 year H1B ends Sept 2011. Is there any chance the priority dates will move to Aug 2006 levels in FY2010? Or in FY2011? I am really worried because these days people are getting rejections for H1 renewals. When my time comes for renewal I want to have the EAD as a backup in case H1 renewal gets rejected.
Please let me know your thoughts on movement to Aug 2006 before Sept 2011.
Thanks.
Why are you so worried? Dont be scared, make enough money and dont make silly financial decision. You can take your kitty back if push comes to shove. Economies in India and China are booming and you wont die hungry. I guarantee you that.
more...
ita
03-30 02:56 PM
For all we know we may not be casting our vote but it is very important to know what is going on around us and this discussion is like a reality check though I agree immigration forum may not be the right place for this discussion.
Coming back to MMS,Advani-going by the qualities you attributed to these guys MMS is like that exquisite diamond that will always sit inside the locked case who can only tantalize people but cannot make anyone happy(since Sonia and Co will never let his policies/Intelligence reach common man.)
LK may not be that exquisite a diamond but he is not caged .I don't think he's a dunghill either.
The most of the guys posting in this thread is not going to vote. Even I think, we all do not have our names in electoral list. There is no sense in arguing who is best or who should be next PM, sitting in US. Furthermore, most of the educated, urban voters will never go to polling booth in hot summer to stand in line to do their duty as a citizen.. Indian�s election of their representatives is fundamentally a show of money and muscle power. Election in India is just a business. It is just investment of money by political parties with the help of capitalists and their lobbyist to get the vote from rural, uneducated, divided voters across the nation. All parties are corruptive, communal, divisive, plays vote bank politics. No exceptions! (whether it is Congress, BJP, communists, BSP, SP, and countless regional parties). One thing I can say or compare about Congress and BJP. Congress is the only party has responsible for bringing both good (economy, growth, education,) and bad (corruption and countless other) thing to India. BJP has not done any good thing to India sofar, only it brought bad things to India (divisive, corruption).
My input regarding comparison of Manmohan and Advani.
Manmohan.
Though, he is not a full time politician, and not a good crowd pulling speaker, he has strong record. He has quietly achieved lot as a RBI governor; FM and PM. US nuclear agreement is a big achievement in his career, despite he had a minority government with the strong left opposition. He does not have long term independent vision, and strong leadership skills. He was widely accepted by all part of the country, as he has no controversial issues.
Advani,
He is a good speaker, crowd puller. He is a typical Indian politician. He has leadership skills. He does not have any significant record/achievement to back his claim for PM (either as a ex-minister or politician). For example, he has not done anything to improve the national security when he was a union home minister. He has involved in controversial issue like Babri Majit, and Ram temple issue. He also does not have long term vision, ideas on economy, poverty elimination etc..
Coming back to MMS,Advani-going by the qualities you attributed to these guys MMS is like that exquisite diamond that will always sit inside the locked case who can only tantalize people but cannot make anyone happy(since Sonia and Co will never let his policies/Intelligence reach common man.)
LK may not be that exquisite a diamond but he is not caged .I don't think he's a dunghill either.
The most of the guys posting in this thread is not going to vote. Even I think, we all do not have our names in electoral list. There is no sense in arguing who is best or who should be next PM, sitting in US. Furthermore, most of the educated, urban voters will never go to polling booth in hot summer to stand in line to do their duty as a citizen.. Indian�s election of their representatives is fundamentally a show of money and muscle power. Election in India is just a business. It is just investment of money by political parties with the help of capitalists and their lobbyist to get the vote from rural, uneducated, divided voters across the nation. All parties are corruptive, communal, divisive, plays vote bank politics. No exceptions! (whether it is Congress, BJP, communists, BSP, SP, and countless regional parties). One thing I can say or compare about Congress and BJP. Congress is the only party has responsible for bringing both good (economy, growth, education,) and bad (corruption and countless other) thing to India. BJP has not done any good thing to India sofar, only it brought bad things to India (divisive, corruption).
