понедельник, 4 июля 2011 г.

images %IMG_DESC_8% . %IMG_DESC_1%
  • %IMG_DESC_1%


  • like_watching_paint_dry
    08-11 11:47 AM
    I agree with yabadaba. We should also send feedback to CNN about the lies Lou Dobbs is perpetuating on national TV.

    Go here http://www.cnn.com/feedback/forms/form4.html?7 to give feedback about Lou Dobbs.

    This is what I wrote:


    Please try to use your own language, otherwise they will ignore the emails as form letters, but try to cover all the points. Later I think we should contact other News outlets and point out the incompetence

    also send it to a competitor network and to a show which competes with Dobbs.




    wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1% . %IMG_DESC_2%
  • %IMG_DESC_2%


  • axbasit
    12-28 03:52 PM
    I always believed that this was the place to talk about problems faced by potential immigrants, and it would not matter from where they came from? but this
    forum is turning into something else.

    would administrator(s) act professionally and lock this discussion? and if these discussions would further be allowed at this point, I suggest change this website to indianimmigrationvoice.org




    . %IMG_DESC_3%
  • %IMG_DESC_3%


  • unitednations
    08-02 12:50 PM
    Thanks UN


    245i is a good example of correct intention but poor execution.

    It caused a surge of labor filings for people who were here illegally. It allowed people who were beneficiaries of i-130's to also jump over to labor cert cases afterwards when they say nothing was happening with family petitions.

    it really caused a drain to department of labor at the state level in the heavily populated states. This is when all the drama began (companies setting up show in delaware, maine, new hampshire, south dakota).

    Just with how the laws work; different agencies; different fuding, different jurisdictions; it is difficult for the agenices to do process improvement because congress doesn't ask them if they can handle a law change. Law gets changed and the agencies don't have enough time to implement or get ready for it; and then we all crib about it.

    I know everyone is in a bit of a high right now that they can file 485's but without increasing quota or allowing more people to get approved; we will definitely see some anxiety from many people.

    Honestly; my biggest worry is the people who work at consulting companies and want to leave the first chance they get. Every time a company files a 140, h-1b; it gives a chance for uscis to go through the whole immigration history of a company. At certain points the number of 140's will be greater then the actual number of people working at the company. If they start detecting a pattern that everyone is leaving;it will look like company is set up for immigration purpose.

    California service center was just getting tough with this before they stopped doing 140's. There were a few big bodyshoppers where california service center denied the 140's and one of the reasons were that they didn't have a full time and permanent job for the person. In the decision; they went to such an extent as to going to company web-site and seeing the positions posted were at client locations for 3 to 6 months; they went to dice to see their postings, etc. and denied the cases. I think there will be an issue with this.




    2011 %IMG_DESC_2% . %IMG_DESC_4%
  • %IMG_DESC_4%


  • SunnySurya
    08-05 10:27 AM
    I have utmost respect for you Walking_Dude. Your leadership and ethusasm is phenomenal. But even in IV , I comes before We.

    Personally, I don't think one necessary needs a immigration attorney for this. This is a public interest litigation. The task is definitly not easy but if 50 people can join hands and willing to shell out $500 dollars. It is doable. But I doubt that will happen.


    Guys,

    Ever wondered why a lawsuit never got filed against Labor Substitution, or stealing of EB Gcs by nurses, or against the discriminatory country quotas?

    Simple, you need an Immigration Attorney to file the case. The same AILA cardholding person who is expecting a windfall profit out of interfiling/PD porting. I am interested to see the immigration attorney who is willing to sacrifice profit for principle. It would be a first in history if that happen!!

    Good luck to everyone willing to participate in this wild goose chase. I guess you guys have too much money in bank to spend over such a mission impossible. If only you'd contribute equally to IV campaigns...



    more...

    . %IMG_DESC_5%
  • %IMG_DESC_5%


  • xyzgc
    12-28 01:09 AM
    One thing everyone needs to realize is that 21st century wars are not cheap anymore.

    India just decided to implement the 12th pay commission's recommendations to its defense forces. A surgical strike is politically a risky venture. A strike may cause immediate gains and soothe tempers of the indian public but the battle will be fought through the media reports. Also, neither does the country have a national identity system nor has India been so serious about reaching out in a pro-active way. A weak border and the continuing saga of the rich getting richer and the poor getting poorer, not to mention caste based politics, will augment future terrorist plans.

