Lasantha
02-13 12:00 PM
LOL - Which side are you on though? There are two schools of thought in this thread. :cool:
I am also with you guys.
Tinku:rolleyes:
I am also with you guys.
Tinku:rolleyes:
wallpaper Transformers: Dark of the Moon
sankap
07-10 01:06 PM
FYI... Canada has much better public schools and health care...Never mind the high taxes...
cps060
04-04 08:39 AM
What are your options if the Canadian PR expires (go to CA get PR and come back to US) and you are still in the US ? OR say you are in your 4th/5th year of CA PR and then you then desire to go to CA, can you re-apply for the Canadian PR ? If you can, what is the procedure .... ?
Anyone who know abt this, please respond.
Anyone who know abt this, please respond.
2011 Wii Pictures
kondur_007
01-13 09:25 PM
Can USCIS face legal challenges on this? It was just a memo, no law has been changed by the Government; the laws are just the same they were when they let it about a million people or so through these IT consulting companies.
Now they go back and say that was a misinterpretation of existing laws :eek:
This is the issue. They are targeting areas that are not "clearly defined" in the "law" itself and so they are changing "interpretation" and Implementation the way they wish. This is quite vicious move...rather than dealing with legal process, they are manipulating it. I am not a lawyer, but I doubt that this can be chanllenged legally. All we can work on is to actually "define them in law"; which would require help of congress to get actual law that defines these things; not the interpretation of some bureaucrat...
Now they go back and say that was a misinterpretation of existing laws :eek:
This is the issue. They are targeting areas that are not "clearly defined" in the "law" itself and so they are changing "interpretation" and Implementation the way they wish. This is quite vicious move...rather than dealing with legal process, they are manipulating it. I am not a lawyer, but I doubt that this can be chanllenged legally. All we can work on is to actually "define them in law"; which would require help of congress to get actual law that defines these things; not the interpretation of some bureaucrat...
more...
Googler
02-13 01:01 PM
The problem here not every country gets equal or equitable piece of pie. The probelm is Part of the pie gets thrown out and not given to people in the line because too many of them happen to be from one country.
How about facts? In 2006, Philippines received 23,733 EB visas, India - 17,169. No other country received more. China received 9,484.
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/yearbook/2006/table10d.xls
One thing to note in this dicussion is that this reallocation to oversubscribed countries is far from seamless. If cutoff dates for oversubscribed countries are not moved up in the 3rd quarter (as opposed to the fourth quarter of the fiscal year), part of the pie DOES get thrown out, as it has in recent years 2003 (88.4K), 2004 (47,3K), 2006 (10.2k) [see 2007 Ombudsmans Report, p. 34 which gives the data for these years and going back to 1992]. This is absolutely infuriating since 2003-2004 these were also the years that largely created the present backlog of applicants with early PDs. How on earth can you justify throwing out 10.2K greencards in 2006 (FY 2007) EVEN AFTER the June 2007 greencard free for all??
How about facts? In 2006, Philippines received 23,733 EB visas, India - 17,169. No other country received more. China received 9,484.
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/yearbook/2006/table10d.xls
One thing to note in this dicussion is that this reallocation to oversubscribed countries is far from seamless. If cutoff dates for oversubscribed countries are not moved up in the 3rd quarter (as opposed to the fourth quarter of the fiscal year), part of the pie DOES get thrown out, as it has in recent years 2003 (88.4K), 2004 (47,3K), 2006 (10.2k) [see 2007 Ombudsmans Report, p. 34 which gives the data for these years and going back to 1992]. This is absolutely infuriating since 2003-2004 these were also the years that largely created the present backlog of applicants with early PDs. How on earth can you justify throwing out 10.2K greencards in 2006 (FY 2007) EVEN AFTER the June 2007 greencard free for all??
old_hat
05-02 02:38 PM
The issue started long before LTTE but it has not stayed static. There were many opportunities to set it correct which LTTE shunned. Again a lot of Tamils joined mainstream in Lanka and LTTE went after them too.
more...
at0474
12-13 04:12 PM
I dont think that the per-country cap on immigration is "Unconstitutional." It may not seem fair to those affected but it does not violate any article of the US consititution. The country has a right to regulate its borders; that is its right. We should try to argue that the policy is counter-productive and harmful - not that it is illegal.