My input regarding comparison of Manmohan and Advani.
Manmohan.
Though, he is not a full time politician, and not a good crowd pulling speaker, he has strong record. He has quietly achieved lot as a RBI governor; FM and PM. US nuclear agreement is a big achievement in his career, despite he had a minority government with the strong left opposition. He does not have long term independent vision, and strong leadership skills. He was widely accepted by all part of the country, as he has no controversial issues.
Advani,
He is a good speaker, crowd puller. He is a typical Indian politician. He has leadership skills. He does not have any significant record/achievement to back his claim for PM (either as a ex-minister or politician). For example, he has not done anything to improve the national security when he was a union home minister. He has involved in controversial issue like Babri Majit, and Ram temple issue. He also does not have long term vision, ideas on economy, poverty elimination etc..
2010 fashion, Kate Moss Style,
hpandey
02-12 12:10 PM
are you dreaming ... India EB3 is 01AUG01
He is talking about ROW EB3 and not India. EB3- ROW is at 1 Jan 05
He is talking about ROW EB3 and not India. EB3- ROW is at 1 Jan 05
more...
H1BinNY
07-03 07:00 PM
I digged all the comments but looks like someone is trying to bury them again and again...
Probably someone from USCIS
Probably someone from USCIS
hair Today, Kate Moss#39; iconic style
snthampi
07-30 01:16 PM
By the way did buy any of the stuff from them later on. I mean u r that close to them.
Or just close to her?:D
Or just close to her?:D
more...
BharatPremi
12-13 04:50 PM
It will be a waste of money. The US does not have to allow any immigration if it chooses so. Do you realize that getting a GC is not a right, but a privelege? It's a matter of grace and no court has jurisdiction to review if government says "no".
Good point. But point what we are discussing is whether the rules (per country based) made to process GC can be challenged in US Courts within its constitutional limits? If tomorrow US decides to shut down EB/FB we do not have problem. Certainly it has that right. But when US wishes to have those immigrants than do we (applicants - non -immigrants) have a right to challenge particular rule (here per country based limit) in Court?
Good point. But point what we are discussing is whether the rules (per country based) made to process GC can be challenged in US Courts within its constitutional limits? If tomorrow US decides to shut down EB/FB we do not have problem. Certainly it has that right. But when US wishes to have those immigrants than do we (applicants - non -immigrants) have a right to challenge particular rule (here per country based limit) in Court?
hot Fashion de-focused.
sidbee
01-22 03:46 PM
Murthy.com explains the effects of the memo.
MurthyDotCom : H1B Memo on Employer-Employee Relationships and 3rd-Party Placements (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_e-erel.html)
MurthyDotCom : H1B Memo on Employer-Employee Relationships and 3rd-Party Placements (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_e-erel.html)
more...
house Celebrity Fashion – Kate Moss
duttasurajit
07-21 11:59 AM
These guys might meet you and greet you in WMT. Once it happened, the guy's wife met my wife and complimented her that "Ooh you have a sweet little boy!" and that's how the convesation started with my wife and then with me. The guy told me he runs his "ecommerce business". Next day he calls us for tea to discuss "ecommerce business" , I became suspicious and charged him "Are you running Amway?" He said there is nothing wrong in running Amway business and I had a heated argument with him over this as to why he did not tell me earlier.
So thats it - nowadays they have adopted a different strategy!
So thats it - nowadays they have adopted a different strategy!
tattoo Kate was spotted wearing this
logiclife
02-12 09:04 PM
Per country limit applies to every country in exactly the same way. It doesn't discriminate between Chad or China. So, how is it discrimination? And think about it- in Olympics soccer/basketball every country can send only one team. Should China and India be allowed to send more teams since they have a larger population? We should try to increase the number of GCs.
That is an apples to dinosaur analogy.
The per-country ceiling was originally created in order to establish and maintain proportionality in various immigrants coming from different countries in FAMILY BASED IMMIGRATION.
