sanjay
07-06 11:08 AM
While IV is a big organization with 20K+ members, I haven't seen the transparency, All I have seen is tons of threads being created requesting members to donate money, However Is there any transparency in the way the money is being spent the answer is a Big NO.
Is IV a big organization ? Yes. Definitely. With more than 20K members it is a big org.
But what transparency do you or we need about contribution money ?
Overall I had not seen monthly contribution going more than 2 - 3 K per month in last 3 years. And I think that would be enough to maintain the server and software cost, that too if spend very carefully. Cause we have more threads than contributions and it does costs to maintain and keep servers / Software up.
Now ask yourself ! ! !
Do I need to know the expenditure report ? My answer would be NO.
Is IV a big organization ? Yes. Definitely. With more than 20K members it is a big org.
But what transparency do you or we need about contribution money ?
Overall I had not seen monthly contribution going more than 2 - 3 K per month in last 3 years. And I think that would be enough to maintain the server and software cost, that too if spend very carefully. Cause we have more threads than contributions and it does costs to maintain and keep servers / Software up.
Now ask yourself ! ! !
Do I need to know the expenditure report ? My answer would be NO.
wallpaper i love you best friend quotes.
abhijitp
07-15 01:33 PM
For the long run, we REALLY need "monthly sign-ups"! However every drop counts, so I am going to pitch in with my $5! Good initiative eb3_nepa!
hopefullegalimmigrant
01-07 02:17 PM
Guys
I just checked my status - It is now "Document mailed to applicant"
this can mean many things. I will update all once I see the document
Please keep updating your status in this thread as you see something happen
We've just gotta keep cool. Thanda thanda pani.
I just checked my status - It is now "Document mailed to applicant"
this can mean many things. I will update all once I see the document
Please keep updating your status in this thread as you see something happen
We've just gotta keep cool. Thanda thanda pani.
2011 miss you best friend quotes.
.gif "miss you best friend quotes. i miss you best friend quotes.")
nosightofgc
09-10 03:45 PM
Contributed $100 on 09/09/2007.
more...
nirenjoshi
03-09 06:14 PM
Added info about April VB to past VBs table.
http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/Past_Visa_Bulletin_Data
The way dates are moved doesn't seem to have any fact based intelligent logic.
Pardon my ignorance, but where does the data on the last 2 columns - the one for I-485s - come from? And does that includes Family+EB?
http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/Past_Visa_Bulletin_Data
The way dates are moved doesn't seem to have any fact based intelligent logic.
Pardon my ignorance, but where does the data on the last 2 columns - the one for I-485s - come from? And does that includes Family+EB?
gc28262
06-26 02:26 PM
My labor is certified online today June 26,2007. Awaiting the hardcopy of labor certification.
Center: Phily BEC
PD: May 2004
TYPE : EB3 NON-RIR
Wishing good luck to all of you waiting in BECs !
Center: Phily BEC
PD: May 2004
TYPE : EB3 NON-RIR
Wishing good luck to all of you waiting in BECs !
more...
scorion
01-06 12:07 PM
I don't think that was an issue ever. Also keep in mind the new PIM process which is now part of visa stamping might delay things if you go to get a visa stamped
Hi,
I talked to my lawyer and she didn't mention about any kind of delay so can you please give me some more details about this PIM and how does it affect the whole process and slow things down.
Thanks a lot in advanced
Hi,
I talked to my lawyer and she didn't mention about any kind of delay so can you please give me some more details about this PIM and how does it affect the whole process and slow things down.
Thanks a lot in advanced
2010 i love you best friend
learning01
04-25 02:50 PM
and a mouthful now in the works. We are not in ideation phase, we are pushing for implementaion of our goals.
learining01,
if you dont like an idea, learn to let it go by, please do not try to impose your thoughts or enforce your will.
All members can suggest ideas, some are pratical, some are are not. If you do not like an idea just let it go by....
learining01,
if you dont like an idea, learn to let it go by, please do not try to impose your thoughts or enforce your will.