    Pakistan has found a money maker in terrorism. US Aid to pakistan to fight terrorists will reach $8B after 9/11 ( http://www.americanprogress.org/issues/2008/08/pakistan_aid_numbers.html ) and more will be promised when the Iraq returns to stability and the focus turns to Pakistan's neighbor Afghanistan as the Taliban are gaining control again. This has been acknowledged by the new president-elect. Zardari's snub to curtail recession by the Chinese and the Saudis only solidifies Pakistan's need to find other sources/means of making money. Providing a conduit for drug trafficking for the Afghani market is already a major revenue source. Corruption is rampant.

    I believe that the rhetoric in the media about war mongering and troop pullouts from the afghan border are for think tanks in Congress and the Pentagon to act and work to defuse the so called drama of war and renew their promises of providing aid in the form of $ and arms.

    India has and will continue to be a peaceful and a reactive neighbor. It will continue significant investments in capital and policy to strengthen its internal security foundation and work towards economic prosperity by defending its borders rather than be a pro-active regional cop.

    What India has gained, out of this sad and unfortunate event and its subsequent actions, is its status as a responsible upcoming super power in the region with diplomacy as the arrow and its nuclear capability as its bow!

    Do you realize the extent of loss after Mumbai attacks?
    The initial rough-and-ready calculations estimate that the business loss on those two days is close to $10 billion and the foreign exchange hit is approximately $20 billion.
    A bomb scare in any software park in India (just a scare - no loss of life and property) will generate enough fear factor to shut it down for several weeks! How much loss do you think it entails?

    And what about the loss of civilian lives? The lives of soldiers dying in shelling across India-Pak borders? The loss of morale of Mumbaities!! The feeling of insecurity when you hop on to the daily commuter train? Who will account for all of that?

    http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/News/PoliticsNation/Mumbai_attacks_may_have_cost_Rs_50k_crore/articleshow/3777430.cms

    Of course, wars are costly! It doesn't mean you should not go on war, it doesn't mean you should zero out your defence budgets, or does it?

    Do you drive your car without an insurance?




    . %IMG_DESC_6%
  • %IMG_DESC_6%


  • Legal
    08-05 06:00 PM
    In a poor zoo of India, a lion was frustrated as he was offered not more than 1 kg meat a day. The lion thought its prayers were answered when one US Zoo Manager visited the zoo and requested the zoo management to shift the lion to the US Zoo.

    The lion was so happy and started thinking of a central A/c environment, a goat or two every day and a US Green Card also.

    On its first day after arrival, the lion was offered a big bag, sealed very nicely for breakfast. The lion opened it quickly but was shocked to see that it contained few bananas. Then the lion thought that may be they cared too much for him as they were worried about his stomach as he had recently shifted from India.

    The next day the same thing happened. On the third day again the same food bag of bananas was delivered.

    The lion was so furious, it stopped the delivery boy and blasted at him, 'Don't you know I am the lion... king of the Jungle..., what's wrong with your management?, what nonsense is this? Why are you delivering bananas to me?'

    The delivery boy politely said, 'Sir, I know you are the king of the jungle but ..did you know that you have been brought here on a monkey's visa!!!

    Moral: Better to be a Lion in India than a Monkey elsewhere!!!



    more...

    . %IMG_DESC_7%
  • %IMG_DESC_7%


  • gcisadawg
    01-03 02:20 AM
    My dad was a never govt employee but I'm sad that Govt folks were so much underpaid!

    When they get bribes, why bother about pay? Sorry, I've no respect for these low lifes who take bribe and make common man run from pillar to post.




    2010 %IMG_DESC_3% . %IMG_DESC_8%
  • %IMG_DESC_8%


  • unitednations
    03-24 12:34 PM
    face it as long as the economy is tanking this is going to be an ongoing debate. Everything goes thorugh stages of high and low and we are now expereincing the lows of having the h1b's.

    Sledge While your points are valid, remember folks do not choose consulting (nor do students) as a first choice but I have friends who were employed without any issues directly with client companies who in the midst of recession decide to fire everyone. What are you options if your GC is denied because the company declared bankruptcy? How do you justify to yourself staying with the employer when they files you under Eb3 category when you a master's degree holder from one of the 10 best universities in the US? What are the employee choices here, just pack up and leave? leave houses, friends and people you stayed with many years.

    You think they haven't searched for full time positions with other companies only to be turned back? or worse case restart the entire GC process and forgo the 6+ years?

    And the experiences I am relating are from the 2001 recession. I have already seen history repeat itself now but my more fear is that tomorrow USCIS will unfortunately hit the person who followed all the rules After all how is the USCIS knowing which are the good companies and which are bad? These very things are happening and very much can happen to you as well. Do not sit on a high perch and think it will not trickle down to me

    That is one thing I have noticed of this divide between non consulting and consulting jobs.