Family based immigration is driven by family relationship. Its not driven by talent or economic contribution. Therefore its important to make sure that no country completely dominates the family based immigration system by getting a head start. If one country is ahead initially in sending immigrants (like the Irish in the 1920s and Italians in 1930s), then that country's immigrants would sponsor their family and that new family would in turn sponsor their relatives and so on. Whichever country has an advantage in the begining would keep building on that advantage and eat up the entire family based quota. That's why when they wrote the INA in 1965 by codifying a bunch of loose federal regulations that governed immigration, they inserted the per-country ceiling. And that makes sense even today in Family based immigration.
Every country in the world has unlimited potential to send family members and relatives to America. But every country in the world does not have unlimited potential to send Ph.Ds and skilled labor. That ability is disproportionately huge with India, China, Mexico and Phillipines.
The per-country ceilings got INHERITED into employment based system because our legislators were too lazy to spot the difference in two systems. One system gives you a green card because you are related to someone. Other system gives you a green card because you have skills that are wanted by an employer here.
Benefits driven by family relationship should be rationed and given out propotionally because an Irish family, Italian family and a Chinese family all love their families equally and the value of family re-unification is the same. You cant say that the Irish love their sibilings more than the Chinese or Indians do. HENCE THE COUNTRY LIMITS IN FAMILY BASED SYSTEM.
But in employment based system, what the system is doing is that an Irish guy, (or any ROW guy) with Bachelor's degree in EB3 is getting green card sooner than an Indian guy or Chinese guy with masters degree in EB2. THAT IS DISCRIMINATION. Yes, that is discrimination not matter how you slice it and dice it with your olympic analogies.
That is an apples to dinosaur analogy.
The per-country ceiling was originally created in order to establish and maintain proportionality in various immigrants coming from different countries in FAMILY BASED IMMIGRATION.
Family based immigration is driven by family relationship. Its not driven by talent or economic contribution. Therefore its important to make sure that no country completely dominates the family based immigration system by getting a head start. If one country is ahead initially in sending immigrants (like the Irish in the 1920s and Italians in 1930s), then that country's immigrants would sponsor their family and that new family would in turn sponsor their relatives and so on. Whichever country has an advantage in the begining would keep building on that advantage and eat up the entire family based quota. That's why when they wrote the INA in 1965 by codifying a bunch of loose federal regulations that governed immigration, they inserted the per-country ceiling. And that makes sense even today in Family based immigration.
Every country in the world has unlimited potential to send family members and relatives to America. But every country in the world does not have unlimited potential to send Ph.Ds and skilled labor. That ability is disproportionately huge with India, China, Mexico and Phillipines.
The per-country ceilings got INHERITED into employment based system because our legislators were too lazy to spot the difference in two systems. One system gives you a green card because you are related to someone. Other system gives you a green card because you have skills that are wanted by an employer here.
Benefits driven by family relationship should be rationed and given out propotionally because an Irish family, Italian family and a Chinese family all love their families equally and the value of family re-unification is the same. You cant say that the Irish love their sibilings more than the Chinese or Indians do. HENCE THE COUNTRY LIMITS IN FAMILY BASED SYSTEM.
But in employment based system, what the system is doing is that an Irish guy, (or any ROW guy) with Bachelor's degree in EB3 is getting green card sooner than an Indian guy or Chinese guy with masters degree in EB2. THAT IS DISCRIMINATION. Yes, that is discrimination not matter how you slice it and dice it with your olympic analogies.
more...
pictures How Do You Feel About Kate Moss#39;s White Bridesmaids#39; Dresses?
iv_only_hope
07-24 08:55 PM
vdlrao
I will post the calcs and see his response. Thanks.
I will post the calcs and see his response. Thanks.
dresses New Fashion Style: Kate Moss
mallickarjunreddy
07-13 10:30 AM
WHY not go back to India if the GC process fails , I mean after all India is our home country rite .(I am talking only about Indians)
Health and Wealth are subjective after all
Health and Wealth are subjective after all
more...
makeup Steal her style: Kate Moss in
nomi
10-18 03:30 PM
Do I need to keep job or Stay in USA once I-140 approved ?? Reason I am asking that my I-140 is approved but my PD is not current and also got my Canadian PR too. If I move in Canada and see what possibilites available there for me and come back in USA when PD is current or file consular process from Canada whenever PD is current. .. what do you guys think about it ?? Any thoughts or feedback ??
