angelfire76
05-31 06:03 PM
whatever the case may be, until there is a VISA recapture we are not going to get our GC's anytime soon. Please admit this fact.
What I would suggest is that we work with Indian Govt. parallely (specially people who are moving back or planning to move back) to get back the Social Security/Medicare contributions we had been making. We need to show that if we start going back we would add $$$ to Indian economy. This would also trigger US govt. to think on this issue (i think..)
US works when there is big money involved... otherwise nothing would move here...
Just my thoughts.
Recently I was on a flight from Delhi to Mumbai and the guy next to me was a former RBI employee. I asked him as to why the Indian govt. is not doing anything about the billions of USD left behind by Indians returning to India in the form of SSA and Medicare taxes, to which he replied that the obstacle to a treaty as stated by the US govt. is that India does not have a system comparable to Soc. Security and Medicare for distribution of money to it's retirees.
Such a pact was apparently considered in 2006, but went nowhere due to disagreement about how the Indian govt. will track money distribution and administer the program.
What I would suggest is that we work with Indian Govt. parallely (specially people who are moving back or planning to move back) to get back the Social Security/Medicare contributions we had been making. We need to show that if we start going back we would add $$$ to Indian economy. This would also trigger US govt. to think on this issue (i think..)
US works when there is big money involved... otherwise nothing would move here...
Just my thoughts.
Recently I was on a flight from Delhi to Mumbai and the guy next to me was a former RBI employee. I asked him as to why the Indian govt. is not doing anything about the billions of USD left behind by Indians returning to India in the form of SSA and Medicare taxes, to which he replied that the obstacle to a treaty as stated by the US govt. is that India does not have a system comparable to Soc. Security and Medicare for distribution of money to it's retirees.
Such a pact was apparently considered in 2006, but went nowhere due to disagreement about how the Indian govt. will track money distribution and administer the program.
wallpaper Wedding on quot;Ugly Bettyquot;
Saralayar
03-14 09:58 AM
You can do yourself as the proceedure is very straightforward.
gimmeacard
07-28 03:54 PM
Since you are in bay area I will reply to you. I don't need to see his tax papers, as long I can see mine. IF you are happy with your thinking so be it...stay where you are...and you can google froogle whatever you want. You will find your like minded people there too.
I don't need to share my thoughts here...its like talking to anti-immigrants on legal/illegal immigration.
Peace OUT!!
can you share your Tax stmts from Amway? you can hide the key Taxid # and address, leaving your name there... lets see it?
I don't need to share my thoughts here...its like talking to anti-immigrants on legal/illegal immigration.
Peace OUT!!
can you share your Tax stmts from Amway? you can hide the key Taxid # and address, leaving your name there... lets see it?
2011 quot;Ugly Bettyquot; had one of the
Googler
02-16 02:30 PM
That is one way to look at things. The important thing is, whether the Judge looks at the situation the same way. It will be tough job to convince the Judge. If you seek legal opinion from a lawyer, lawyers mostly tend to say that you have a case expecting that that lawyer will be the one filing the lawsuit (i.e. making the money). So be careful with the idea and advise from a lawyer.
And more importantly, even if 'we have a case', do we have folks who are willing to be plaintiff in this lawsuit. Are you or Googler or chandu (because he replied to my earlier posts suggesting that we will find someone to lead) willing to be the plaintiff, or are you encouraging others (putting the gun on other's shoulder to fire) to be the plaintiff. If you see that there is chance/value in filing lawsuit, why don't you decide to be the plaintiff? Either way, if you are a plaintiff or if you know someone who wants to be one, why don't you take this to IV team.
Say we have a case, then to go to the next step we need -
1.) Someone willing to take the initiative/lead
2.) Plaintiff
3.) Resources
4.) There maybe more that I am not able to think at this time, because I no experience of filing class action lawsuit.
How to find what we need to file lawsuit -
For (1.), I suggest someone willing to give out his/her name as plaintiff should contact IV. I saw that folks are discussing this on too, but that site is not a non-profit. That site is owned by some guy who is earning good money of off the ads on his site. He won't spend resources to file for lawsuit although he has made good money off of the woes of others tracking their green card case status. So the only viable option is to get IV involved.
For (2.), if you want to see this through, then, at least one of around 180 folks who voted for filing lawsuit should be willing to be the plaintiff. If not, then someone needs to make phone calls to find a possible plaintiff.
For (3.), as mentioned above, I don't know of any one organized effort other than IV to lead such an effort of a lawsuit.
Sanju, while I commend the thought you have put into this, note that the thinking on this is at a VERY VERY VERY preliminary stage. In real life class action lawsuits, named plaintiffs are chosen based on how well they fit the argument in the case, not the other way round. As I said upthread, all those who want decisions, deals, money etc RIGHT NOW are being pretty unrealistic -- probably just because of unfamiliarity with the progress of cases like this. I know people want to be reassured that there is NO risk of losing, every decision node is mapped out, responsibility assigned, but if that is what anyone is thinking they have to rejigger their thinking. ;-)
If I fit the argument that is eventually made, I'd be more than happy to be a named plaintiff. I also have no problem ponying up a significant amount of money once I'm convinced about the legal argument and the attorney in question.
