Dakota Newfie
07-03 12:20 PM
As I said, I expected to be "attacked" when I submitted my posts which only proves my point since the attacks are only coming from a "select group"; remember, the more you criticize my opions, the more you prove I'm right!
That being said, since I am not a member of this "select group", Administrator please remove me from the list of IMMIGRATION VOICE members. Thank you and good bye.
That being said, since I am not a member of this "select group", Administrator please remove me from the list of IMMIGRATION VOICE members. Thank you and good bye.
wallpaper dresses images miss you friend
.jpeg "i miss you grandpa quotes.")
aachoo
03-09 12:47 PM
Hey who are you calling BS ???? :rolleyes:
I have been in the US 15 years and counting.
-a
This is insane, they are moving 15 days in 1 calendar month.
So going by this pace for EB3
mar 2002 - march 2011
mar 2003 - march 2013
mar 2004 - march 2015
mar 2005 - march 2017
mar 2006 - march 2019
i will get gc on mar 2019 ? after 16 years of stay in USA ??? that total bull shit !!!!!!!!!!!!
I have been in the US 15 years and counting.
-a
This is insane, they are moving 15 days in 1 calendar month.
So going by this pace for EB3
mar 2002 - march 2011
mar 2003 - march 2013
mar 2004 - march 2015
mar 2005 - march 2017
mar 2006 - march 2019
i will get gc on mar 2019 ? after 16 years of stay in USA ??? that total bull shit !!!!!!!!!!!!
redds777
06-10 04:51 PM
Sent
OPPOSE the Sanders-Grassley-Harkin amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213 which severely hurts Competitiveness, Innovation and creating jobs in America
It will only take less then 1 minute of your time to click this link ImmigrationVoice.org - Advocacy -- OPPOSE the Sanders-Grassley-Harkin amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213 which severely hurts Competitiveness, Innovation and creating jobs in America (http://immigrationvoice.capwiz.com/immigrationvoice/issues/alert/?alertid=15130466)
and send the message out
Please post this link on other forums and mail to friends asking them to join this action item.
OPPOSE the Sanders-Grassley-Harkin amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213 which severely hurts Competitiveness, Innovation and creating jobs in America
It will only take less then 1 minute of your time to click this link ImmigrationVoice.org - Advocacy -- OPPOSE the Sanders-Grassley-Harkin amendment S.AMDT.4319 in bill H.R.4213 which severely hurts Competitiveness, Innovation and creating jobs in America (http://immigrationvoice.capwiz.com/immigrationvoice/issues/alert/?alertid=15130466)
and send the message out
Please post this link on other forums and mail to friends asking them to join this action item.
2011 i miss you grandpa quotes.
--Love--imissu--sweet--quote--Eterna4ui--words--luv2--friends--missing-you--b--cute--txt--greeting--miss-u--asa--note--miss-you--Magzie%2525252525252525255Cx27s-favourites--rinzie--All-4-U--comments_large.jpg "2011 images i miss you friend")
dilber
06-06 03:53 PM
We got the "welcome" and "card production ordered" email for my wife and I today too. It was a long frustrating wait at times but I am glad its over for us now. Our best wishes to those that are still waiting.
No RFE at any stage, straight forward case, never called them for status or infopass. Took them about 4.5 years.
Here are our dates for those interested in tracking.
PD: Jan 29, 2004, EB2
Ohio labor approved - Oct 2004
45 day letter - Jan 2005
Labor approved from Dalla BEC - June 2006
I I140 regular, non concurrent approved - Sept 2006
I 485 sent to Nebraska - July 13 2007
EAD approved - Oct 2007
I485 approval email - June,06, 2008
Congratulations Bothi_Tree and good luck... Do visit us some times and help out with calling campaigns etc... Your voice just got way more important to the Law makers then ours
No RFE at any stage, straight forward case, never called them for status or infopass. Took them about 4.5 years.
Here are our dates for those interested in tracking.
PD: Jan 29, 2004, EB2
Ohio labor approved - Oct 2004
45 day letter - Jan 2005
Labor approved from Dalla BEC - June 2006
I I140 regular, non concurrent approved - Sept 2006
I 485 sent to Nebraska - July 13 2007
EAD approved - Oct 2007
I485 approval email - June,06, 2008
Congratulations Bothi_Tree and good luck... Do visit us some times and help out with calling campaigns etc... Your voice just got way more important to the Law makers then ours
more...