--Well said.
--Well said.
2010 Transformers 3 Dark of The
dilipcr
06-11 05:11 PM
To be honest, I do agree that the US needs qualified people with skillsets. The real question is "Are the people from the desi consulting companies the real qualified lot ? " Just to get my background details out of the way. I am a new member, from India ofcourse, and I have recently applied for my citizenship. Now with this huge deluge of immigrants, especially from the desi consulting companies, I feel that my quality of life is getting adversely impacted. Do not rush to conclusions that I am anti Indian or anti immigrant. 12 years back when I first got my H1 visa, the requirements to qualify were strict. Staffing companies to a decent extent followed rules and tried to get the best and the brightest. Once the dot com boom started, people from all walks of life entered IT. This was true of not just the Indians but also of people in the US. Soon after the bust, the value proposition from these staffing companies was simply low cost. This is not to blame the staffing companies. They behaved in an economically rational way.
Consider this scenario. If you run a consulting company, wouldn't you try to maximize your profits by staffing people in projects at the least cost ? This is econmically rational. You wouldn't worry much about the quality of the deliverables and all you would care is to dump as many bodies as possible at the client site or offshore and get the maximum bang for the buck.
In this scenario, how is it feasible to expect immigrational justice when the bodies themselves dont provide exceptional talent and skills but simply offer low cost ? Now you would be tempted to bring in the analogous case of illegal low skilled immigrants. Remember they are just that - low skilled workers. They dont "steal" the jobs of high skilled workers. But this dumping of IT workforce has completely brought down the standard of living of the IT workers here. To be honest, those who get green cards today would feel the same way five years from now when the next wave of so called "skilled IT immigrants" offer even lower wages and destroy the quality of life.
In summary, this retrogression is good in a way. The truly best and the brightest would still be employed until their turn for adjournment comes in. Only the weak are currently scared of the delays. I went through the same torrid GC phase after the tech meltdown in 2001. I was not worried of my job then but many people whom I knew got clobbered and were forced to leave. This is the darwinian flush and it will take its toll. Trust me this the bitter truth. If you people still consider that all the people on H1/L1 are part of the best and the brightest, they are WRONG. Only a small % (probably 20%) are the true best and the brightest and a good 50% will be flushed out. Sorry to say this and hey give me the red dots.
Consider this scenario. If you run a consulting company, wouldn't you try to maximize your profits by staffing people in projects at the least cost ? This is econmically rational. You wouldn't worry much about the quality of the deliverables and all you would care is to dump as many bodies as possible at the client site or offshore and get the maximum bang for the buck.
In this scenario, how is it feasible to expect immigrational justice when the bodies themselves dont provide exceptional talent and skills but simply offer low cost ? Now you would be tempted to bring in the analogous case of illegal low skilled immigrants. Remember they are just that - low skilled workers. They dont "steal" the jobs of high skilled workers. But this dumping of IT workforce has completely brought down the standard of living of the IT workers here. To be honest, those who get green cards today would feel the same way five years from now when the next wave of so called "skilled IT immigrants" offer even lower wages and destroy the quality of life.
In summary, this retrogression is good in a way. The truly best and the brightest would still be employed until their turn for adjournment comes in. Only the weak are currently scared of the delays. I went through the same torrid GC phase after the tech meltdown in 2001. I was not worried of my job then but many people whom I knew got clobbered and were forced to leave. This is the darwinian flush and it will take its toll. Trust me this the bitter truth. If you people still consider that all the people on H1/L1 are part of the best and the brightest, they are WRONG. Only a small % (probably 20%) are the true best and the brightest and a good 50% will be flushed out. Sorry to say this and hey give me the red dots.
more...
cableman
12-13 09:02 PM
I can't agree more. In fact, I don't understand how we can argue the quota cap discriminate a special group. The quota cap system is very different from the case of which a man could vote but not a woman. The quota cap system applies to every country fairly. Every foreign citizen can apply for immigration. Any country reaching the cap will have to wait for next year quota. Perhaps it is *too* fair that the system doesn't account the world population distribution. IMHO I have no doubt that this case would lose in the court and I am sure that bringing this case to the court would make EB applicants enemy to the country. In the end, what do we achieve?
hair Transformers - Dark of the
nomi
09-29 01:19 PM
Hi Kukitron and all,
I am having a new h1b with validity 7/2009. But My Visa expired by Aug,2006. Please clarify, can i travel from canada to Seattle thro Road with the expired visa and the new h1b which contains a valid I-94
Thanks
Sundar
Yes you can according to following rule
http://travel.state.gov/visa/laws/te...ams_1441.html#
There are lot of condition which you need to follow in order to use this Law. That`s why I am asking other people about it and see how many people use it and what they said about it.