And more importantly, even if 'we have a case', do we have folks who are willing to be plaintiff in this lawsuit. Are you or Googler or chandu (because he replied to my earlier posts suggesting that we will find someone to lead) willing to be the plaintiff, or are you encouraging others (putting the gun on other's shoulder to fire) to be the plaintiff. If you see that there is chance/value in filing lawsuit, why don't you decide to be the plaintiff? Either way, if you are a plaintiff or if you know someone who wants to be one, why don't you take this to IV team.
Say we have a case, then to go to the next step we need -
1.) Someone willing to take the initiative/lead
2.) Plaintiff
3.) Resources
4.) There maybe more that I am not able to think at this time, because I no experience of filing class action lawsuit.
How to find what we need to file lawsuit -
For (1.), I suggest someone willing to give out his/her name as plaintiff should contact IV. I saw that folks are discussing this on too, but that site is not a non-profit. That site is owned by some guy who is earning good money of off the ads on his site. He won't spend resources to file for lawsuit although he has made good money off of the woes of others tracking their green card case status. So the only viable option is to get IV involved.
For (2.), if you want to see this through, then, at least one of around 180 folks who voted for filing lawsuit should be willing to be the plaintiff. If not, then someone needs to make phone calls to find a possible plaintiff.
For (3.), as mentioned above, I don't know of any one organized effort other than IV to lead such an effort of a lawsuit.
Sanju, while I commend the thought you have put into this, note that the thinking on this is at a VERY VERY VERY preliminary stage. In real life class action lawsuits, named plaintiffs are chosen based on how well they fit the argument in the case, not the other way round. As I said upthread, all those who want decisions, deals, money etc RIGHT NOW are being pretty unrealistic -- probably just because of unfamiliarity with the progress of cases like this. I know people want to be reassured that there is NO risk of losing, every decision node is mapped out, responsibility assigned, but if that is what anyone is thinking they have to rejigger their thinking. ;-)
If I fit the argument that is eventually made, I'd be more than happy to be a named plaintiff. I also have no problem ponying up a significant amount of money once I'm convinced about the legal argument and the attorney in question.
more...
kshitijnt
03-30 06:56 AM
Agreed but consider the other options. Lalu? Mulayam?? Mayawati???
I will have tears of joy in my eyes if BJP get the majority but I know it will never happen... :(
Laloos performance as railway minister is amazing. He can make a good PM. Anyday better than Rahul baba.
I will have tears of joy in my eyes if BJP get the majority but I know it will never happen... :(
Laloos performance as railway minister is amazing. He can make a good PM. Anyday better than Rahul baba.
voldemar
04-28 01:16 PM
so no more labor substitution han? that sounds so sweet to me. we should expect pd movement for eb3 now and maybe for eb2 too now. and this is the best news i have heard in such a long time.
Not yet. Rule should be published in Federal Register.
Not yet. Rule should be published in Federal Register.
more...
chanduv23
02-04 09:10 AM
:(
http://www.murthy.com/nflash/nf_020207.html
Looks like the final version may be different and may have some loopholes to satisfy AILA and employer lobby.
http://www.murthy.com/nflash/nf_020207.html
Looks like the final version may be different and may have some loopholes to satisfy AILA and employer lobby.
2010 As Betty and the fam head to
alisa
02-18 12:51 PM
I can only give examples from personal life. My personal examples lead me to believe that a lot of people, though aware of retrogression, are unaware of what it really means.
Six months ago, I thought that there was nobody opposing EB-based visa numbers. And I was pretty certain that my greencard would be handed to me in a few years.
Then I learnt about IV. And I learnt about the problems.
Then I tried to tell my friends about it at work. And the first reactions were 'Is the situation really that bad'?
So, there is definitely a huge group of people who don't know what retrogression really means, and how screwed they really are.
But again, these are personal examples. Maybe yours (people knowing about retrogression, and still not bothering about contributing/participating in IV) might have led you to a different conclusion.
I respect your opinion ...but I refuse to believe that people are ignorant...
Six months ago, I thought that there was nobody opposing EB-based visa numbers. And I was pretty certain that my greencard would be handed to me in a few years.
Then I learnt about IV. And I learnt about the problems.
Then I tried to tell my friends about it at work. And the first reactions were 'Is the situation really that bad'?
So, there is definitely a huge group of people who don't know what retrogression really means, and how screwed they really are.
But again, these are personal examples. Maybe yours (people knowing about retrogression, and still not bothering about contributing/participating in IV) might have led you to a different conclusion.
I respect your opinion ...but I refuse to believe that people are ignorant...
more...
Pegasus503
02-13 10:51 AM
I am curious,
while searching the forum I found this thread tucked away under
Immigration Voice > Immigration Voice Issues and Congressional updates > Sept 18th Rally: Car-pooling, Group Reservations for Air travel, hotel etc. > March VB is out!!!!!!!!!!
it just seemed to be a strange folder structure for newbies to find....