Madhuri
10-12 02:41 PM
PD Mar 2006
485 pending
Recd EAD
485 pending
Recd EAD
axp817
02-13 02:54 PM
Congratulations on the new job, glad everything worked out for you, even in these difficult times. The hard part is behind you now, replying to the RFE shouldn't be an issue anymore.
Godspeed.
Godspeed.
more...
akred
01-21 12:30 PM
My guess is that except for the early years (2001, maybe 2002), EB-2 timelines will be almost identical to EB-3.
Supporting reasons are -
1. As things stand today, EB-2 differs from EB-3 only in the amount of wages required when filing the petition.
2. EB-3 filers will naturally earn more money with experience and file fresh for EB-2 when they can.
Other things such as qualifications and 5 years of experience are easily obtained and not relevant with such long timelines.
Supporting reasons are -
1. As things stand today, EB-2 differs from EB-3 only in the amount of wages required when filing the petition.
2. EB-3 filers will naturally earn more money with experience and file fresh for EB-2 when they can.
Other things such as qualifications and 5 years of experience are easily obtained and not relevant with such long timelines.
2010 A True Friend Is You.
willigetgc?
08-10 10:30 PM
i feel frustrated at some peoples' unwillingness to admit that eb3 needs iv's help now more than ever. They are saying that nothing much can be done for eb3, as ins merely corrected its wrong interpretation in visa allocation
I went to the advocacy days in DC this June, and the biggest push IV was/is making - country cap elimination. The biggest benefactor of this change is EB3 (eb2 will be helped too, but that is how INS preference system works) - again, the biggest benefactor of this legislative change is eb3. IV has been pushing this issue over and over - try reaching out about town hall meetings or any such meetings with lawmakers - and you will figure out how much iv is working on behalf of eb3. Unfortunately, not many eb3 were active until the last 2 vbs. So, please do not say, "nothing much can be done for eb3" or "IV is not working for EB3". Its just that you may not see value in the route that IV is pursuing. It is eb3 members' unwillingness to admit that IV needs grass root help more than ever now.
but, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The ina language says that until eb2 is not current, there will be no spillover to eb3. Agreed. but i would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. that is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all eb2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 eb3.
i am sorry to point this out, but you are looking at this from only your angle. Don't get me wrong, i would probably do the same. Having said that, logically this change will not fly with the uscis - 2 reasons - 1. Your contention that this rule is year to year - flawed contention 2. What does all eb2 satisfied mean? - these arguments will not work. I am not pulling you or the idea down - but simply stating my point of view based on what I know of the law.
is this something iv can point out and fight for? Can eb3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
now a days we are seeing more threads related to spill over allocation interpretation etc, but i have not seen any single post by iv core about this. I am from eb3 community and share the frustration among others.
i remember a time just a few months ago this year, eb2 were complaining about spillover not happening, and iv core disputed it, saying that spillover was happening.
i see a lot of people suggesting to port from eb3 to eb2, instead of wasting time on these discussions. Well, porting is not an option for most of us. It is either because we are working for big companies (who do not want to extra burden) or not able to find a small company which can help us.
just like you are seeing the ground realities of porting from eb3 to eb2, i believe that iv knows the ground reality of proposing new interpretations to the law. I would go a little further in saying that the proposals considered here are changes in the law than changes in the interpretation of the law.
I may be wrong on my thinking, but I do hope you take a suggestion - when reading the INS law, understand it independently first. Then go back to see, if it can be applied on your interpretation. Do not start out with it, everything looks red when wearing red tinted glasses.......
After the advocacy days in DC, I am sold on what IV is offering and its commitment to the EB community. I am EB3 too and I am pretty much in the same boat as many of you here.