All members can suggest ideas, some are pratical, some are are not. If you do not like an idea just let it go by....
more...
rongha_2000
04-30 03:40 PM
These guys are so pathetic. Have they heard a concept of "Digracing from Issue". We had better debates in my college competitions.
Committee members, dont mix issues and derail our hopes, please...!!
Aaaahhhhhh.... they are talking about delay in getting H1B visa and something like that ... guyssssssssssssssssss
Committee members, dont mix issues and derail our hopes, please...!!
Aaaahhhhhh.... they are talking about delay in getting H1B visa and something like that ... guyssssssssssssssssss
hair miss you best friend quotes. i miss you best friend quotes.
rajuram
12-16 09:33 PM
Gandhigiri approach to retrogression in my opinion will be to do some good deeds that give Immigration Voice positive publicity, which in turn pushes the retrogression debate in the forefront in the national press.
There are several positive things that IV could do:
1. Start a small scholarship in a poor/immigrant dominated school/neighborhood.
2. Help some hospital in a poor/immigrant dominated.
3. Have a blood camp.
4. Donate food.
5. Send flowers to Senate & House.
Guys, all we need is positive publicity. We do not need large sums of money to do this.
There are several positive things that IV could do:
1. Start a small scholarship in a poor/immigrant dominated school/neighborhood.
2. Help some hospital in a poor/immigrant dominated.
3. Have a blood camp.
4. Donate food.
5. Send flowers to Senate & House.
Guys, all we need is positive publicity. We do not need large sums of money to do this.
more...
chanduv23
02-24 11:57 AM
Entire world is turning up against immigration. It is beyond individual/group control to lobby for changes in that area.
It is on the threshold of the time. Right now we as individuals still can make a decision to continue to be in US and wait it out or go back to our home country.
But if this trend continues, I am afraid, some new law will make that decision for us to send us all back. It is just around the corner. Worst part is we can't do a thing about that.
So want to blame anyone, blame your politicians of your native country for creating such a mess that people wanted to move to a different country.
Such thing can never happen. Also, don't lose hope. Look at how the world was before. Slavery, racism, castiesm, untouchability, intolerance, poverty etc.... it has always been a struggle to navigate through all these barriers and we are still navigating.
Basically the attitude is "when my house is burning why should I accomodate these people" - it is how the world is and we have to navigate.
It is on the threshold of the time. Right now we as individuals still can make a decision to continue to be in US and wait it out or go back to our home country.
But if this trend continues, I am afraid, some new law will make that decision for us to send us all back. It is just around the corner. Worst part is we can't do a thing about that.
So want to blame anyone, blame your politicians of your native country for creating such a mess that people wanted to move to a different country.
Such thing can never happen. Also, don't lose hope. Look at how the world was before. Slavery, racism, castiesm, untouchability, intolerance, poverty etc.... it has always been a struggle to navigate through all these barriers and we are still navigating.
Basically the attitude is "when my house is burning why should I accomodate these people" - it is how the world is and we have to navigate.
hot i miss you friend poems. i
485Mbe4001
06-10 12:32 PM
From Ron Gotchers site:-
Something is seriously out of whack. EB3 is "unavailable." EB3 "other workers" however have a cutoff date. The applicable statute provides:
"
Quote:
203(b)(3) Skilled workers, professionals, and other workers.--
203(b)(3)(A) In general.--Visas shall be made available, in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraphs (1) and (2), to the following classes of aliens who are not described in paragraph (2):
. . .
203(b)(3)(B) Limitation on other workers.--Not more than 10,000 of the visas made available under this paragraph in any fiscal year may be available for qualified immigrants described in subparagraph (A)(iii). "
That's not a set aside for "other workers" - it is a limit. In other words, "other workers are not guaranteed 10,000 visas each year, they are limited to no more than 10,000 visas out of the 28.6% of the overall quota that is guaranteed to EB3 applicants.
How can "other workers" have a cutoff date when the rest of EB3 is unavailable?