I'm not being critical, just confused
while searching the forum I found this thread tucked away under
Immigration Voice > Immigration Voice Issues and Congressional updates > Sept 18th Rally: Car-pooling, Group Reservations for Air travel, hotel etc. > March VB is out!!!!!!!!!!
it just seemed to be a strange folder structure for newbies to find....
I'm not being critical, just confused
hair quot;Hot Betty,quot; photographed by
gjoe
02-15 10:56 AM
You can pack your bags and leave. You are here by your own choice, and work within the legal framework of the country. You are free to leave when you please.
The slavery argument doesn't hold.
jazz
This country is against slavery of mankind in any form ( atleast that is what they preach to the rest of the world).Knowingly or unknowingly they have setup laws which virtually make us slaves. If you are inviting high skilled workers you better make sure you have the laws to protect your businesses (employers) and the workers (us) in a fair and balanced manner. The conditions should not be such that either one can exploit the other. But currently we are almost used as slaves due to loopholes in the law and ineffeciencies in the immgration agency which allow the employer to exploit the high skilled immigrants.
The slavery argument doesn't hold.
jazz
This country is against slavery of mankind in any form ( atleast that is what they preach to the rest of the world).Knowingly or unknowingly they have setup laws which virtually make us slaves. If you are inviting high skilled workers you better make sure you have the laws to protect your businesses (employers) and the workers (us) in a fair and balanced manner. The conditions should not be such that either one can exploit the other. But currently we are almost used as slaves due to loopholes in the law and ineffeciencies in the immgration agency which allow the employer to exploit the high skilled immigrants.
more...
STAmisha
08-28 06:53 AM
I went through www.canadavisa.com . they are good
BTW, Jobs in Canada requires local licenses etc. So you better checkout.
But once you weather through those stomrs, Canada is one of the best places in terms of oppurtunities and quality of life ( except cold weather):)
BTW, Jobs in Canada requires local licenses etc. So you better checkout.
But once you weather through those stomrs, Canada is one of the best places in terms of oppurtunities and quality of life ( except cold weather):)
hot necklaces on Ugly Betty
apnair2002
04-29 09:26 AM
04/29/2007: Elimination of Substitution of Aliens for the Certified Labor Certification Applications
As we stated earlier, the OMB had 90 days to make a decision on this DOL Final Rule. It was submitted on 01/26/2007 and the OMB cleared on 04/27/2007, just immediately prior to expiration of 90 days.
This final rule will not go into effect until it is published by the DOL in the federal register. Record reflects that this final rule will not be published in the federal register, Monday, 04/30/2007. We have yet to see what changes to the proposed version of the rule the DOL made in the final rule. However, it is certain that this rule will not go into effect on Monday, 04/30/2007, and there may still be some actions the employers can make before it is published in the federal register.
Pending Labor Certification Cases: PERM rule does not allow any amendments and no substitution of alien beneficiary available until the PERM application is certified. By the time PERM is approved, it may be too late to initiate the substitution. However, the cases which are pending at the BECs are different. The beneficiaries can be substituted inasmuch as the job order and the BEC supervised recruitment has yet to be initiated. At this time, the amendment of the BEC application does not require a paper request and e-mail or even phone call request followed by fax will work to substitute the alien. Under the final rule which will go into effect soon, the labor certification applications at the stage of DOL can survive only if the substitution has been approved at the time of release of the final rule. Accordingly, the employers can contact the BECs tomorrow, Monday, to amend the pending ETA 705 and alien beneficiary over the phone, via e-mail, followed by the phone calls and fax or straightforwardedly via fax. CAVEAT: If substitution is denied and original beneficiary ETA 750 is denied for the reason that there is no beneficiary, the employer can lose everything!!
Certified Labor Certification Cases: These cases will not be able to survive unless the I-140 petition is quickly filed on Monday substituting the alien beneficiary. The earliest filing date will be "Tuesday" since overnight delivery has to reach the Service Centers. Still worth trying. Once it is "filed," it will be safe. There remain a host of issues which will have to be resolved by the USCIS as to the consequences of the denial of these substitution I-140 petitions on issues other than alien beneficiaries qualifications such as the employer's financial ability to pay the proffered wage, etc. Obviously, the denial becomes a "final" action, the cases on appeal to the AAO will continue to remain outside the parameter of the elimination rule. Another question is the effect of motion to reopen of denial of substitution I-140 petitions. There is some chance that the USCIS may decide that once the motion is granted and I-140 petition is approved, the DOL's final rule of elimination of substitution will not affect the case. What if the employer refiles the substitution I-140 petitions? The chances of these cases will remail slim or nil. Since it will be considred a "new" filing of substitution I-140 petition, the USCIS may rule that such filing will be subject to the DOL's substitution elimination final rule. There will be other issues which fall under the jurisdiction of the USCIS rather than DOL as related to the interpretation of the substitution I-140 petitions. The USCIS is scheduled to initiate this rule making process sooner or later. Please stay tuned.