I am having a new h1b with validity 7/2009. But My Visa expired by Aug,2006. Please clarify, can i travel from canada to Seattle thro Road with the expired visa and the new h1b which contains a valid I-94
Thanks
Sundar
Yes you can according to following rule
http://travel.state.gov/visa/laws/te...ams_1441.html#
There are lot of condition which you need to follow in order to use this Law. That`s why I am asking other people about it and see how many people use it and what they said about it.
more...
smisachu
06-16 02:55 PM
You cannot compare a recession to retrogression. A recession is a shrinking economy which is a natural correction of supply and demand. Retrogression is an artificial rationing which has no bearing on demand. It is almost un democratic and prejudiced. What they are doing here by imposing caps by country is they are rationing brilliance. Is it our fault that India and China produces more number of PhD�s and engineers than say Kenya or Denmark?
If you are looking for diversity look for it under family immigration and not under employment based immigration.
Your analogy of recession works for the H1. As you see in a falling demand environment the demand for H1 visas this year is tepid compared to previous years. There is no excess supply in employment based immigration as all EB immigrants are gainfully employed and hence �Employment Based� immigrants. There certainly are some who have purchased substitute labor certifications and finding loop holes in the law through consulting firms. I doubt that they are a significant part of the population waiting for visa numbers.
Your attaining green card is luck more than Pluck. Due to random visa allotment last year many people with dates in 2006 were given green cards ignoring people with prior dates. Now do you intend to say that they were more qualified than those with older priority dates? The whole intention of retrogression is not even to weed out the bum applicants, it is just a result of apathy towards a small immigrant population which is politically insignificant. You can argue all you want of the survival of fittest, but the basic fact is if some one has a PhD in physics and has multiple companies offering jobs, he is not going to stand in line meekly to collect his green card after 10 years. He is going to leg it and go to some other country who will welcome him and his intellect with open arms. So the fittest will be gone and only the mediocre will be left.
The current retrogression is not a way to filter the fittest out; it is just dumb political red tape.
Why do you have to resort to calling names ? Are ad hominem arguments the best you could come up with ? Let me give you an analogous case wherein people say that a recession is a good thing. Recession occurs in order to cleanse the economy of bohemian excesses and inefficiencies. Do you think that such people are sadists and belong to the mental asylum ? Of course there are people who get affected in a recession. Does it mean it is not desired ? In a similar vein, you need to understand that there were and are huge gaping inefficiencies in the current immigration process. There has to be a way to curb these excesses and inefficiencies. Retrogression may not be the best way but it is the only way utilized right now. If you still believe that I have to subscribe to these inefficiencies despite having gone through the immigration process, I am sorry I beg to differ.
If you are looking for diversity look for it under family immigration and not under employment based immigration.
Your analogy of recession works for the H1. As you see in a falling demand environment the demand for H1 visas this year is tepid compared to previous years. There is no excess supply in employment based immigration as all EB immigrants are gainfully employed and hence �Employment Based� immigrants. There certainly are some who have purchased substitute labor certifications and finding loop holes in the law through consulting firms. I doubt that they are a significant part of the population waiting for visa numbers.
Your attaining green card is luck more than Pluck. Due to random visa allotment last year many people with dates in 2006 were given green cards ignoring people with prior dates. Now do you intend to say that they were more qualified than those with older priority dates? The whole intention of retrogression is not even to weed out the bum applicants, it is just a result of apathy towards a small immigrant population which is politically insignificant. You can argue all you want of the survival of fittest, but the basic fact is if some one has a PhD in physics and has multiple companies offering jobs, he is not going to stand in line meekly to collect his green card after 10 years. He is going to leg it and go to some other country who will welcome him and his intellect with open arms. So the fittest will be gone and only the mediocre will be left.