Something is seriously out of whack. EB3 is "unavailable." EB3 "other workers" however have a cutoff date. The applicable statute provides:
"
Quote:
203(b)(3) Skilled workers, professionals, and other workers.--
203(b)(3)(A) In general.--Visas shall be made available, in a number not to exceed 28.6 percent of such worldwide level, plus any visas not required for the classes specified in paragraphs (1) and (2), to the following classes of aliens who are not described in paragraph (2):
. . .
203(b)(3)(B) Limitation on other workers.--Not more than 10,000 of the visas made available under this paragraph in any fiscal year may be available for qualified immigrants described in subparagraph (A)(iii). "
That's not a set aside for "other workers" - it is a limit. In other words, "other workers are not guaranteed 10,000 visas each year, they are limited to no more than 10,000 visas out of the 28.6% of the overall quota that is guaranteed to EB3 applicants.
How can "other workers" have a cutoff date when the rest of EB3 is unavailable?
more...
house i miss you love quotes
pappu
08-12 10:55 AM
Senate Passage of Border Security Legislation
August 12, 2010
Today, I come to the floor to seek unanimous consent to pass a smart, tough, and effective $600 million bill that will significantly enhance the security and integrity of our nation’s southern border—which currently lacks the resources needed to fully combat the drug smugglers, gun-runners, human-traffickers, money launderers and other organized criminals that seek to do harm to innocent Americans along our border….
The best part of this border package, Mr. President, is that it is fully paid for and does not increase the deficit by a single penny. In actuality, the Congressional Budget Office has determined that this bill will yield a direct savings to taxpayers of $50 million….
The emergency border funds we are passing today are fully paid for by assessing fees on certain types of companies who hire foreign workers using certain types of visas in a way that Congress did not intend. I want to take a moment to explain exactly what we are doing in this bill a little further because I want everyone to clearly understand how these offsets are designed.
In 1990, Congress realized that the world was changing rapidly and that technological innovations like the internet were creating a high demand in the United States for high-tech workers to create new technologies and products. Consequently, Congress created the H-1B visa program to allow U.S. employers to hire foreign tech workers in special circumstances when they could not find an American citizen who was qualified for the job.
Many of the companies that use this program today are using the program in the exact way Congress intended. That is, these companies (like Microsoft, IBM, and Intel) are hiring bright foreign students educated in our American universities to work in the U.S. for 6 or 7 years to invent new product lines and technologies so that Microsoft, IBM, and Intel can sell more products to the American public. Then—at the expiration of the H-1B visa period—these companies apply for these talented workers to earn green cards and stay with the company.
When the H-1B visa program is used in this manner, it is a good program for everyone involved. It is good for the company. It is good for the worker. And it is good for the American people who benefit from the products and jobs created by the innovation of the H-1B visa holder.
Every day, companies like Oracle, Cisco, Apple and others use the H-1B visa program in the exact way I have just described—and their use of the program has greatly benefitted this country.
But recently, some companies have decided to exploit an unintended loophole in the H-1B visa program to use the program in a manner that many in Congress, including myself, do not believe is consistent with the program’s intent.
Rather than being a company that makes something, and simply needs to bring in a talented foreign worker to help innovate and create new products and technologies—these other companies are essentially creating “multinational temp agencies” that were never contemplated when the H-1B program was created.
The business model of these newer companies is not to make any new products or technologies like Microsoft or Apple does. Instead, their business model is to bring foreign tech workers into the United States who are willing to accept less pay than their American counterparts, place these workers into other companies in exchange for a “consulting fee,” and transfer these workers from company to company in order to maximize profits from placement fees. In other words, these companies are petitioning for foreign workers simply to then turn around and provide these same workers to other companies who need cheap labor for various short term projects.
Don’t take my word for it. If you look at the marketing materials of some of the companies that fall within the scope covered by today’s legislation, their materials boast about their “outsourcing expertise” and say that their advantage is their ability to conduct what they call “labor arbitrage” which is—in their own words—“transferring work functions to a lower cost environment for increased savings.”