Thanks in advance
Thanks in advance
girlfriend Kate Moss - festival style
krish2005
01-16 06:18 PM
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_repatt.html dated March 2006
I discussed the matter of the Consular section requiring end-user client (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/#) letters. Many H1B employers and employees, as well as several AILA attorneys, have approached me as well as the Murthy Law Firm, inquiring about this. The matter deals with the fairly recent requests for letters from supervisors of the end-user clients. These requests require the end users to outline the nature of the job to be performed by the H1B visa candidate, provide details of where the candidate will work, the length of the project, and the need for a specific H1B employee by name and other details. Unfortunately, most end-user clients are not willing to comply with such an onerous request. The very reason for the end-user client to hire an outside consulting company is to minimize the burden of administrative or HR responsibilities. Moreover, the law does not require such detailed letters for the issuance of H1B visas.
�MurthyDotCom
I respectfully summarized the position of many of you, our clients or those using candidates who apply for the H1B visa at Chennai, as follows.
End-user clients generally will not issue letters to the consulate, as they do not wish to get involved with the H1B process. The very nature of the employment relationship, when hiring through consulting companies, is to avoid or minimize the work related to hiring candidates.
Employers who sign the H1B documents do so under penalty of perjury and must pay the required prevailing wage, irrespective of whether they have assignments for the H1B candidates. The employer may decide to send the candidate back to his/her home country if enough assignments cannot be found.
Legacy INS (now USCIS) raised many similar issues, in the early- to mid-1990s, regarding the length and nature of the projects in the U.S., timetable of assignments, and the H1B employer�s ability to pay the required prevailing wage. Senior Legacy INS officials from headquarters in Washington DC addressed the concerns of those examiners by pointing out that the law does not permit them to investigate a U.S. employer�s ability to hire H1B employees. The USCIS is bound by memos and policy guidance of the Legacy INS. After that memo, Legacy INS stopped issuing lengthy RFEs on these matters.
The law does not require any such letters by end-user clients for the issuance of the H1B visas to the visa applicants.
Delays in the issuance of H1B visas cause many of the employers considerable financial (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/#) loss and postpone the implementation of projects. This results in the additional loss of revenues and credibility with their clients, due to their inability to produce in a timely fashion the required specialty-worker candidates.
Thanks for the post. Is there such a requirement when there is a renewal of H1B ?
I discussed the matter of the Consular section requiring end-user client (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/#) letters. Many H1B employers and employees, as well as several AILA attorneys, have approached me as well as the Murthy Law Firm, inquiring about this. The matter deals with the fairly recent requests for letters from supervisors of the end-user clients. These requests require the end users to outline the nature of the job to be performed by the H1B visa candidate, provide details of where the candidate will work, the length of the project, and the need for a specific H1B employee by name and other details. Unfortunately, most end-user clients are not willing to comply with such an onerous request. The very reason for the end-user client to hire an outside consulting company is to minimize the burden of administrative or HR responsibilities. Moreover, the law does not require such detailed letters for the issuance of H1B visas.
�MurthyDotCom
I respectfully summarized the position of many of you, our clients or those using candidates who apply for the H1B visa at Chennai, as follows.
End-user clients generally will not issue letters to the consulate, as they do not wish to get involved with the H1B process. The very nature of the employment relationship, when hiring through consulting companies, is to avoid or minimize the work related to hiring candidates.
Employers who sign the H1B documents do so under penalty of perjury and must pay the required prevailing wage, irrespective of whether they have assignments for the H1B candidates. The employer may decide to send the candidate back to his/her home country if enough assignments cannot be found.