The current retrogression is not a way to filter the fittest out; it is just dumb political red tape.
Why do you have to resort to calling names ? Are ad hominem arguments the best you could come up with ? Let me give you an analogous case wherein people say that a recession is a good thing. Recession occurs in order to cleanse the economy of bohemian excesses and inefficiencies. Do you think that such people are sadists and belong to the mental asylum ? Of course there are people who get affected in a recession. Does it mean it is not desired ? In a similar vein, you need to understand that there were and are huge gaping inefficiencies in the current immigration process. There has to be a way to curb these excesses and inefficiencies. Retrogression may not be the best way but it is the only way utilized right now. If you still believe that I have to subscribe to these inefficiencies despite having gone through the immigration process, I am sorry I beg to differ.
hot The Transformers: Dark of the
subba
08-03 05:33 PM
I think another positive aspect of banning labor substitution would be, for people who switch jobs after I140 approval the chances of old employer revoking application is slim (because employer can't reuse labor for anyone else).
Am I right?
Am I right?
more...
house Transformers 3 Trailer
pmb76
04-02 06:03 PM
The BJP manifesto seems to be the most realistic taking into account the issues at hand and the ground realities. This is a true thrust towards ardent nationalism and free market reform where the congress and it's communist allies have constantly failed to achieve.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/BJP-manifesto-to-offer-low-tax-low-interest-rate-regime/articleshow/4351540.cms
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/BJP-manifesto-to-offer-low-tax-low-interest-rate-regime/articleshow/4351540.cms
tattoo Developer: High Moon Studios
Desertfox
09-23 05:35 PM
FIRST lets just send out the emails as requested by IV (Yes, this is OFFICIALLY ENDORSED BY IV initiative)
We will have all the time in the world to discuss the details.
OK... I support the initiative because it will remove some people ahead of me in line. However, I bought a house last week with 3% downpayment on FHA loan, and now how can I justify writing an email with the draft that urges for GCs only for those who paid 20% downpayment?
Can you give me some thoughts on this so that I can make my selfish mind to agree on writing this email to congress?
We will have all the time in the world to discuss the details.
OK... I support the initiative because it will remove some people ahead of me in line. However, I bought a house last week with 3% downpayment on FHA loan, and now how can I justify writing an email with the draft that urges for GCs only for those who paid 20% downpayment?
Can you give me some thoughts on this so that I can make my selfish mind to agree on writing this email to congress?
more...
pictures Transformers action figures by
Kodi
05-25 12:21 PM
At what stage do you have to prove funds? Is it in the form of bank statements?
dresses The game will be released on
suriajay12
09-24 07:59 PM
congress or the president or USCIS is not going to come and physically check whether you are staying in a house or apt ..and it is not that the original suggestion will become a law in the exact terms (I cannot imagine that there will be a law saying that only those who buy house with 20 down will get GC) ..i.e. the purpose here is to show the giving faster GC's to people who are waiting since 8 years helps the economy in some minute way. and the reverse (i.e. to make a highly paid immigrants wait in line for 8 - 10 years) does not achieve anything !! ..INFACT if there are lot of job losses and if those who are here for 8 plus years start to go back (with their bank balances) ..THEN there will be measurable losses for US ..because the IT person not only takes one job to China, India or some other place ..but also trains lot of youngsters in those places and who end up taking more jobs away ..a BIG loss (plus buys house there, pays taxes, services there) (but I guess politicians are too selfish to see that !!).
it is as simple as that !!! i.e. give people faster GC's and it helps the US ..make them sweat and keep them in limbo does not achieve anything...will it work God knows ..but it is worth trying since nothing else is happening and soon if things worsen then the GC will be meaning less for many.
Also, In the end ..if we do go back ..then atleast we will have the satisfaction that we tried everything ..
----------
on unrelated thoughts ..this wait really sucks ..for me it is almost 5 years since I applied for GC and I cannot even imagine how the people who applied in 2001 / 2002 feel.
-------- and on related point ...don't rush to buy houses if u don't have a GC (actually this makes sense for those on GC too) ..here is a point from an article by Meredith Whitney who sort of became famous after making some correct forecasts.. this article was written today.