The business model used by these companies within the United States is creating three major negative side effects. First, it is ruining the reputation of the H-1B program, which is overwhelmingly used by good actors for beneficial purposes. Second, according to the Economic Policy institute, it is lowering the wages for American tech workers already in the marketplace. Third, it is also discouraging many of our smartest students from entering the technology industry in the first place. Students can see that paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for advanced schooling is not worth the cost when the market is being flooded with foreign temporary workers willing to do tech-work for far less pay because their foreign education was much cheaper and they intend to move back home when their visa expires to a country where the cost of living is far less expensive.
This type of use of the H-1B visa program will be addressed as part of comprehensive immigration reform and will likely be dramatically restricted. We will be reforming the legal immigration system to encourage the world’s best and brightest individuals to come to the United States and create the new technologies and businesses that will employ countless American workers, but will discourage businesses from using our immigration laws as a means to obtain temporary and less-expensive foreign labor to replace capable American workers.
Nevertheless, I do wish to clarify a previous mischaracterization of these firms, where I labeled them as “chop shops.” That statement was incorrect, and I wish to acknowledge that. In the tech industry, these firms are sometimes known as “body shops” and that’s what I should have said.
While I strongly oppose the manner in which these firms are using the H-1B visa to accomplish objectives that Congress never intended, it would be unfortunate if anyone concluded from my remarks that these firms are engaging in illegal behavior.
But I also want to make clear that the purpose of this fee is not to target businesses from any particular country. Many news articles have reported that the only companies that will be affected by this fee are companies based in India and that, ipso facto, the purpose of this legislation must be to target Indian IT companies.
Well, it is simply untrue that the purpose of this legislation is to target Indian companies. We are simply raising fees for businesses who use the H-1B visa to do things that are contrary to the program’s original intent.
Visa fees will only increase for companies with more than 50 workers who continue to employ more than 50 percent of their employees through the H-1B program. Congress does not want the H-1B visa program to be a vehicle for creating multinational temp agencies where workers do not know what projects they will be working on—or what cities they will be working in—when they enter the country.
The fee is based solely upon the business model of the company, not the location of the company.
If you are using the H-1B visa to innovate new products and technologies for your own company to sell, that is a good thing regardless of whether the company was originally founded in India, Ireland, or Indiana.
But if you are using the H-1B visa to run a glorified international temp agency for tech workers in contravention of the spirit of the program, I and my colleagues believe that you should have to pay a higher fee to ensure that American workers are not losing their jobs because of unintended uses of the visa program that were never contemplated when the program was created.
This belief is consistent regardless of whether the company using these staffing practices was founded in Bangalore, Beijing, or Boston.
Raising the fees for companies hiring more than 50 percent of their workforce through foreign visas will accomplish two important goals. First, it will provide the necessary funds to secure our border without raising taxes or adding to the deficit. Second, it will level the playing field for American workers so that they do not lose out on good jobs here in America because it is cheaper to bring in a foreign worker rather than hire an American worker.
Let me tell you what objective folks around the world are saying about the impact of this fee increase. In an August 6, 2010, Wall Street Journal article, Avinash Vashistha—the CEO of a Bangalore based off-shoring advisory consulting firm—told the Journal that the new fee in this bill “would accelerate Indian firms’ plans to hire more American-born workers in the U.S.” What’s wrong with that? In an August 7, 2010 Economic Times Article, Jeya Kumar, a CEO of a top IT company, said that this bill would “erode cost arbitrage and cause a change in the operational model of Indian offshore providers.”
The leaders of this business model are agreeing that our bill will make it more expensive to bring in foreign tech workers to compete with American tech workers for jobs here in America. That means these companies are going to start having to hire U.S. tech workers again.
So Mr. President, this bill is not only a responsible border security bill, it has the dual advantage of creating more high-paying American jobs.