    Reality is that people either came on f-1 or they came on h-1 through staffing company.

    Permanent jobs are the least safe from immigration point of view. As soon as there is a downturn; they will cut your job unmercilessly; doesn't matter which stage of the greencard you are in. You have absolutely no flexibility whatsoever (eb2 versus eb3); when or if they are going to start the greencard process. In fact companies such as these are the ones who generally won't give you any details of labor or 140.

    Many of the peple who are in 8 or 9 year h-1b painfully learned this lesson. They generally started at staffing company; got enticed by permanent job; got stuck in labor processing; got laid off; jumped back to staffing company; chased labor substitution; got 140 denied; jumped to another company and started again.

    Many of the people I discussed with who have been here for a long time on h-1b were continually re-starting their greencard for all these issues.

    I remember seeing a posting by another member that stated people from india were more susceptible to being out of status or having applications denied because of the long wait to get the greencard. The longer it goes; the bigger chane of something going wrong.

    People from other countries don't have such issues. I know one person from Uzbekistan who was on OPT and filed h-1b quota case in April 2007; at the same time company filed labor for him. He got greencard approved before the h-1b even got adjudicated.

    One of the issues of stafffing companies is that it is usually run by another person who was a non immigrant at one point themselves so they did not revoke h-1b's and were very flexible with their employees (that flexibility made them skirt h-1b rules). However, now that flexibility is gone as USCIS has gone through zero tolerance.

    The way USCIS/DOL/CONSULATES are behaving is making it very difficult for even the traditional companies to pursue or even keep non immigrants. Right now with the layoffs, many people from the traditional companies are approaching the staffing companies to do h-1b's. However, the staffing companies are not doing them because they are starting to follow the rules as close as they can. If they don't have a job for you then they are not going to file (no more speculative employment).



    more...

    . %IMG_DESC_9%
  • %IMG_DESC_9%


  • Macaca
    12-29 07:47 PM
    Our Nation as a Startup (http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2010/12/29/india-journal-our-nation-as-a-startup/) By Rajeev Mantri | IndiaRealTime

    Doing business in India can be overwhelming for somebody accustomed to working in a more hospitable business environment. The World Bank�s Doing Business study ranks India 134th worldwide for ease of doing business, behind lesser-talked- about nations such as Tanzania and Ghana.

    Besides the well-documented inadequacy of physical infrastructure, archaic corporate and taxation laws are yet to catch up with modern ways of structuring and operating new ventures. Yet India is able to register high rates of economic growth year after year.

    U.S. President Barack Obama�s contention that India has already arrived is magnanimous � India is a startup with high potential but hasn�t made it yet into the pantheon of world powers. Like a startup, India is chaotic and unpredictable.

    Democracy adds another twist in the tale. As the last three months have shown, Indian politics can turn on a dime and the perception of political stability can give way very quickly. India�s business model is contrary to how other Asian economies have developed: India continues to be services-driven and domestically-oriented instead of being heavy on export-led manufacturing.

    This approach shielded the economy during the financial crisis. With growth driven by high-quality entrepreneurs who have been able to deliver despite a suspicious and often obstructionist state, it�s no wonder that investors continue to be bullish on India and tend to overlook major political and geopolitical risks.

    But high growth brings with it many quandaries. Though a happy problem to have, a growing enterprise faces its own management challenges. At the very least, the capacity of India�s executives and government to manage growth has been somewhat disappointing. India chose (some would argue that it stumbled upon) a bottom-up development model based upon entrepreneurship.

    We are now reaching a stage in the economic cycle where we need to push the envelop further, not negate the strategy that has served us very well over the last two decades. India saw two bursts of significant reform, from 1991 to 1996 under Prime Minister P.V. Narasimha Rao and again from 1998 to 2004 under Prime Minister A.B. Vajpayee. Since 2004, there has been virtually no reform initiated by the Congress-led United Progressive Alliance government in areas such as labor law, where the current regime is constraining growth in manufacturing. This is impairing the quality of India�s economic growth and limiting job creation.

    Recently, Steve Jobs said that his company, Apple, is the world�s largest startup. It�s an interesting view given that Apple�s market capitalization, which is close to $300 billion, makes it one of the most valuable companies in the world. Apple also has zero debt and tens of billions of dollars in cash. From the brink of bankruptcy and irrelevance in 1998, Apple�s financial and competitive strength is now the envy of the technology industry.