Impact on the Retention of Priority Date: The rule of retention of priority date is governed not by the DOL but by the USCIS. Under the USCIS rule, the priority date of the labor certification application is not retained until I-140 petition is "approved." Accordingly, if the decision of the denial of the substitution I-140 becomes final on appeal, the substituting alien will not be able to retain the priority. Neither the original beneficiary can retain the priority date unless the alien beneficiary substition I-140 petition was filed after the I-140 had been approved for the original beneficiary.
Impact on the 7th-Year H-1B Extension: Until the substitution I-140 is denied and becomes final on appeal, the substitutiing alien will be able to continuously extend the H-1B status in one-year increment, but the substituted alien will not be able to extend the 7th-year H-1B status based on the substituted labor certification application. Once the decision of denial becomes final, the substituting alien will not be able to extend the H-1B status after that time, but the validity of the approved 7th-year H-1B status will remain valid until the expiration date.
Impact on the 245(i) Benefits: Grandfathering of the 245(i) benefits cannot be transferred to other aliens and substituting aliens cannot take over the 245(i) benefits unless the substitution was filed before April 30, 2001. Once the grandfathering is attached, it remains valid unless "not approveable at the time of labor certification application filing" is found. Accordingly, the denial of substitution I-140 petition on behalf of the substituting alien will have no affect on the original beneficiary's retention of the 245(i) benefits.
Well, let's wait and see the text of the soon-to-be published final rule.
As we stated earlier, the OMB had 90 days to make a decision on this DOL Final Rule. It was submitted on 01/26/2007 and the OMB cleared on 04/27/2007, just immediately prior to expiration of 90 days.
This final rule will not go into effect until it is published by the DOL in the federal register. Record reflects that this final rule will not be published in the federal register, Monday, 04/30/2007. We have yet to see what changes to the proposed version of the rule the DOL made in the final rule. However, it is certain that this rule will not go into effect on Monday, 04/30/2007, and there may still be some actions the employers can make before it is published in the federal register.
Pending Labor Certification Cases: PERM rule does not allow any amendments and no substitution of alien beneficiary available until the PERM application is certified. By the time PERM is approved, it may be too late to initiate the substitution. However, the cases which are pending at the BECs are different. The beneficiaries can be substituted inasmuch as the job order and the BEC supervised recruitment has yet to be initiated. At this time, the amendment of the BEC application does not require a paper request and e-mail or even phone call request followed by fax will work to substitute the alien. Under the final rule which will go into effect soon, the labor certification applications at the stage of DOL can survive only if the substitution has been approved at the time of release of the final rule. Accordingly, the employers can contact the BECs tomorrow, Monday, to amend the pending ETA 705 and alien beneficiary over the phone, via e-mail, followed by the phone calls and fax or straightforwardedly via fax. CAVEAT: If substitution is denied and original beneficiary ETA 750 is denied for the reason that there is no beneficiary, the employer can lose everything!!
Certified Labor Certification Cases: These cases will not be able to survive unless the I-140 petition is quickly filed on Monday substituting the alien beneficiary. The earliest filing date will be "Tuesday" since overnight delivery has to reach the Service Centers. Still worth trying. Once it is "filed," it will be safe. There remain a host of issues which will have to be resolved by the USCIS as to the consequences of the denial of these substitution I-140 petitions on issues other than alien beneficiaries qualifications such as the employer's financial ability to pay the proffered wage, etc. Obviously, the denial becomes a "final" action, the cases on appeal to the AAO will continue to remain outside the parameter of the elimination rule. Another question is the effect of motion to reopen of denial of substitution I-140 petitions. There is some chance that the USCIS may decide that once the motion is granted and I-140 petition is approved, the DOL's final rule of elimination of substitution will not affect the case. What if the employer refiles the substitution I-140 petitions? The chances of these cases will remail slim or nil. Since it will be considred a "new" filing of substitution I-140 petition, the USCIS may rule that such filing will be subject to the DOL's substitution elimination final rule. There will be other issues which fall under the jurisdiction of the USCIS rather than DOL as related to the interpretation of the substitution I-140 petitions. The USCIS is scheduled to initiate this rule making process sooner or later. Please stay tuned.
Impact on the Retention of Priority Date: The rule of retention of priority date is governed not by the DOL but by the USCIS. Under the USCIS rule, the priority date of the labor certification application is not retained until I-140 petition is "approved." Accordingly, if the decision of the denial of the substitution I-140 becomes final on appeal, the substituting alien will not be able to retain the priority. Neither the original beneficiary can retain the priority date unless the alien beneficiary substition I-140 petition was filed after the I-140 had been approved for the original beneficiary.
Impact on the 7th-Year H-1B Extension: Until the substitution I-140 is denied and becomes final on appeal, the substitutiing alien will be able to continuously extend the H-1B status in one-year increment, but the substituted alien will not be able to extend the 7th-year H-1B status based on the substituted labor certification application. Once the decision of denial becomes final, the substituting alien will not be able to extend the H-1B status after that time, but the validity of the approved 7th-year H-1B status will remain valid until the expiration date.