Finally, Mr. President, I want to be clear about one other thing. Even though passing this bill will secure our border, I again say that the only way to fully restore the rule of law to our entire immigration system is by passing comprehensive immigration reform….
The urgency for immigration reform cannot be overstated because it is so overdue. The time for excuses is now over, it is now time to get to work.
August 12, 2010
Today, I come to the floor to seek unanimous consent to pass a smart, tough, and effective $600 million bill that will significantly enhance the security and integrity of our nation’s southern border—which currently lacks the resources needed to fully combat the drug smugglers, gun-runners, human-traffickers, money launderers and other organized criminals that seek to do harm to innocent Americans along our border….
The best part of this border package, Mr. President, is that it is fully paid for and does not increase the deficit by a single penny. In actuality, the Congressional Budget Office has determined that this bill will yield a direct savings to taxpayers of $50 million….
The emergency border funds we are passing today are fully paid for by assessing fees on certain types of companies who hire foreign workers using certain types of visas in a way that Congress did not intend. I want to take a moment to explain exactly what we are doing in this bill a little further because I want everyone to clearly understand how these offsets are designed.
In 1990, Congress realized that the world was changing rapidly and that technological innovations like the internet were creating a high demand in the United States for high-tech workers to create new technologies and products. Consequently, Congress created the H-1B visa program to allow U.S. employers to hire foreign tech workers in special circumstances when they could not find an American citizen who was qualified for the job.
Many of the companies that use this program today are using the program in the exact way Congress intended. That is, these companies (like Microsoft, IBM, and Intel) are hiring bright foreign students educated in our American universities to work in the U.S. for 6 or 7 years to invent new product lines and technologies so that Microsoft, IBM, and Intel can sell more products to the American public. Then—at the expiration of the H-1B visa period—these companies apply for these talented workers to earn green cards and stay with the company.
When the H-1B visa program is used in this manner, it is a good program for everyone involved. It is good for the company. It is good for the worker. And it is good for the American people who benefit from the products and jobs created by the innovation of the H-1B visa holder.
Every day, companies like Oracle, Cisco, Apple and others use the H-1B visa program in the exact way I have just described—and their use of the program has greatly benefitted this country.
But recently, some companies have decided to exploit an unintended loophole in the H-1B visa program to use the program in a manner that many in Congress, including myself, do not believe is consistent with the program’s intent.
Rather than being a company that makes something, and simply needs to bring in a talented foreign worker to help innovate and create new products and technologies—these other companies are essentially creating “multinational temp agencies” that were never contemplated when the H-1B program was created.
The business model of these newer companies is not to make any new products or technologies like Microsoft or Apple does. Instead, their business model is to bring foreign tech workers into the United States who are willing to accept less pay than their American counterparts, place these workers into other companies in exchange for a “consulting fee,” and transfer these workers from company to company in order to maximize profits from placement fees. In other words, these companies are petitioning for foreign workers simply to then turn around and provide these same workers to other companies who need cheap labor for various short term projects.
Don’t take my word for it. If you look at the marketing materials of some of the companies that fall within the scope covered by today’s legislation, their materials boast about their “outsourcing expertise” and say that their advantage is their ability to conduct what they call “labor arbitrage” which is—in their own words—“transferring work functions to a lower cost environment for increased savings.”
The business model used by these companies within the United States is creating three major negative side effects. First, it is ruining the reputation of the H-1B program, which is overwhelmingly used by good actors for beneficial purposes. Second, according to the Economic Policy institute, it is lowering the wages for American tech workers already in the marketplace. Third, it is also discouraging many of our smartest students from entering the technology industry in the first place. Students can see that paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for advanced schooling is not worth the cost when the market is being flooded with foreign temporary workers willing to do tech-work for far less pay because their foreign education was much cheaper and they intend to move back home when their visa expires to a country where the cost of living is far less expensive.
This type of use of the H-1B visa program will be addressed as part of comprehensive immigration reform and will likely be dramatically restricted. We will be reforming the legal immigration system to encourage the world’s best and brightest individuals to come to the United States and create the new technologies and businesses that will employ countless American workers, but will discourage businesses from using our immigration laws as a means to obtain temporary and less-expensive foreign labor to replace capable American workers.