I went to the advocacy days in DC this June, and the biggest push IV was/is making - country cap elimination. The biggest benefactor of this change is EB3 (eb2 will be helped too, but that is how INS preference system works) - again, the biggest benefactor of this legislative change is eb3. IV has been pushing this issue over and over - try reaching out about town hall meetings or any such meetings with lawmakers - and you will figure out how much iv is working on behalf of eb3. Unfortunately, not many eb3 were active until the last 2 vbs. So, please do not say, "nothing much can be done for eb3" or "IV is not working for EB3". Its just that you may not see value in the route that IV is pursuing. It is eb3 members' unwillingness to admit that IV needs grass root help more than ever now.
but, if we are all willing to put our hearts and minds to it we can surely come up with new ideas that will help our cause. Surely, laws are written so that justice can happen. So if justice is not happening, the law would have some answer, somewhere.
Let me put forward my idea.
The ina language says that until eb2 is not current, there will be no spillover to eb3. Agreed. but i would contend that this statement is on a year to year basis. that is, if in the year 2002 (for example) all eb2 has been satisfied, then the spillovers should go to year 2002 eb3.
i am sorry to point this out, but you are looking at this from only your angle. Don't get me wrong, i would probably do the same. Having said that, logically this change will not fly with the uscis - 2 reasons - 1. Your contention that this rule is year to year - flawed contention 2. What does all eb2 satisfied mean? - these arguments will not work. I am not pulling you or the idea down - but simply stating my point of view based on what I know of the law.
is this something iv can point out and fight for? Can eb3 members put their money and efforts in this direction? Let me know if this sounds worthwhile
now a days we are seeing more threads related to spill over allocation interpretation etc, but i have not seen any single post by iv core about this. I am from eb3 community and share the frustration among others.
i remember a time just a few months ago this year, eb2 were complaining about spillover not happening, and iv core disputed it, saying that spillover was happening.
i see a lot of people suggesting to port from eb3 to eb2, instead of wasting time on these discussions. Well, porting is not an option for most of us. It is either because we are working for big companies (who do not want to extra burden) or not able to find a small company which can help us.
just like you are seeing the ground realities of porting from eb3 to eb2, i believe that iv knows the ground reality of proposing new interpretations to the law. I would go a little further in saying that the proposals considered here are changes in the law than changes in the interpretation of the law.
I may be wrong on my thinking, but I do hope you take a suggestion - when reading the INS law, understand it independently first. Then go back to see, if it can be applied on your interpretation. Do not start out with it, everything looks red when wearing red tinted glasses.......
After the advocacy days in DC, I am sold on what IV is offering and its commitment to the EB community. I am EB3 too and I am pretty much in the same boat as many of you here.
more...
ganip
03-17 09:45 AM
I140 approved 2005
Eb3 priority date Feb 2002
Eb3 priority date Feb 2002
hair 2011 images i miss you friend
nixstor
07-03 12:38 PM
There have been cases of folks using L1 A Visa. Big outsourcing companies (US & Indian- Does not matter) routinely file for L1 A (intra company transferee - Managerial) when the person is clearly not performing managerial job. Once on L1 A, folks can file for EB1 and get a GC very soon as it is mostly current. I have seen cases in the past like this. I do not know the status now, as DOL is coming down heavily with audits on PERM applicants. This is one area where only deserving people need to be awarded. This post is not to blame anyone, but people do use this Grey area I suppose to their benefit.
AFAIK, this does not work for people who are already in the US. One has to work in their native or different county to be eligible for the EB1 managerial position here. Some one might have sneaked away this way at some time. But this is definitely not happening on a large scale as EB1 is current for all countries for quite some time. If a lot of folks are getting away, EB1 cannot be current for long time.
AFAIK, this does not work for people who are already in the US. One has to work in their native or different county to be eligible for the EB1 managerial position here. Some one might have sneaked away this way at some time. But this is definitely not happening on a large scale as EB1 is current for all countries for quite some time. If a lot of folks are getting away, EB1 cannot be current for long time.
more...
quizzer
04-04 04:57 PM
On hindsight i belive this bill would help clean the H1B system currently abused by many bodyshops.
It would pit lot of controls on these numerous small time companies who just file H1B's on the first day..get people on bench and wait to place them in big companies for a huge money.
This leads to lot of people not getting a chance to filre H1B even though they have good offers from fortune 500 companies.
I feel we should give credit to these 2 for coming out with this bill.