Legacy INS (now USCIS) raised many similar issues, in the early- to mid-1990s, regarding the length and nature of the projects in the U.S., timetable of assignments, and the H1B employer�s ability to pay the required prevailing wage. Senior Legacy INS officials from headquarters in Washington DC addressed the concerns of those examiners by pointing out that the law does not permit them to investigate a U.S. employer�s ability to hire H1B employees. The USCIS is bound by memos and policy guidance of the Legacy INS. After that memo, Legacy INS stopped issuing lengthy RFEs on these matters.
The law does not require any such letters by end-user clients for the issuance of the H1B visas to the visa applicants.
Delays in the issuance of H1B visas cause many of the employers considerable financial (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/#) loss and postpone the implementation of projects. This results in the additional loss of revenues and credibility with their clients, due to their inability to produce in a timely fashion the required specialty-worker candidates.
Thanks for the post. Is there such a requirement when there is a renewal of H1B ?
hairstyles 2010 Kate Moss Fashion and
Desertfox
09-23 04:06 PM
Nixstor,
Thanks for the brilliant idea, but I have a question about the draft. Is it really necessary to mention that 20% downpayment clause in there? I am a non-IT (manufacturing) EB3 applicant making half the salary you mentioned in the draft, and I bought a house with a 3% downpayment on a FHA loan. However, I have an excellent credit and I don't foresee myself in a foreclosure situation in the near future. I dont know if there are many GC applicant with my profile, but aren't we helping the housing market by buying a house?
Anyway, I will support every initiative that has the remotest possibility to remove one person in line ahead of me.
Thanks for the brilliant idea, but I have a question about the draft. Is it really necessary to mention that 20% downpayment clause in there? I am a non-IT (manufacturing) EB3 applicant making half the salary you mentioned in the draft, and I bought a house with a 3% downpayment on a FHA loan. However, I have an excellent credit and I don't foresee myself in a foreclosure situation in the near future. I dont know if there are many GC applicant with my profile, but aren't we helping the housing market by buying a house?
Anyway, I will support every initiative that has the remotest possibility to remove one person in line ahead of me.
sunny1000
12-13 05:30 PM
Note that it would certainly not benefit the other 60%+ from countries other than India that are also stuck in various steps (EB3, name check). So, unless you want IV to stand for IndiaVoice, you should concentrate your admirable effort on increasing the overall quota (with increased per-country quota), excluding dependents, etc.
Well said!
Well said!
oguinan
02-15 11:48 PM
ouignan,
You can see that the UN panel is aware of the fact that racial discrimination manifests itself in disproportional representation (note the reference to the composition of the Supreme Court). It can be argued that the 7% country limit provides a pretext to discriminate against India/China/Mexico on the basis of ethnic or racial origin, and as such would run afoul of the convention.
I enjoyed that article, it's a great find. To be fair, it does offer both opinion and history. I do agree that the 7% limit is unfair but the answer is to increase the supply of green cards so that all qualified applicants get their green cards. The racial element is something everybody should be aware of. It's important that we all have a good understanding of the history of the immigration laws, in the united states and elsewhere. Perhaps "History of Immigration Laws" would be an interesting thread on it's own. At the very least we should add the wikipedia references that we discussed earlier into the resources section.
You can see that the UN panel is aware of the fact that racial discrimination manifests itself in disproportional representation (note the reference to the composition of the Supreme Court). It can be argued that the 7% country limit provides a pretext to discriminate against India/China/Mexico on the basis of ethnic or racial origin, and as such would run afoul of the convention.
I enjoyed that article, it's a great find. To be fair, it does offer both opinion and history. I do agree that the 7% limit is unfair but the answer is to increase the supply of green cards so that all qualified applicants get their green cards. The racial element is something everybody should be aware of. It's important that we all have a good understanding of the history of the immigration laws, in the united states and elsewhere. Perhaps "History of Immigration Laws" would be an interesting thread on it's own. At the very least we should add the wikipedia references that we discussed earlier into the resources section.
No comments:
Post a Comment