-------
Whitney said home prices were not close to bottoming and expects prices to ultimately be at least 25 percent lower from current levels. She also sees further declines in homeownership rate.
The unemployment rate, which is up over 40 percent year-on-year in key states, is "headed materially higher," Whitney said.
Albert,
I agree with you.. We need to make the points clear, point wise too. A big letter.. some points may be missed.
Plusses:1,2,3,4.....
Negatives:...
it is as simple as that !!! i.e. give people faster GC's and it helps the US ..make them sweat and keep them in limbo does not achieve anything...will it work God knows ..but it is worth trying since nothing else is happening and soon if things worsen then the GC will be meaning less for many.
Also, In the end ..if we do go back ..then atleast we will have the satisfaction that we tried everything ..
----------
on unrelated thoughts ..this wait really sucks ..for me it is almost 5 years since I applied for GC and I cannot even imagine how the people who applied in 2001 / 2002 feel.
-------- and on related point ...don't rush to buy houses if u don't have a GC (actually this makes sense for those on GC too) ..here is a point from an article by Meredith Whitney who sort of became famous after making some correct forecasts.. this article was written today.
-------
Whitney said home prices were not close to bottoming and expects prices to ultimately be at least 25 percent lower from current levels. She also sees further declines in homeownership rate.
The unemployment rate, which is up over 40 percent year-on-year in key states, is "headed materially higher," Whitney said.
Albert,
I agree with you.. We need to make the points clear, point wise too. A big letter.. some points may be missed.
Plusses:1,2,3,4.....
Negatives:...
more...
makeup Transformers Dark of the Moon
Macaca
02-19 10:36 AM
IEEE-USA (http://www.ieeeusa.org/policy/issues/H1bvisa/index.html) is saying exactly the following. As you can check, it is very influential on the Hill.
b) It is not really the smartest thing in the world to bring people here from foreign lands, let them work here in high-tech fields, and then send them back after 6-10 years so that they can compete against Americans from OUTSIDE America.
c) A lot of EB-based immigrants have been to American colleges and have graduate degrees. Again, see (b) above. Not the brightest idea to have this American-educated and trained high-skilled manpower forced to go back to India and China, the two main US competitors.
Atleast, not if you are America.
Bottomline is this. If there have been abuses of the system, and any system will be abused, then those need to be fixed. If there are loopholes, they need to be plugged (and people will come up with more loopholes.) But the USCIS should not throw the baby out with the bath water. Either this country values high-skilled immigrants, or it doesn't. The high-skilled immigrants need to know this, so that they can make decisions in their life. The incompetence of USCIS can't be the instrument of public policy making.
b) It is not really the smartest thing in the world to bring people here from foreign lands, let them work here in high-tech fields, and then send them back after 6-10 years so that they can compete against Americans from OUTSIDE America.
c) A lot of EB-based immigrants have been to American colleges and have graduate degrees. Again, see (b) above. Not the brightest idea to have this American-educated and trained high-skilled manpower forced to go back to India and China, the two main US competitors.
Atleast, not if you are America.
Bottomline is this. If there have been abuses of the system, and any system will be abused, then those need to be fixed. If there are loopholes, they need to be plugged (and people will come up with more loopholes.) But the USCIS should not throw the baby out with the bath water. Either this country values high-skilled immigrants, or it doesn't. The high-skilled immigrants need to know this, so that they can make decisions in their life. The incompetence of USCIS can't be the instrument of public policy making.
girlfriend Transformers Dark Of The Moon
sidbee
06-01 02:19 PM
Guys,
I have been working here for 9 years and next year we plan to return back to India. I spoke to SSN customer service to find out my retirement and survivor benefits. Being an Indian citizen, all these are available only if me, or my dependants, have a valid residing status with the US, at the time of making the application. The contribution at this point is like getting a right to work. This is outrageous.
We all have been legally invited into this country for a work, and that means the US gov should protect our legal and fair interests. It is universally true that everyone works to protect his family. Now here is a case, where I have no right to my retirement money just because I dont have a legal resident status. Whose fault is this. I already made the application 6 years ago. If my home country does not have the comparable SSN structure, then return the money back? We will pay the taxes and take the money back. Our kids need it.