Thanks
It would pit lot of controls on these numerous small time companies who just file H1B's on the first day..get people on bench and wait to place them in big companies for a huge money.
This leads to lot of people not getting a chance to filre H1B even though they have good offers from fortune 500 companies.
I feel we should give credit to these 2 for coming out with this bill.
Thanks
hot i miss you quotes death.
kondur_007
04-10 03:44 PM
Thanks Kondur. That was a very good presentation of the numbers. I very much appreciate it.
Now,
1. Why did EB1 last year needed spillover visas, although it was current all the time? If a category is current, isn't that it has less demand than allocated numbers?
2. As per May bulletin, EB4 might need a cut off. So we cannot expect any spillover from EB4. So that is clear. Now the spillover chances are from EB5, EB2 ROW and EB1(?). I am including EB1 because, given the current economy over the past year, should there be a better possibility of more spillover from EB2 ROW and EB1 compared to last year?
3. Also why are the total EB numbers different in different fiscal years (e.g., 141020 in FY2009, 162949 in FY 2008 and 154497 in FY2007)? In FYs 2007 and 2008 did the extra visas come from Family based while it did not for FY 2009? If so, why is it so?
4. Based on Pending 485 data of March 2010, I barely see few hundred EB4s. And hardly considerable number of EB1s. What's going on? If we go by this data, we should be getting good chunk of spillover numbers...
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/Employment%20Based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory-Total%203-8-2010.pdf
Thanks,
Here is what I think; possible answers/comments. I am not an expert but am thinking following:
1. Any category being "current" is based on "DOS's guesstimate" based on demand numbers they receive and so it is never "perfect". So yes, you are true that technically EB1 should be retrogressed "slightly", but considering the small number of spillover (now called fall down numbers) it used, it may not have been able to be predicted prior to the end of fiscal year.
2. That is the biggest hope and assumption that there will be more fall down from EB5 and EB1 due to "economy". Caveat is, more and more people are trying to switch to "current" categories and so actual usage may not be commensurate with "economy". We have never been given any "usage data". So everything is a pure guess on this front. Looking at data, I honestly do not see any difference in number of EB1 cases from 2008-2009-2010.
3. Yes, it is due to "spillover" from Family based category. (This is where DOS is using the word "spillover" and any visa number that go from one EB to another EB category, they all it "fall across" and "fall down"). These numbers used to be higher before and now lower as they are more efficient in using as many numbers as possible for a particular category.
4. Pending 485 data is extremely deceptive for "current" categories. Look at the approval timeframe of EB2 ROW or EB1 cases; majority of them are approved before ever counted as "pending". Remember. "pending cases" DO NOT reflect "usage".
The main thing missing in all these is the "USAGE", this should be a very easy information that can be made available by DOS, but they have not. If I had one "wish" to get one piece of info; would be this: "number of visa used in each category every month and YTD". Without that info, no prediction of spillover/fall down-across is ever possible.
Now,
1. Why did EB1 last year needed spillover visas, although it was current all the time? If a category is current, isn't that it has less demand than allocated numbers?
2. As per May bulletin, EB4 might need a cut off. So we cannot expect any spillover from EB4. So that is clear. Now the spillover chances are from EB5, EB2 ROW and EB1(?). I am including EB1 because, given the current economy over the past year, should there be a better possibility of more spillover from EB2 ROW and EB1 compared to last year?
3. Also why are the total EB numbers different in different fiscal years (e.g., 141020 in FY2009, 162949 in FY 2008 and 154497 in FY2007)? In FYs 2007 and 2008 did the extra visas come from Family based while it did not for FY 2009? If so, why is it so?
4. Based on Pending 485 data of March 2010, I barely see few hundred EB4s. And hardly considerable number of EB1s. What's going on? If we go by this data, we should be getting good chunk of spillover numbers...
http://www.uscis.gov/USCIS/Green%20Card/Green%20Card%20Through%20a%20Job/Employment%20Based%20I-485%20Pending%20Inventory-Total%203-8-2010.pdf
Thanks,
Here is what I think; possible answers/comments. I am not an expert but am thinking following:
1. Any category being "current" is based on "DOS's guesstimate" based on demand numbers they receive and so it is never "perfect". So yes, you are true that technically EB1 should be retrogressed "slightly", but considering the small number of spillover (now called fall down numbers) it used, it may not have been able to be predicted prior to the end of fiscal year.