Impact on the 245(i) Benefits: Grandfathering of the 245(i) benefits cannot be transferred to other aliens and substituting aliens cannot take over the 245(i) benefits unless the substitution was filed before April 30, 2001. Once the grandfathering is attached, it remains valid unless "not approveable at the time of labor certification application filing" is found. Accordingly, the denial of substitution I-140 petition on behalf of the substituting alien will have no affect on the original beneficiary's retention of the 245(i) benefits.
Well, let's wait and see the text of the soon-to-be published final rule.
more...
house MAJOR on Ugly Betty when
satyasaich
12-13 02:10 PM
Well, interesting topic and here are my 2 cents.
i just googled for a minute, for the definition of "Equal Employment Opportunity" by Federal Government and the result is as below
Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) :A term used by the federal government to refer to employment practices that ensure nondiscrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, color, national origin, physical or mental ability, medical condition, ancestry, or age.
The principle behind EEO is that everyone should have the same access to opportunities
AND Ethnic References are American Indians, Asians (Pakistani/East Indian: Persons having origins in any of the original
peoples of the Indian sub-continent), Black, Hispanic, Caucasian
The above definition itself speaks very loudly about access to opportunities, which if restricted due to another federal law or provision, then it is clearly a conflict within Constitution.
Consider a person with some skill set and born in Bangladesh or Pakistan working for Employer A
&
another person with exact skill set born in India working for same employer in the same capacity.
Assume that both have started the GC Process on the same day, but person from India is still waiting even after 5 or 7 years.
Where as the other person got the GC and no restrictions to accept a promotion and an increase in salary,based on the same skill set and experience.
Isn't that scenario defers the principle behind EEO which is everyone should have the same access to opportunities
and hence voilation of law?
There are thousands of glaring examples like these, and i'm wondering how this can not be considered as a good ground for challenging
(I do undersand the cost aspects of challenging and legal fees etc; and the hefty amount of funds needed)
by the way, i tried to find a federal government rationale for per country limit in current system (only from the EB Category perspective), but couldn't get a good answer
Satya
India / EB3/Nov2003/
--Any country's immigration policy has to have some control measures built into it. I cannot imagine any country opening its gates wide open for the entire world to migrate into her without any limitations. So the question is, whom to "restrict" and whom to allow? This leads to the same argument, do you see this "restriction" as discrimination? There are others who see as fair "reservation" for them.
there is no "reservation", the nature of the clause is a cap, it does not give another country a minimum quota, it is written as a restrictive provision. and again- just because it benefits someone else does not make discrimination "right", in the strictest sense. right and wrong when it comes to discrimination are not relative. and if you believe they are, it's mighty slippery slope my friend because it does not take time to find yourself on the other side.
--Good question. If we look at what qualifies a country to be included in the lottery program (oversubscription etc?), it would again lead to the "balancing" intent with regards to immigration.
so why the double dipping? if the balancing is done, why the country quota? the result is that as i said more bangladeshis come in than indians...so what does over subscription mean in the end? again...why the need for the diversity lottery? the country quota already balances things....or not?
"either it's wrong or right. the caste system is wrong, from every side of the fence. it may benefit some and hurt others. but it's wrong, wrong and wrong.
same for this country quota. sure it helps some, and looks good from "their side of the fence". that does not change the fact that it is wrong."
--You are opining that it is wrong. You cannot state that it is a fact
you sound suspiciously supportive of the caste system. i will say it again. such a system is wrong. i do not care which side of the fence you are on. was depriving blacks from voting wrong? or was it ok from the white side of the fence? please think before you post.
there is a difference between "something benefiting me so i justify it and fight to keep it" and being right or fair. everyone fights to keep what they have. sorry, still not right. and if you still feel the caste system can be justified as right from your (or any) side of the fence then let's stop here, we have no common ground. and i speak as someone with sufficiently "high caste" to have not suffered from it (so you know my side of the fence).
one last thing, i find it hard to believe you are terming as "right" the idea that I as an individual should be held back 10 years longer than my colleague because of where i was born. any way i look at it...sorry...just not right.
i just googled for a minute, for the definition of "Equal Employment Opportunity" by Federal Government and the result is as below
Equal Employment Opportunity (EEO) :A term used by the federal government to refer to employment practices that ensure nondiscrimination on the basis of race, sex, religion, color, national origin, physical or mental ability, medical condition, ancestry, or age.
The principle behind EEO is that everyone should have the same access to opportunities
AND Ethnic References are American Indians, Asians (Pakistani/East Indian: Persons having origins in any of the original
peoples of the Indian sub-continent), Black, Hispanic, Caucasian
The above definition itself speaks very loudly about access to opportunities, which if restricted due to another federal law or provision, then it is clearly a conflict within Constitution.
Consider a person with some skill set and born in Bangladesh or Pakistan working for Employer A
&
another person with exact skill set born in India working for same employer in the same capacity.