    When Mr. Jobs returned as Apple�s CEO, he had a straightforward mantra: To rebuild Apple as a pioneering innovator and rescue it from the morass of creating �me-too� products, as he put it. He felt that the company he founded had forgotten what it stood for. This was audacious for a company struggling to stay on its feet.

    Indian administrators and policy-makers should also remember how high rates of economic growth have been achieved in the first place. Like a startup which has achieved a fit between product and market fit and is ready to scale up, India needs to continue providing its entrepreneurs with the space and environment to operate.

    Apple lost its mojo because it abandoned the strategy that made it what it was. Curiously, that strategy itself was not rigid and inflexible but one of continuous innovation, where Apple would make its products irrelevant before its competitors could. A return to this thinking has ensured the company�s rise through the 2000s. India, too, needs to return to policies that have transformed its economy from anemic to blistering growth.

    In Hindu philosophy, The Upanishads talk of the concept of �Atmanam Viddhi,� which roughly translates as �knowing oneself.� It turns out that self-knowledge is also a sound business strategy � to reach where you want to go, it�s first important to know how you got to where you are.

    The government must realize what it is that has delivered high rates of economic growth. Negating the ideas and policies that are driving India�s economic development by delaying the next round of economic reforms could prove to be immensely damaging to India�s economic prospects. India needs a visionary leader to step up and push through some of the changes that most agree need to be implemented � but few have the political courage to execute � or else an opportunity may be lost again.




    hair %IMG_DESC_4% . %IMG_DESC_10%
  • %IMG_DESC_10%


  • Refugee_New
    01-06 05:28 PM
    What do you mean by "Others"? Al-Jazeera? Al-Aqsa? Al-Manar?? FYI, Here are couple of Articles from the charter of Hamas. And you think Hamas is peace loving organization because........ ?

    Article 7 of the Hamas Covenant states the following: "The Day of Judgement will not come about until Muslems fight the Jews (killing the Jews), when the Jew will hide behind stones and trees. The stones and trees will say O Muslems, O Abdulla, there is a Jew behind me, come and kill him. Only the Gharkad tree, (the Cedar tree) would not do that because it is one of the trees of the Jews." (related by al-Bukhari and Muslem).

    Article 22 claims that the French revolution, the Russian revolution, colonialism and both world wars were created by the Zionists. It also claims the Freemasons and Rotary clubs are Zionist fronts. "You may speak as much as you want about regional and world wars. They were behind World War I, when they were able to destroy the Islamic Caliphate, making financial gains and controlling resources. They obtained the Balfour Declaration, formed the League of Nations through which they could rule the world. They were behind World War II, through which they made huge financial gains by trading in armaments, and paved the way for the establishment of their state. It was they who instigated the replacement of the League of Nations with the United Nations and the Security Council to enable them to rule the world through them. There is no war going on anywhere, without having their finger in it.

    I am not supporting Hamas or their core belief. I am not going that far. What i'm saying is, how can one country kill school kids and go scot-free???

    When we cried for terror victims, why don't we do the same for palestinians who are victims of state sponsored terrorism???

    If we want to discuss about Ideology of other faiths and different groups, we can open one more thread. You wouldn't want to open another thread. Because you know how nasty those ideologies are? Every religion/group have their own ideology and they are nothing but brutal.



    more...

    . %IMG_DESC_11%
  • %IMG_DESC_11%


  • Macaca
    12-30 08:20 AM
    2007: Democrats in Control, but Thwarted (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/30/AR2007123000447.html) By LAURIE KELLMAN | Associated Press, Dec 30, 2007

    WASHINGTON -- It's a painful irony for Democrats: In the space of a year, the Iraq war that was the source of party's resurgence in Congress became the measure of its impotence.

    By the end of the 2007, a Congress controlled by Democrats for the first time since 1994 had an approval rating of only 25 percent, down from 40 percent last spring. Then the debate over the war split the party and cast shadows over other issues, spawning a series of legislative failures and losing confrontations with President Bush.

    What to do about Iraq has turned into a dissing match so far-reaching and nasty that Congress's accomplishments are seen, even by some who run it, through the lens of their failure to override Bush and start bringing the troops home.

    "There is no question that the war in Iraq has eclipsed much of what we have done," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters. "If you asked me in a phone call, as ardent a Democrat as I am, I would disapprove of Congress as well."

    It's not as if the new Democrat-controlled Congress did nothing during 2007.

    It gave the nation's lowest paid workers their first raise in a decade, raising the minimum wage from $5.15 to $5.85 an hour in July. It will rise to $7.25 an hour in 2009.