2. That is the biggest hope and assumption that there will be more fall down from EB5 and EB1 due to "economy". Caveat is, more and more people are trying to switch to "current" categories and so actual usage may not be commensurate with "economy". We have never been given any "usage data". So everything is a pure guess on this front. Looking at data, I honestly do not see any difference in number of EB1 cases from 2008-2009-2010.
3. Yes, it is due to "spillover" from Family based category. (This is where DOS is using the word "spillover" and any visa number that go from one EB to another EB category, they all it "fall across" and "fall down"). These numbers used to be higher before and now lower as they are more efficient in using as many numbers as possible for a particular category.
4. Pending 485 data is extremely deceptive for "current" categories. Look at the approval timeframe of EB2 ROW or EB1 cases; majority of them are approved before ever counted as "pending". Remember. "pending cases" DO NOT reflect "usage".
The main thing missing in all these is the "USAGE", this should be a very easy information that can be made available by DOS, but they have not. If I had one "wish" to get one piece of info; would be this: "number of visa used in each category every month and YTD". Without that info, no prediction of spillover/fall down-across is ever possible.
more...
house miss you quotes for friends.
485Mbe4001
02-20 03:20 PM
looks like there no hope for EB3 India to move further :(
tattoo 2010 i miss you friendship
chanduv23
11-11 03:47 PM
We can do something to start with call. later admin adds funding drive or some senior member will add funding drive. Why people asking for IV core is If I or other member will start some thread/campaign it will divert to other discussion or no more support. But I have notice that if IV core starts it people become active and call or write email.
Even being a organization some one may be prez of IV org can call Zoe and find out what will be deal with HR 5882 in lame duck session. They will not reply to me or other members but atleast can reply to some IV rep.
hows that ? I am not favoring rajuram or not against chandu.. just expressing what I am thinking and what others may do..
You are also a very active poster and can definitely help IV in all possible ways. Thanks for all the help.
Even being a organization some one may be prez of IV org can call Zoe and find out what will be deal with HR 5882 in lame duck session. They will not reply to me or other members but atleast can reply to some IV rep.
hows that ? I am not favoring rajuram or not against chandu.. just expressing what I am thinking and what others may do..
You are also a very active poster and can definitely help IV in all possible ways. Thanks for all the help.
more...
pictures So, I just wont you to know
Sunx_2004
07-15 01:53 PM
I agree, Don't waste single minute and consult attorney if you haven'nt done so..
Good luck
ajthakur,
U r covered under AC-21 if I-140 is not revoked by your previous employer.
Be truthful to USCIS and using a very good attorney firm drat AC-21 and Employment verification letter to USCIS. Since your PD is current chances are after reviewing the new employment letter USCIS might approve your case.
Please dont waste time in on this forum, instead spend some money to consult Rajeev Khanna or Sheela Murthy, it is worth spending every penny on the advice and their services for invoking AC-21.
Per your RFE notice it looks like, USCIS is only interested in verifying your current employment in the similar profession. good employment verification letter and AC-21 draft is good to save your GC.
RFE might have triggered due to previous H1B transfer, it has nothing to do with your employer revoking I-140. Trust me lot of desi consulting companies dont want to take any "Panga" with USCIS and 99% of the time they just ignore employees leaving them. So dont worry, dial in Murthy or Khanna consulting services and see what's their take on your case. If you are getting any help from new Employer's attorney that will be free of cost to you.
Bottomline you need a competent attorney for answering this RFE and invoking AC-21.
Good luck
ajthakur,
U r covered under AC-21 if I-140 is not revoked by your previous employer.
Be truthful to USCIS and using a very good attorney firm drat AC-21 and Employment verification letter to USCIS. Since your PD is current chances are after reviewing the new employment letter USCIS might approve your case.
Please dont waste time in on this forum, instead spend some money to consult Rajeev Khanna or Sheela Murthy, it is worth spending every penny on the advice and their services for invoking AC-21.