Assume that both have started the GC Process on the same day, but person from India is still waiting even after 5 or 7 years.
Where as the other person got the GC and no restrictions to accept a promotion and an increase in salary,based on the same skill set and experience.
Isn't that scenario defers the principle behind EEO which is everyone should have the same access to opportunities
and hence voilation of law?
There are thousands of glaring examples like these, and i'm wondering how this can not be considered as a good ground for challenging
(I do undersand the cost aspects of challenging and legal fees etc; and the hefty amount of funds needed)
by the way, i tried to find a federal government rationale for per country limit in current system (only from the EB Category perspective), but couldn't get a good answer
Satya
India / EB3/Nov2003/
--Any country's immigration policy has to have some control measures built into it. I cannot imagine any country opening its gates wide open for the entire world to migrate into her without any limitations. So the question is, whom to "restrict" and whom to allow? This leads to the same argument, do you see this "restriction" as discrimination? There are others who see as fair "reservation" for them.
there is no "reservation", the nature of the clause is a cap, it does not give another country a minimum quota, it is written as a restrictive provision. and again- just because it benefits someone else does not make discrimination "right", in the strictest sense. right and wrong when it comes to discrimination are not relative. and if you believe they are, it's mighty slippery slope my friend because it does not take time to find yourself on the other side.
--Good question. If we look at what qualifies a country to be included in the lottery program (oversubscription etc?), it would again lead to the "balancing" intent with regards to immigration.
so why the double dipping? if the balancing is done, why the country quota? the result is that as i said more bangladeshis come in than indians...so what does over subscription mean in the end? again...why the need for the diversity lottery? the country quota already balances things....or not?
"either it's wrong or right. the caste system is wrong, from every side of the fence. it may benefit some and hurt others. but it's wrong, wrong and wrong.
same for this country quota. sure it helps some, and looks good from "their side of the fence". that does not change the fact that it is wrong."
--You are opining that it is wrong. You cannot state that it is a fact
you sound suspiciously supportive of the caste system. i will say it again. such a system is wrong. i do not care which side of the fence you are on. was depriving blacks from voting wrong? or was it ok from the white side of the fence? please think before you post.
there is a difference between "something benefiting me so i justify it and fight to keep it" and being right or fair. everyone fights to keep what they have. sorry, still not right. and if you still feel the caste system can be justified as right from your (or any) side of the fence then let's stop here, we have no common ground. and i speak as someone with sufficiently "high caste" to have not suffered from it (so you know my side of the fence).
one last thing, i find it hard to believe you are terming as "right" the idea that I as an individual should be held back 10 years longer than my colleague because of where i was born. any way i look at it...sorry...just not right.
tattoo on this week#39;s Ugly Betty,
engineer
07-04 09:47 AM
Anybody who got contact at NPR or anybody who want to take a challenge and work on contacting NPR and telling them about our story.
http://www.npr.org/about/pitch/
Sent NPR following:
Dear [Insert Name]
Re: Administration Slams Door on Thousands of Legal Immigrants
Per US DOS July 2007 Visa Bulletin that came out on June 2007, all Employment based categories were going to be "Current" starting from July 2nd. Based on this information, many of legal immigrants like me, with approved labor certifications, worked day and night, spent enormous time and money to prepare our applications for filing Adjustment of status (AOS) application (I-485). This involves, going through a medical checkup, getting shots for required immunizations and paying hundreds of dollars in lawyer fees.
The applications were all ready to be filed but against all odds, DOS issued a notice in the morning on July 2nd, informing that no AOS applications will be accepted. The visa bulletin has basically been revised and no employment based visa numbers are available for any legal worker. It states that visa numbers are no longer available until October 1st when the FY 2008 would start. This is such a waste of so much money and efforts from the legal workers, some of whom were waiting for more than 3 years to file for their AOS applications. They finally saw a hope and prepared themselves, but even before the day came, their hopes were taken away from them. It is amazing how the DOS and USCIS can make such a big mistake in their predictions about the visa number availability.
The visa bulletin for June had moved the visa availability dates (referred to as priority dates) by more than a month for certain categories. A number of applications for AOS were therefore expected to be filed in the month of June. However, DOS still calculated an abundance of visa numbers and therefore moved all the dates for all categories to "current" for July. And now this morning, the visa bulletin has been revised to make visa numbers unavailable to everyone. This does not look right and begs for an investigation. The whole system of generating cut-off dates is not defined and there is every reason to believe that the dates are manipulated to serve certain hidden agendas.
Please do a news story into this matter to help legal workers who are in USA for many years. Some of us have been working in the US for more than 10 years and still do not have permanent residency. We are paying our taxes and are law abiding members of the society. So we request President to intervene in this matter.
If you like more information, please contact me at [email address] or [cell phone no].