Nevertheless, I do wish to clarify a previous mischaracterization of these firms, where I labeled them as “chop shops.” That statement was incorrect, and I wish to acknowledge that. In the tech industry, these firms are sometimes known as “body shops” and that’s what I should have said.
While I strongly oppose the manner in which these firms are using the H-1B visa to accomplish objectives that Congress never intended, it would be unfortunate if anyone concluded from my remarks that these firms are engaging in illegal behavior.
But I also want to make clear that the purpose of this fee is not to target businesses from any particular country. Many news articles have reported that the only companies that will be affected by this fee are companies based in India and that, ipso facto, the purpose of this legislation must be to target Indian IT companies.
Well, it is simply untrue that the purpose of this legislation is to target Indian companies. We are simply raising fees for businesses who use the H-1B visa to do things that are contrary to the program’s original intent.
Visa fees will only increase for companies with more than 50 workers who continue to employ more than 50 percent of their employees through the H-1B program. Congress does not want the H-1B visa program to be a vehicle for creating multinational temp agencies where workers do not know what projects they will be working on—or what cities they will be working in—when they enter the country.
The fee is based solely upon the business model of the company, not the location of the company.
If you are using the H-1B visa to innovate new products and technologies for your own company to sell, that is a good thing regardless of whether the company was originally founded in India, Ireland, or Indiana.
But if you are using the H-1B visa to run a glorified international temp agency for tech workers in contravention of the spirit of the program, I and my colleagues believe that you should have to pay a higher fee to ensure that American workers are not losing their jobs because of unintended uses of the visa program that were never contemplated when the program was created.
This belief is consistent regardless of whether the company using these staffing practices was founded in Bangalore, Beijing, or Boston.
Raising the fees for companies hiring more than 50 percent of their workforce through foreign visas will accomplish two important goals. First, it will provide the necessary funds to secure our border without raising taxes or adding to the deficit. Second, it will level the playing field for American workers so that they do not lose out on good jobs here in America because it is cheaper to bring in a foreign worker rather than hire an American worker.
Let me tell you what objective folks around the world are saying about the impact of this fee increase. In an August 6, 2010, Wall Street Journal article, Avinash Vashistha—the CEO of a Bangalore based off-shoring advisory consulting firm—told the Journal that the new fee in this bill “would accelerate Indian firms’ plans to hire more American-born workers in the U.S.” What’s wrong with that? In an August 7, 2010 Economic Times Article, Jeya Kumar, a CEO of a top IT company, said that this bill would “erode cost arbitrage and cause a change in the operational model of Indian offshore providers.”
The leaders of this business model are agreeing that our bill will make it more expensive to bring in foreign tech workers to compete with American tech workers for jobs here in America. That means these companies are going to start having to hire U.S. tech workers again.
So Mr. President, this bill is not only a responsible border security bill, it has the dual advantage of creating more high-paying American jobs.
Finally, Mr. President, I want to be clear about one other thing. Even though passing this bill will secure our border, I again say that the only way to fully restore the rule of law to our entire immigration system is by passing comprehensive immigration reform….
The urgency for immigration reform cannot be overstated because it is so overdue. The time for excuses is now over, it is now time to get to work.
tattoo miss you best friend quotes
skdskd
09-13 07:38 PM
yes, I did earlier this week :-)... You can anything GC can do in EAD....
sent pm to you
sent pm to you
more...
pictures i miss you best friend quotes.
skd
04-14 12:58 AM
Had anybody have to send Driving License for filing extention of h1b?
dresses miss you best friend quotes. i miss you best friend poems
priti8888
06-26 01:51 PM
What is america losing?
Lets take a typical example:
My friend and his wife both have jobs here. They pay around $50K-60 income tax (approx) as a couple.