Per your RFE notice it looks like, USCIS is only interested in verifying your current employment in the similar profession. good employment verification letter and AC-21 draft is good to save your GC.
RFE might have triggered due to previous H1B transfer, it has nothing to do with your employer revoking I-140. Trust me lot of desi consulting companies dont want to take any "Panga" with USCIS and 99% of the time they just ignore employees leaving them. So dont worry, dial in Murthy or Khanna consulting services and see what's their take on your case. If you are getting any help from new Employer's attorney that will be free of cost to you.
Bottomline you need a competent attorney for answering this RFE and invoking AC-21.
dresses i miss you best friend quotes.
WeShallOvercome
08-17 05:47 PM
I don't get it.
How can:
VB-April07 EB3-ROW PD be Aug-02
VB-MAy07 EB3-ROW PD be Aug-03
VB-June07 EB3-ROW PD be June-05
..and then:
VB-Sept-07 EB3-ROW PD be Aug-02
Are you telling me they haven't processed any EB3-ROW 485 during all those months? Why does it go all the way back to Aug-02???
Sometimes i consider seriously giving up:(
Need someone to give me the motivation to keep waiting... something logical i can understand.
Well, First let me tell you that nothing in USCIS makes any sense.
Cominig to the reasoning behind it, it could be that they did not have enough 'approvable' cases with PDs before Aug'02 to exhaust the annual quota(stuck in name check FP check etc), so they moved the dates forward. They approved some cases that felll within the new dates.
Now after approving some newly current cases, only a few visas are left with them. Also, by this time, some of the older cases, which were stuck earlier got out of whatever check they were stuck in...
As a result, now they don't have enough visas available to approve any cases after the PD of Aug'02.
Anything is possible here dear !
How can:
VB-April07 EB3-ROW PD be Aug-02
VB-MAy07 EB3-ROW PD be Aug-03
VB-June07 EB3-ROW PD be June-05
..and then:
VB-Sept-07 EB3-ROW PD be Aug-02
Are you telling me they haven't processed any EB3-ROW 485 during all those months? Why does it go all the way back to Aug-02???
Sometimes i consider seriously giving up:(
Need someone to give me the motivation to keep waiting... something logical i can understand.
Well, First let me tell you that nothing in USCIS makes any sense.
Cominig to the reasoning behind it, it could be that they did not have enough 'approvable' cases with PDs before Aug'02 to exhaust the annual quota(stuck in name check FP check etc), so they moved the dates forward. They approved some cases that felll within the new dates.
Now after approving some newly current cases, only a few visas are left with them. Also, by this time, some of the older cases, which were stuck earlier got out of whatever check they were stuck in...
As a result, now they don't have enough visas available to approve any cases after the PD of Aug'02.
Anything is possible here dear !
more...
makeup miss you friendship quotes
DDD
03-14 12:06 AM
If ya'll do like a character model contest next time, I think I will be in. But we will need like a 4 week due date...lol. Good job all.
girlfriend i miss you best friend quotes
starscream
06-12 11:34 AM
Kyl: CIR can be finished in a few days
Sen. Kyl (R-Az), one of the architects of the Senate�s CIR announced today that the Senate CIR can be finished in a few days. On CNN this morning he mentioned that the Senate Republican leadership is crafting a few necessary amendments and will take them to the Majority Leader. It is expected that the Cantwell amendment, albeit in a revised form, will be one of the amendments. The NY Times has a similar report.
please post the link to the NYTimes report and also to the report which says Cantwell amendment will be included
Sen. Kyl (R-Az), one of the architects of the Senate�s CIR announced today that the Senate CIR can be finished in a few days. On CNN this morning he mentioned that the Senate Republican leadership is crafting a few necessary amendments and will take them to the Majority Leader. It is expected that the Cantwell amendment, albeit in a revised form, will be one of the amendments. The NY Times has a similar report.
please post the link to the NYTimes report and also to the report which says Cantwell amendment will be included
hairstyles i miss you friendship quotes
nojoke
10-20 06:34 PM
I missed on some of the conversation here
- '92-'00 was a good economic time because of the dot com boom.
It happened because of Al Gore and policies of Clinton
- the repubs were in charge of the house and senate, and they helped in part to frame/pass the policies during that time.