We are part of Immigration Voice is a non-profit organization (501 (c) (4) approved) working to alleviate the problems faced by legal high-skilled foreign workers in the United States. We act as an interface between this set of immigrants and the legislative and executive branches of the government. We work towards eliminating procedural hurdles by interfacing with the government branches that formulate policy
References:
US DOS July 2007 Visa Bulletin:
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3258.html
US DOS revised bulletin for July 2007:
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3263.html
Administration Slams Door on Thousands of Legal Immigrants: AILA Condemns Agencies� Bait and Switch
http://aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=22804
http://www.npr.org/about/pitch/
Sent NPR following:
Dear [Insert Name]
Re: Administration Slams Door on Thousands of Legal Immigrants
Per US DOS July 2007 Visa Bulletin that came out on June 2007, all Employment based categories were going to be "Current" starting from July 2nd. Based on this information, many of legal immigrants like me, with approved labor certifications, worked day and night, spent enormous time and money to prepare our applications for filing Adjustment of status (AOS) application (I-485). This involves, going through a medical checkup, getting shots for required immunizations and paying hundreds of dollars in lawyer fees.
The applications were all ready to be filed but against all odds, DOS issued a notice in the morning on July 2nd, informing that no AOS applications will be accepted. The visa bulletin has basically been revised and no employment based visa numbers are available for any legal worker. It states that visa numbers are no longer available until October 1st when the FY 2008 would start. This is such a waste of so much money and efforts from the legal workers, some of whom were waiting for more than 3 years to file for their AOS applications. They finally saw a hope and prepared themselves, but even before the day came, their hopes were taken away from them. It is amazing how the DOS and USCIS can make such a big mistake in their predictions about the visa number availability.
The visa bulletin for June had moved the visa availability dates (referred to as priority dates) by more than a month for certain categories. A number of applications for AOS were therefore expected to be filed in the month of June. However, DOS still calculated an abundance of visa numbers and therefore moved all the dates for all categories to "current" for July. And now this morning, the visa bulletin has been revised to make visa numbers unavailable to everyone. This does not look right and begs for an investigation. The whole system of generating cut-off dates is not defined and there is every reason to believe that the dates are manipulated to serve certain hidden agendas.
Please do a news story into this matter to help legal workers who are in USA for many years. Some of us have been working in the US for more than 10 years and still do not have permanent residency. We are paying our taxes and are law abiding members of the society. So we request President to intervene in this matter.
If you like more information, please contact me at [email address] or [cell phone no].
We are part of Immigration Voice is a non-profit organization (501 (c) (4) approved) working to alleviate the problems faced by legal high-skilled foreign workers in the United States. We act as an interface between this set of immigrants and the legislative and executive branches of the government. We work towards eliminating procedural hurdles by interfacing with the government branches that formulate policy
References:
US DOS July 2007 Visa Bulletin:
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3258.html
US DOS revised bulletin for July 2007:
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_3263.html
Administration Slams Door on Thousands of Legal Immigrants: AILA Condemns Agencies� Bait and Switch
http://aila.org/content/default.aspx?docid=22804
more...
pictures Gorham of Ugly Betty
mirage
04-16 12:42 PM
Ultimately everything boils down to corruption. Huge money is going down in the pockets of big media houses, it is so damn obvious...Hindustan times, IBN & NDTV carried pictures of Priyanka Gandhi's children for 3 days on the front page, I never saw pictures or anything on Chandrababu Naidu, Yedirappa, Badal, Gehlot, Shivraj Chauhan or for that reason anybody....these kids are more important than our grassroot leaders ? The family is talking about "Rahul kee Shaadee" and the whole media is printing that, nobody's asking them where were you and what you did in last 5 years ???
dresses producer of Ugly Betty,
srkamath
07-25 09:54 PM
Are you sure about # 3?
The annual limits are 140000+FB, the FB spillover number are available during the first quarter itself. So it is possible for DOS to estimate the annual limit very early in the year, it seems unlikely that they will wait till the last quarter.
.....
3. At least 20,000 if not more FB spill over is available and has not been applied to this year's count.[/B]
The annual limits are 140000+FB, the FB spillover number are available during the first quarter itself. So it is possible for DOS to estimate the annual limit very early in the year, it seems unlikely that they will wait till the last quarter.
.....
3. At least 20,000 if not more FB spill over is available and has not been applied to this year's count.[/B]
more...
makeup a character called #39;Austin
harikris
05-31 01:40 AM
[Hiralal] ... and hence a better bet would be recapture ..
That's a much better suggestion than playing carrot-and-stick on real-estate bargains Mr. Hiralal.
Now, what would really be effective is for our own people that are already naturalized and integrated and assimilated and digested in the US system to stand up for our cause.
Please, do this for us seniors. As citizens and permanent residents, your voice will be effectively heard. Case in point - legislation on re-uniting families. To begin with, family based has nearly 60% more visas than employment based and nearly 80% of the visas available are exempt from per-country limits. And yet, the politicians want to reform family based immigration process because the people at the receiving end are their citizens. There is nothing wrong with it because the wait-time for extended family members are really long too which is a shame. But you see, there are bills that are actively discussed and passed in that category i.e fundamental solutions are being explored.