They have 10 yrs of exp. (approx) or have masters degree. They have a decent bit of 401K. And about 30 years of career left. They also have capital investment in India which is growing at a good pace.
Now if even one is forced to go back I am sure both of them will go back to India or wherever they are from. Makes sense?
So what are they losing by going back to India? Some $$$$. Thats all? No debt. no hassle, just semi retirement early enough.
Now think about 100 couples like this?
Now think about 1000 couples like this?
1000* 60 K = $60 million of taxes and social security lost. Who is going to pay the troops in Iraq? Or the USCIS dumbo? Will he have a job to do if we leave?
And if we leave who is going to pay the medical bills of the baby boomer who needs medicare soon?
Lets say, they replace us with younger workers. what will be their salary? 50K or 75K. lets say 80 K. Chances are they are single. If they are married. Will their wife work immediately. If no, they are collecting taxes from him at a married rate while his spouse has no income. If his wife is educated, how long will she want to live on H4? If she doesnt get H1 will they both go back or stay here endlessly? Chickens (americans).
How much tax will they will pay? If they are on F1 EAD, even better, they dont even pay social security.
Of course we lost $$$$ income, but we are not in so much deep shit as US would be if they lose 1000 couples, just 2000 people.
Now lets say we go to India and undergo semi retirement. Fine, US companies maintain competitive advantage and they gain most. But if we decide to continue to excel, can not such 2000 start a formidably competitive business? Who wins? India or USA? Or will they start multiple businesses?
Its about the numbers. If 1 or 2 dont get GC , it doesnt matter. But if thousands are impacted, most of them smart people, it will hurt someone here or many ones.
What have we really asked for in return? Just a piece of plastic that will let us live and contribute like everyone else here.
They have a problem with that too. Bloody morons.
For how many years this game of making people fools will continue? Message spreads fast. I am already telling my junior relative what to expect in America.
I totally agree with you, but think about this.
For every couple who plan to leave, there are 5 couples anxious to replace them. Do you know the % of visas approved vs visa applicants?.The 5 couples could be from anywhere, not just from india where the economy is in good shape.
My point is that America does lose when someone goes back.But the loss is on a very very micro level----and replacement is not that difficult.
Lets take a typical example:
My friend and his wife both have jobs here. They pay around $50K-60 income tax (approx) as a couple.
They have 10 yrs of exp. (approx) or have masters degree. They have a decent bit of 401K. And about 30 years of career left. They also have capital investment in India which is growing at a good pace.
Now if even one is forced to go back I am sure both of them will go back to India or wherever they are from. Makes sense?
So what are they losing by going back to India? Some $$$$. Thats all? No debt. no hassle, just semi retirement early enough.
Now think about 100 couples like this?
Now think about 1000 couples like this?
1000* 60 K = $60 million of taxes and social security lost. Who is going to pay the troops in Iraq? Or the USCIS dumbo? Will he have a job to do if we leave?
And if we leave who is going to pay the medical bills of the baby boomer who needs medicare soon?
Lets say, they replace us with younger workers. what will be their salary? 50K or 75K. lets say 80 K. Chances are they are single. If they are married. Will their wife work immediately. If no, they are collecting taxes from him at a married rate while his spouse has no income. If his wife is educated, how long will she want to live on H4? If she doesnt get H1 will they both go back or stay here endlessly? Chickens (americans).
How much tax will they will pay? If they are on F1 EAD, even better, they dont even pay social security.
Of course we lost $$$$ income, but we are not in so much deep shit as US would be if they lose 1000 couples, just 2000 people.
Now lets say we go to India and undergo semi retirement. Fine, US companies maintain competitive advantage and they gain most. But if we decide to continue to excel, can not such 2000 start a formidably competitive business? Who wins? India or USA? Or will they start multiple businesses?
Its about the numbers. If 1 or 2 dont get GC , it doesnt matter. But if thousands are impacted, most of them smart people, it will hurt someone here or many ones.
What have we really asked for in return? Just a piece of plastic that will let us live and contribute like everyone else here.