I thought they are in charge till 2006? So what got changed from 1992-2000 and from 2000-2006?
- the housing sector debacle started in the clinton era, when the dems pushed the fannie may & freddie mac to lower the lending standards to give loans to the people who couldn't afford it. though it sounded like a good objective they all knew that at one point it would boomerang.
This credit problem was caused by not only Fannie/Freddie but due to deregulation of banking and finance sector that started from Regan era. Republicans are so proud of deregulation.
- the dems did that for their own purposes:
1. to gain the support of the lower income/middle income population which they did.
And for Bush to be proud of the ownership society that he bragged about in 2004.
2. to fatten their own wallets-they changed the compensation rules so that the more they loan out the more their compensation. the dem guy in charge of the loaning agencies earned 90 mil in 6 years.
Prove.
3. the top two beneficiaries of contribution from fm/fm were guess who chris dodd & barck obama (barack got 130K in just 3 years). not to mention the favorable interest rates on their mortgage loans.
Not True. The employees of the firm gave to obama campaign. Companies are prohibited by law from giving donations. On the otherhand
The New York Times has published a separate list looking at contributions from "directors, officers, and lobbyists for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac" for the 2008 campaign cycle. That list � using figures from the Federal Election Commission � shows McCain receiving $169,000, while Obama received only $16,000.
- the US has prospered so far because of its capitalistic philosophy. it has advanced innovation, and entrepreneurship, because innovators know they'll be compensated for their hardwork. barack recently claimed he want's to spread the wealth around which is a socialist philosophy...you've seen that in the communist countries (no growth, poverty, and low standards).
FOX news talking point. He meant tax the rich to give tax break for the middle class. If you are super rich then I understand your anger.
Unregulated capitalism will cause serious trouble. We just found that out.
[/QUOTE]
- barack has had no accomplishment at all...no executive decision made, no major legislation (bills) introduced or passed (let alone through bipartisan efforts). so all of a sudden to assume he's going to bring change is ridiculous. hillary would have made a better president of course the press decides/controls everything now.
It is leadership skills. Not the most experienced skill that is needed. He obviously has the skills since he defeated the great clintons.
- look at the huge spending plan he has (free giveaways to everybody)...to fund that he'll tax you and I (take away whatever money we've saved).
FOX news talking points. He said he will give tax cut for middle class. Moreover McCain's spending plan is will have a deficit of 1trillion compared to 750billion from obama's plan. Google.
- he's ambiguous on everything...he changed his initial position on almost everything, and not just once (again according to the audience)
FOX news talking point again. No proof. McCain said economy fundamentally good then bad, he has a long list. I don't have time http://www.bi30.org/wordpress/flipflopper.htm
I don't think we need to go thru all this again. all i care now is my gc, and I don't think obama is for it. even if he says he's for it, you can't trust him. he'll change his position when it becomes unpopular.
again be rational in your thinking.
p.s with the limited time I had I wrote all this...so don't pounce on any gramatical errors (of course the dems like to do that).
- '92-'00 was a good economic time because of the dot com boom.
It happened because of Al Gore and policies of Clinton
- the repubs were in charge of the house and senate, and they helped in part to frame/pass the policies during that time.
I thought they are in charge till 2006? So what got changed from 1992-2000 and from 2000-2006?
- the housing sector debacle started in the clinton era, when the dems pushed the fannie may & freddie mac to lower the lending standards to give loans to the people who couldn't afford it. though it sounded like a good objective they all knew that at one point it would boomerang.
This credit problem was caused by not only Fannie/Freddie but due to deregulation of banking and finance sector that started from Regan era. Republicans are so proud of deregulation.
- the dems did that for their own purposes:
1. to gain the support of the lower income/middle income population which they did.
And for Bush to be proud of the ownership society that he bragged about in 2004.
2. to fatten their own wallets-they changed the compensation rules so that the more they loan out the more their compensation. the dem guy in charge of the loaning agencies earned 90 mil in 6 years.
Prove.
3. the top two beneficiaries of contribution from fm/fm were guess who chris dodd & barck obama (barack got 130K in just 3 years). not to mention the favorable interest rates on their mortgage loans.