I dont know what is the appropriate channel to get this fixed. This appears more like human rights violation, or abuse. I am sure there are many in this forum who are in the same boat as I am. Can someone team up with me to do more research or share your discoveries.
To the US, this is what I got to say:
=======================
If you want to protect the jobs for your people, please do it. You have every right. But please dont dump the people you officially invited to augument the workforce of your country into the waters. Before you bring in additional workers to support your companies, do necessary corrections in your immigration policies to let them in only with green card. Dont strangulate their careers. Your existing policies have been burning the aspirations and careers of a lot of innocent people from India and China.
To those innocent legal foreign workers that have already gathered 40 points in SS, you owe them. They deserve citizenship, not green card. I know it is jumping across multitude of issues, but is it not fair.
The only solution , to all our problems, is a LAWSUIT.
The earlier some one has the balls to do it , the better it is.
I have been working here for 9 years and next year we plan to return back to India. I spoke to SSN customer service to find out my retirement and survivor benefits. Being an Indian citizen, all these are available only if me, or my dependants, have a valid residing status with the US, at the time of making the application. The contribution at this point is like getting a right to work. This is outrageous.
We all have been legally invited into this country for a work, and that means the US gov should protect our legal and fair interests. It is universally true that everyone works to protect his family. Now here is a case, where I have no right to my retirement money just because I dont have a legal resident status. Whose fault is this. I already made the application 6 years ago. If my home country does not have the comparable SSN structure, then return the money back? We will pay the taxes and take the money back. Our kids need it.
I dont know what is the appropriate channel to get this fixed. This appears more like human rights violation, or abuse. I am sure there are many in this forum who are in the same boat as I am. Can someone team up with me to do more research or share your discoveries.
To the US, this is what I got to say:
=======================
If you want to protect the jobs for your people, please do it. You have every right. But please dont dump the people you officially invited to augument the workforce of your country into the waters. Before you bring in additional workers to support your companies, do necessary corrections in your immigration policies to let them in only with green card. Dont strangulate their careers. Your existing policies have been burning the aspirations and careers of a lot of innocent people from India and China.
To those innocent legal foreign workers that have already gathered 40 points in SS, you owe them. They deserve citizenship, not green card. I know it is jumping across multitude of issues, but is it not fair.
The only solution , to all our problems, is a LAWSUIT.
The earlier some one has the balls to do it , the better it is.
hairstyles Transformers: Dark of the Moon
EkAurAaya
07-17 09:58 AM
Note to Moderators: I posted the same question as a separate thread, but then I thought this would be a good place to pose the question too...
Heres the background...
Primary:
EB3 Feb 2003 PD
i140 Approved
i485 files June 2007
for both wife and me...
EAD/AP - approved Sept 2007
EAD extension received June 2008 (1 year)
AP extension pending
(we have not used EAD/AP yet - we both are on H1b)
Derivative:
EB2 April 2004 PD
i140 Approved
Pending - i824 in Sept 2007 to convert AOS to CP (hoping it will get through by Oct this year)
Question:
Assuming we will get CP interview before AOS gets adjudicated, do you forsee any potential issues in this scenario?
Thanks in advance!
Heres the background...
Primary:
EB3 Feb 2003 PD
i140 Approved
i485 files June 2007
for both wife and me...
EAD/AP - approved Sept 2007
EAD extension received June 2008 (1 year)
AP extension pending
(we have not used EAD/AP yet - we both are on H1b)
Derivative:
EB2 April 2004 PD
i140 Approved
Pending - i824 in Sept 2007 to convert AOS to CP (hoping it will get through by Oct this year)
Question:
Assuming we will get CP interview before AOS gets adjudicated, do you forsee any potential issues in this scenario?
Thanks in advance!
vdlrao
09-24 12:05 AM
By Septemebre 2010, EB3-india wll be in the mid of 2002.
at0474
12-13 04:12 PM
I dont think that the per-country cap on immigration is "Unconstitutional." It may not seem fair to those affected but it does not violate any article of the US consititution. The country has a right to regulate its borders; that is its right. We should try to argue that the policy is counter-productive and harmful - not that it is illegal.
--Well said.
--Well said.
No comments:
Post a Comment