    Congress also cut in half the interest rates on federal student loans and boosted annual Pell grants for post high-school education by $260 to $4,310 in July, rising to $5,400 for the 2012-2013 school year. Bush signed the bill after initially threatening to veto it.

    And just before Congress turned out the lights for the year on Dec. 19, Bush signed into law a sweeping new energy policy that requires automakers to achieve an industrywide average fuel efficiency for cars, SUVs and small trucks of 35 miles per gallon by 2020, a 40 percent jump. Some analysts said the new law will render gas guzzlers relics of the past and make farmers rivals of oil companies in producing motor fuels.

    "All of us deserve credit for getting some things done," Bush said in his year-end news conference, insisting that he doesn't keep score.

    But on the eve of an election year with the presidency and control of Congress at stake, many others do.

    In the year's firmest push-back against the Bush administration, Congress for the first time overrode one of Bush's vetoes, on a $23 billion bill for restoring hurricane-ravaged wetlands along the Gulf Coast and other water projects. The president had protested it was filled with unnecessary projects, but 34 Senate Republicans defied him.

    Democrats scored other political victories as well. Most significantly, a Democrat-led investigation revealed a troubled Justice Department and forced Alberto Gonzales, a longtime presidential friend, from the attorney general's office. Democrats also played a big role in selecting his successor, Michael Mukasey.

    But the story of Congress in 2007 is more about what it failed to accomplish during a war that the public opposes and that Democrats had vowed _ but did not _ to end.

    On that, they found themselves repeatedly outmaneuvered, unable to break bill-killing GOP filibusters with 60 votes in a Senate where Democrats held only what effectively is a 51-49 majority.

    Plans to expand health care for 10 million children stalled. And a fragile compromise put together by Bush and liberal Democrats to provide a path to citizenship for millions of immigrants buckled with only lukewarm support from all sides.

    Perhaps the most bitter pill came toward the end of the year. Democrats were forced to acknowledge that the decrease in violence in Iraq might mean that Bush's much-criticized surge buildup of troops was working.

    Simultaneously, they found themselves on the defensive against Republican charges that they squandered time on the war that could have been spent getting agency budgets passed on time. As usual, what has become an annual fix to the tax code to save 20 million families an average $2,000 in extra taxes was put off until the final days before Christmas.

    Predictably, Democrats and Republicans blamed each other.

    Majority Leader Harry Reid called Bush's "stubbornness" and Republicans' filibuster threats "obstruction on steroids."

    Republicans suggested Democrats could have accomplished big reforms on Social Security and immigration _ or even just speedy passage of the federal budget _ had it been in their election-year interests.

    "I just don't think the new majority wanted to do anything significant," said Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

    By most accounts, the window for accomplishing broad new reforms was quickly closing as the nation's political machinery rumbled into position for the 2008 presidential and congressional elections. On the ballot will be all 435 House seats and 35 of the 100 seats in the Senate.

    At stake is a wider Democratic majority, big enough to govern. A cascade of retirements by Republicans in the Senate made that goal achievable. Democrats hoped gain seats in the House, as well.

    So they labored to tout what they had accomplished in the majority. They suggested that what failed this year might pass with more Democrats elected next year.

    Bush has signed into law other initiatives of the Democratic-led Congress, such as $3 billion in funding for Louisiana's Road Home program to rebuild housing stock destroyed by Hurricane Katrina.

    Procedural and institutional reforms became law as well, such as changes in ethics and lobbying rules.

    Behind the scenes, Democrats and their aides debated which fights to pick next year with a lame duck president. Most likely, they said: the children's health care bill.

    Immigration reform, however, appears dead until the new Congress takes its seats in 2009.




    hot %IMG_DESC_5% . %IMG_DESC_12%
  • %IMG_DESC_12%


  • gc28262
    07-13 10:45 AM
    I commend the initiative. But I see a few issues with it:

    You are complaining to DOS about USCIS and DOL. That will not work. Every agency has a specific role

    You are complaining to the official who sets visa dates. He has no authority to give relief just because some applicant/s are asking for it. He has to follow the rule every month and his responsibility is only to set the dates based on the statistics received from USCIS. This official has a very specific and limited role.


    Who has the authority to set the spillover mode ? (Vertical vs Horizonal)

    I read in some immigration forum that USCIS/DOS has switched between these at will in the past.



    more...

    house %IMG_DESC_17% . %IMG_DESC_13%
  • %IMG_DESC_13%


  • django.stone
    09-26 07:03 PM
    I agree with 485Mbe4001 and many other folks on this thread that have talked about the results of Obama victory - USA would face socialist policies and personally our GCs could be affected by protectionist agenda. I have never understood why Indians (even 2nd generation) by default support Democrats, when all the values and rational reasons point us towards Republicans. I am libertarian in my views and a staunch supporter of republicans.