They have a problem with that too. Bloody morons.
For how many years this game of making people fools will continue? Message spreads fast. I am already telling my junior relative what to expect in America.
I totally agree with you, but think about this.
For every couple who plan to leave, there are 5 couples anxious to replace them. Do you know the % of visas approved vs visa applicants?.The 5 couples could be from anywhere, not just from india where the economy is in good shape.
My point is that America does lose when someone goes back.But the loss is on a very very micro level----and replacement is not that difficult.
more...
makeup i miss you brother quotes.
insbaby
07-21 11:18 AM
Well, if you do the direct calculations (eventhough it looks correct for most of us), it always results scary.
But that does not happen always. A Government Agency decided to accept that many applications in a month window, defintely it would not have been decided in a lunch or dinner meeting.
They should have known their limitations and how to handle the situation. If there are 20K 485 applications sitting at the storage, it would not create much problems. But it creates so much administration issues if the number is 600K applications.
One major issue is, every year they are going to receive 600K EAD renewals. They will never get time to work on 485, but life long working on renewing this EAD's and no more further GC processing.
So, its not going to be the case. Now they have money, even if it takes first year some more months, they may go for hiring more contracters OR spliting the applications across different centers processing them.
Its a big administration issue to the agency to keep all the applications pending than us.
So, no worries. There must be a solution ahead for us.
But that does not happen always. A Government Agency decided to accept that many applications in a month window, defintely it would not have been decided in a lunch or dinner meeting.
They should have known their limitations and how to handle the situation. If there are 20K 485 applications sitting at the storage, it would not create much problems. But it creates so much administration issues if the number is 600K applications.
One major issue is, every year they are going to receive 600K EAD renewals. They will never get time to work on 485, but life long working on renewing this EAD's and no more further GC processing.
So, its not going to be the case. Now they have money, even if it takes first year some more months, they may go for hiring more contracters OR spliting the applications across different centers processing them.
Its a big administration issue to the agency to keep all the applications pending than us.
So, no worries. There must be a solution ahead for us.
girlfriend love you best friend quotes.
zerozerozeven
07-11 09:25 AM
PD - Jul 07
Any hopes for me in the Sep bulletin? hope they move it by another 14 to 15 months ...USCIS...pls...my wife badly needs an EAD to start working
Any hopes for me in the Sep bulletin? hope they move it by another 14 to 15 months ...USCIS...pls...my wife badly needs an EAD to start working
hairstyles Best Friend Quote
GCVictim
02-18 02:58 PM
Looks like they doesn't want to move GC Dates. President has to give green signal to pass this. I don't know when will happen this.
ssss
08-11 05:45 PM
ssss,
I mean did your employer sent you the approval copy or the Online status changed ? The reason i'm asking this question because lot of times the Online status never changes for 3-4 months from 'Pending' to 'Approved'. When did you file your EB3 140 at NSC ? i filed in May 2007 - pending for 15 months by now.
Would you mind if i ask you when you've seen the LUD change before approval ?
Thanks for your time !
I didnot have any LUDs on my I-140, On 08/08 I recd the approval email directly. The only LUD on my case was early this year when I filed AR-11. My employer did not send the letters, I was still convincing them to sign. My application was filed at TSC on 07/30/07 concurrent.
HTH
I mean did your employer sent you the approval copy or the Online status changed ? The reason i'm asking this question because lot of times the Online status never changes for 3-4 months from 'Pending' to 'Approved'. When did you file your EB3 140 at NSC ? i filed in May 2007 - pending for 15 months by now.
Would you mind if i ask you when you've seen the LUD change before approval ?
Thanks for your time !
I didnot have any LUDs on my I-140, On 08/08 I recd the approval email directly. The only LUD on my case was early this year when I filed AR-11. My employer did not send the letters, I was still convincing them to sign. My application was filed at TSC on 07/30/07 concurrent.
HTH
gumpena
08-02 05:11 PM
Nebraska has issued only 2800 receipts for today...
No comments:
Post a Comment