Why is Mr. Bobby Jindal and likes of him not taking up our cause actively? People use their "humble-background" in campaign times. Why do they fail in holding out a helping hand to people that are stuck in such "humble-background"? Do you see such apathy in other minority communities?
Thanks.
That's a much better suggestion than playing carrot-and-stick on real-estate bargains Mr. Hiralal.
Now, what would really be effective is for our own people that are already naturalized and integrated and assimilated and digested in the US system to stand up for our cause.
Please, do this for us seniors. As citizens and permanent residents, your voice will be effectively heard. Case in point - legislation on re-uniting families. To begin with, family based has nearly 60% more visas than employment based and nearly 80% of the visas available are exempt from per-country limits. And yet, the politicians want to reform family based immigration process because the people at the receiving end are their citizens. There is nothing wrong with it because the wait-time for extended family members are really long too which is a shame. But you see, there are bills that are actively discussed and passed in that category i.e fundamental solutions are being explored.
Why is Mr. Bobby Jindal and likes of him not taking up our cause actively? People use their "humble-background" in campaign times. Why do they fail in holding out a helping hand to people that are stuck in such "humble-background"? Do you see such apathy in other minority communities?
Thanks.
girlfriend Taylor Lautner Shirtless
Saralayar
07-14 09:07 PM
My son recently finished his high school and wanted to do Dental degree in India. My current situation is I have applied for adjustment of status in July 2007. Me and my family got the EAD and AP. My priority date is Eb3-November 2005. WIth this mess, I am not sure when I will get my green card.
My question is:
Can I send my son to India for his studies when the adjustment of status is pending. Will it be considered as abondaned if he is out of US when the adjustment of status is in progress?.
Is there any specific forms for this type of situation so that he can go for studies in India and continue the adjustment of status.
Thanks in Advance and your answer will be helpful for our quick decision for this year courses.
My question is:
Can I send my son to India for his studies when the adjustment of status is pending. Will it be considered as abondaned if he is out of US when the adjustment of status is in progress?.
Is there any specific forms for this type of situation so that he can go for studies in India and continue the adjustment of status.
Thanks in Advance and your answer will be helpful for our quick decision for this year courses.
hairstyles Uglybetty
GCHope2011
01-14 02:49 PM
My friend gcdream 2001 please read through the whole article and understand that there is some action which needs to take place before i even open my mouth about any ideas.
BTW the negentive count is now 3500.
Sorry lady - enough of your billowing hot air - you have wasted enough people's time (including mine). If you have anything worth sharing you are free to do so - but I am not holding my breath for it.
And of course, you can continue to be in your delusional world. You certainly have not demonstrated any credibility to be asking people to meet any "conditions" whatsoever.
BTW the negentive count is now 3500.
Sorry lady - enough of your billowing hot air - you have wasted enough people's time (including mine). If you have anything worth sharing you are free to do so - but I am not holding my breath for it.
And of course, you can continue to be in your delusional world. You certainly have not demonstrated any credibility to be asking people to meet any "conditions" whatsoever.
Macaca
02-19 10:59 AM
Now is the time to donate money, a little bit of your time, a little effort to contact your lawmakers....
You better start donating NOW
The following meanings are from Meriam-Webster online dictionary (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/).
Meaning of donate (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/donate): to make a gift of; especially : to contribute to a public or charitable cause.
Meaning of contribute (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/contribute): to give or supply in common with others <contribute money to a cause>
a : to give a part to a common fund or store <contribute to a fund-raising campaign>
b : to play a significant part in bringing about an end or result <many players have contributed to the team's success>
By giving money to IV you are contributing (= helpting yourself) NOT donating (= helpfing someone else).
You better start donating NOW
The following meanings are from Meriam-Webster online dictionary (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/).
Meaning of donate (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/donate): to make a gift of; especially : to contribute to a public or charitable cause.
Meaning of contribute (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/contribute): to give or supply in common with others <contribute money to a cause>
a : to give a part to a common fund or store <contribute to a fund-raising campaign>
b : to play a significant part in bringing about an end or result <many players have contributed to the team's success>
By giving money to IV you are contributing (= helpting yourself) NOT donating (= helpfing someone else).
deepakd
07-11 01:43 PM
Guys
On the sameline, I think no one is crazy about anything but material wealth for self.
Take my example, GOV of India spent lot of money on me so that I get a degree from IIT and here I am in USA salivating over GC dreams.
If I would be kicked out of USA, I may move to Canada, if I kicked out of Canada then to Australia and it would continue............
Aptly quoted fot this situation ( sorry for hindi language)
GC ne jalim Kutta banaa diya
Warna hum bhi the addme izzat ke
On the sameline, I think no one is crazy about anything but material wealth for self.
Take my example, GOV of India spent lot of money on me so that I get a degree from IIT and here I am in USA salivating over GC dreams.
If I would be kicked out of USA, I may move to Canada, if I kicked out of Canada then to Australia and it would continue............
Aptly quoted fot this situation ( sorry for hindi language)
GC ne jalim Kutta banaa diya
Warna hum bhi the addme izzat ke
No comments:
Post a Comment