    Reasons for Indians to support Democrats -

    1. Generally religion neutral and not influenced by christian right wing
    2. Generally tolerant of people from other cultures rather than being a party of white folks run by white men
    3. Tendency to help human/environment suffering
    4. Afraid of military draft that could recruit our kids

    Reasons for Indians to support Republicans -

    1. Supportive of outsourcing which is one of the many reasons our home country is flourishing these days
    2. Supportive of entrepreneurship, which many if not all Indians plan to pursue at some point in their life time in USA
    3. Lower taxes so you can spend your money rather than have govt spend it for you in things you don't need (such as bear research in Montana for $3MM)
    4. Privatize social security so you can keep you own contributions rather than throw it into the common pool. Let me explain this a bit here. Indians contribute to SS all their life until 65, but never get to enjoy it as rarely we live past 65. Life expectancy of Indian women is around 60 and men is around 55, rarely we live up to 75+ like Caucasians. What happens to the money we contribute to the common pot? It is enjoyed by somebody else, if we had private accounts, you can retire around 55 and enjoy your contribution till you live.
    5. Family values of Indians very much like the value system of middle-america's republican base - religious, hard working, humility, respect for elders, american dream of owning a 3bed-2bath house with a yard, cul-de-sac and basketball etc.
    6. Aligned with Indian govt's views on fighting terrorism
    7. Allow your kid to go to private school of your choice with your tax dollars, rather than force you to send your kid to public school in your area

    Immigration

    Now coming to the issue on hand, overall roughly 60% to 80% of americans do not want any kind of immigration (check wikipedia). That is the unfortunate truth! We should all be lucky to be here due to generally business friendly laws that allows for H1B visas and EB GCs for skilled labor. If left to public, immigration would be banned. Hence, I believe both parties use this as a posturing issue during elections to their favor. khodalmd in the previous thread explained the breakdown of republicans/democrats accurately. Logically speaking, republicans can be convinced about its need to sustain economy and generate taxes as more baby boomers retire, but this logic is these days trumped by mix up with illegals.

    If Obama wins, economy/stock market would tank, more jobs would be outsourced. My fear is that during those times, any kind of immigration law would not pass. If god forbid, layoffs start to roll, then many of us may have to start from scratch, hence I call it perfect storm.




    tattoo %IMG_DESC_6% . %IMG_DESC_14%
  • %IMG_DESC_14%


  • inspectorfox
    03-23 03:23 AM
    Immigration uncertainties should not be a reason for not buying a house in the US. In my opinion it�s always best to buy a house considering it as a long term investment � You will eventually build equity even though the present US housing market is in doldrums.

    I played the housing game differently to minimize the risks associated with my present immigration scenario (I am on 8th year H1B with I140 pending since Oct 2006)...
    1) I did not buy an expensive place even though I could easily qualify for $500K mortgage.
    2) I put only 3% down payment on my mortgage instead of conventional 20%. It was a difficult decision to make due to PMI but I feel more secure with cash liquidity.

    I am an optimistic person but here is my realistic backup strategy if anything falls apart due to immigration (Worse case scenario) -

    1) Sell the house and move out of the US (Housing market conditions could be a determining factor)
    2) Rent the house (I don't think this should be a problem... LOCATION is the key)
    3) Go into Foreclosure (Highly unlikely but you are destined to be screwed anyways)

    Does anyone have a better backup plan? Please share here :)



    more...

    pictures %IMG_DESC_7% . %IMG_DESC_15%
  • %IMG_DESC_15%


  • 485Mbe4001
    08-06 01:41 PM
    Lets petition USCIS to scrap EB3 and send them home. Rolling_flood needs his GC real bad... We are unavailable today and will be U in 2010. you can have our 3k visa for your category.

    Have you never jumped a line in your life, i bet you have.

    We see it all the time, people will find ways to move ahead and so will you..nothing wrong with that. What is wrong is demeaning or ridiculing a group for you selfish needs...good luck with the law suit.. the least it will do is highlight problem our to a greater audience (Y).




    dresses %IMG_DESC_12% . %IMG_DESC_16%
  • %IMG_DESC_16%


  • msp1976
    04-07 08:31 AM
    Members working for consulting companies can talk to their employers about this. Let us know their response.

    The employers are not gonna be worried about it..

    Many of these restrictions were passed for the L1 program some 1 year back.
    I know many people on L1 still working at client sites and no one even saying peep about it...

    This is what I heard from a friend who is a employee of a NYSE listed firm with 100+ million turnover...He and a few more on L1 raised this question to their company lawyer.. The company lawyer had many arguments to defend their position. For example 'If DOL raises a question, the company would say we have offices at multiple locations one at each client site..'There is a small army of lawyers on the company's retainer and they are not afraid at all...They told the L1 employees to calm down and leave it to them....There are many creative ways in which to structure the consulting deals and the law is worth the paper it is printed on.....

    DOL is gonna have 200 more employees for the enforcement...200 is nothing frankly...Then they have to funded every year...May be congress would not fund the additional 200. Governments never have the will to go after the businesses....So the law would look very restrictive on paper and no real impact.....I know as a fact that the L1 restriction law had absolutely no impact...

    The net scenario would really depend on what happens during the first year or so...Suppose USCIS starts denying applications and they deny 10K applications...Then 5K and more of these appeal the denial and in the end sue the USCIS ..Do not forget to remember that CIR is passed and the USCIS is loaded with the legalization workload...The appeals system and the immigration courts would get swamped with these cases...As long as the case is in the appeal or the court, they employee continues to work.....The employees would have problems with the Drivers license and like but some would stick it out...Once USCIS appeals system and courts system gets overloaded with the case load...USCIS and the US attorneys would lose their will power to try to enforce the law......
    I do not know the details of judicial review for H1 denials and I did not see anything in this law curtailing the judicial review of H1B petitions...So a lot is subjective about the law.....Many laws never have their intended impact it just goes sits in some corner...



    more...

    makeup %IMG_DESC_9% . %IMG_DESC_17%
  • %IMG_DESC_17%


  • sekharpurna
    03-24 01:17 PM
    ok..People its been more than 6 months since some adventure in my case :D

    OK..today morning I got a call from a lady voice saying she is from Immigration services..

    The call ended by the time I realized my senses..here is the short story

    Immig: We are verifying your details and need from information to process
    Me: sure.

    Immig: WHo do you work for
    Me: Blah Blah employer
    :

    gimme_GC2006

    You are lucky to recieve such call from USCIS. Just go ahead and send the details ASAP.

    Four months ago one of my friend got the similar type of call from USCIS asking for copy of marriage certificate and his daugthers birth certificate. Officers aksed him to mail it or fax it. My friend was in panic mode after this, he took call back number then faxed it and called him to check if officer recieved it or not. Officer joked with him that don't panic and give him al least couple of days to go over faxed documents. When my firend told me this story, I couldn't believe but I could see the glow and excitement on his face. After 4-5 days 485 was approved for his family.




    girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14% . %IMG_DESC_18%
  • %IMG_DESC_18%


  • NKR
    08-06 03:15 PM
    speaking of DOTs..how do you give Dots?

    Send a PM to soni and ask, he/she gave me one.




    hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11% . %IMG_DESC_19%
  • %IMG_DESC_19%


  • nogc_noproblem
    08-05 12:49 PM
    I was recently riding with a friend of mine.
    We were coming to a red light, and he shoots right through it. I ask him, "Why'd you do that?" He tells me this is how his brother drives.

    We come to another red light, and again, he shoots right through it. I ask him, "Why'd you do that?" Again, he tells me this is how his brother drives.

    We come to a green light, and he SLAMS on the brakes. My heart nearly goes into my throat. I shouted at him, "Why'd You Do That?!"

    He replied, "You never know, my brother could be coming the other way."




    Macaca
    12-30 08:20 AM
    2007: Democrats in Control, but Thwarted (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/12/30/AR2007123000447.html) By LAURIE KELLMAN | Associated Press, Dec 30, 2007

    WASHINGTON -- It's a painful irony for Democrats: In the space of a year, the Iraq war that was the source of party's resurgence in Congress became the measure of its impotence.

    By the end of the 2007, a Congress controlled by Democrats for the first time since 1994 had an approval rating of only 25 percent, down from 40 percent last spring. Then the debate over the war split the party and cast shadows over other issues, spawning a series of legislative failures and losing confrontations with President Bush.

    What to do about Iraq has turned into a dissing match so far-reaching and nasty that Congress's accomplishments are seen, even by some who run it, through the lens of their failure to override Bush and start bringing the troops home.

    "There is no question that the war in Iraq has eclipsed much of what we have done," House Speaker Nancy Pelosi told reporters. "If you asked me in a phone call, as ardent a Democrat as I am, I would disapprove of Congress as well."

    It's not as if the new Democrat-controlled Congress did nothing during 2007.

    It gave the nation's lowest paid workers their first raise in a decade, raising the minimum wage from $5.15 to $5.85 an hour in July. It will rise to $7.25 an hour in 2009.

    Congress also cut in half the interest rates on federal student loans and boosted annual Pell grants for post high-school education by $260 to $4,310 in July, rising to $5,400 for the 2012-2013 school year. Bush signed the bill after initially threatening to veto it.

    And just before Congress turned out the lights for the year on Dec. 19, Bush signed into law a sweeping new energy policy that requires automakers to achieve an industrywide average fuel efficiency for cars, SUVs and small trucks of 35 miles per gallon by 2020, a 40 percent jump. Some analysts said the new law will render gas guzzlers relics of the past and make farmers rivals of oil companies in producing motor fuels.

    "All of us deserve credit for getting some things done," Bush said in his year-end news conference, insisting that he doesn't keep score.

    But on the eve of an election year with the presidency and control of Congress at stake, many others do.

    In the year's firmest push-back against the Bush administration, Congress for the first time overrode one of Bush's vetoes, on a $23 billion bill for restoring hurricane-ravaged wetlands along the Gulf Coast and other water projects. The president had protested it was filled with unnecessary projects, but 34 Senate Republicans defied him.

    Democrats scored other political victories as well. Most significantly, a Democrat-led investigation revealed a troubled Justice Department and forced Alberto Gonzales, a longtime presidential friend, from the attorney general's office. Democrats also played a big role in selecting his successor, Michael Mukasey.

    But the story of Congress in 2007 is more about what it failed to accomplish during a war that the public opposes and that Democrats had vowed _ but did not _ to end.

    On that, they found themselves repeatedly outmaneuvered, unable to break bill-killing GOP filibusters with 60 votes in a Senate where Democrats held only what effectively is a 51-49 majority.

    Plans to expand health care for 10 million children stalled. And a fragile compromise put together by Bush and liberal Democrats to provide a path to citizenship for millions of immigrants buckled with only lukewarm support from all sides.

    Perhaps the most bitter pill came toward the end of the year. Democrats were forced to acknowledge that the decrease in violence in Iraq might mean that Bush's much-criticized surge buildup of troops was working.

    Simultaneously, they found themselves on the defensive against Republican charges that they squandered time on the war that could have been spent getting agency budgets passed on time. As usual, what has become an annual fix to the tax code to save 20 million families an average $2,000 in extra taxes was put off until the final days before Christmas.

    Predictably, Democrats and Republicans blamed each other.

    Majority Leader Harry Reid called Bush's "stubbornness" and Republicans' filibuster threats "obstruction on steroids."

    Republicans suggested Democrats could have accomplished big reforms on Social Security and immigration _ or even just speedy passage of the federal budget _ had it been in their election-year interests.

    "I just don't think the new majority wanted to do anything significant," said Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell of Kentucky.

    By most accounts, the window for accomplishing broad new reforms was quickly closing as the nation's political machinery rumbled into position for the 2008 presidential and congressional elections. On the ballot will be all 435 House seats and 35 of the 100 seats in the Senate.

    At stake is a wider Democratic majority, big enough to govern. A cascade of retirements by Republicans in the Senate made that goal achievable. Democrats hoped gain seats in the House, as well.

    So they labored to tout what they had accomplished in the majority. They suggested that what failed this year might pass with more Democrats elected next year.

    Bush has signed into law other initiatives of the Democratic-led Congress, such as $3 billion in funding for Louisiana's Road Home program to rebuild housing stock destroyed by Hurricane Katrina.

    Procedural and institutional reforms became law as well, such as changes in ethics and lobbying rules.

    Behind the scenes, Democrats and their aides debated which fights to pick next year with a lame duck president. Most likely, they said: the children's health care bill.

    Immigration reform, however, appears dead until the new Congress takes its seats in 2009.




    GCBatman
    01-06 04:53 PM
    Hey guys,
    If all the topics can be posted here and anyone can start any unrelated thread (No Offense to "Refugee_New" because there are others also who did the same in past and it looks like all the moderators are sleeping.)
    So I am thinking of posting unrelated issue.
    Here is the question?
    I have to buy the tires for my car (15")
    Which tires are best Michelin or Goodyear
    Please no reds and sincere answers only.
    Thanks,



    Комментариев нет:

    Отправить комментарий