Not True. The employees of the firm gave to obama campaign. Companies are prohibited by law from giving donations. On the otherhand
The New York Times has published a separate list looking at contributions from "directors, officers, and lobbyists for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac" for the 2008 campaign cycle. That list � using figures from the Federal Election Commission � shows McCain receiving $169,000, while Obama received only $16,000.
- the US has prospered so far because of its capitalistic philosophy. it has advanced innovation, and entrepreneurship, because innovators know they'll be compensated for their hardwork. barack recently claimed he want's to spread the wealth around which is a socialist philosophy...you've seen that in the communist countries (no growth, poverty, and low standards).
FOX news talking point. He meant tax the rich to give tax break for the middle class. If you are super rich then I understand your anger.
Unregulated capitalism will cause serious trouble. We just found that out.
[/QUOTE]
- barack has had no accomplishment at all...no executive decision made, no major legislation (bills) introduced or passed (let alone through bipartisan efforts). so all of a sudden to assume he's going to bring change is ridiculous. hillary would have made a better president of course the press decides/controls everything now.
It is leadership skills. Not the most experienced skill that is needed. He obviously has the skills since he defeated the great clintons.
- look at the huge spending plan he has (free giveaways to everybody)...to fund that he'll tax you and I (take away whatever money we've saved).
FOX news talking points. He said he will give tax cut for middle class. Moreover McCain's spending plan is will have a deficit of 1trillion compared to 750billion from obama's plan. Google.
- he's ambiguous on everything...he changed his initial position on almost everything, and not just once (again according to the audience)
FOX news talking point again. No proof. McCain said economy fundamentally good then bad, he has a long list. I don't have time http://www.bi30.org/wordpress/flipflopper.htm
I don't think we need to go thru all this again. all i care now is my gc, and I don't think obama is for it. even if he says he's for it, you can't trust him. he'll change his position when it becomes unpopular.
again be rational in your thinking.
p.s with the limited time I had I wrote all this...so don't pounce on any gramatical errors (of course the dems like to do that).
abstractvision
03-19 12:07 AM
Nixstor did explained his actions and I concur... Controversial handles should be banned... Handle "TALIBAN" was banned and same member opened new handle "TAWLIBANN" saying his name is Tawlibann Foggs...
Anyway we should close this issue.. I do find tawlibann's posts decent and non-offensive.. Only thing is we need to practice some respect to the communitity when chosing a handle... Its just not this.. there could be potentially other offensive handles.. So I'd say there should be a step/check in registration process to monitor/regulate handles... You won't like any handle offending your religious beliefs, dis-respecting your nation or humanity itself...
Just my 2 cents... We should stop this discussion and focus on immigration issues...
Trying to understand why Mr. Foggs was singled out...
May be obscene name: Humm ..much better than existing F---GC,fuckadothead, chumki, chumma, xxxx, coolhokie, ussexy, saksibaby, funkycatspangky, faaltoo and plenty ..check the member list.
May be obscene posts: No...his posts were very decent. He pleaded his case very politely. Never lost his cool even after being banned without being told.
May be meaning of Taliban is wrong: No, It means..someone who is seeking religious knowledge. Nothing wrong in it.
May be bad relation with US: Humm, US may not have good relations now, that was not the case earlier in late eighties and early nineties...not too far back..;)
May be having political cause: What about existing handles like FREE_KASHMIR, us-alien...etc
May be reference to terrorism: Having a same name "AbstractVision" as a terrorist organization somewhere in remote part of the world doesnot make me a terrorist.
May be religious name: Humm...not like existing jaihanuman, saibaba,saint.. .etc
May be country specific: Hum...Jai_Hind, JisDeshMeinGangaBehthiHai etc.. more than 500 handles have meaning related to India and in Hindi, Tamil etc
May be phone call was not received by proper person: Humm..did someone tell him to expect a call..;) Being a member doesnot to be glued to phone 24 hrs waiting for someone to call. A private message with time would have been the right way.
May be phone no. was fake: I had my previous cell number in my profile that I used 2 years back. I corrected this evening after this interesting post. I wasn't red flagged.
May be handle name was a distraction: If handle names are distractions, I wonder how far can we go....no offense. We have got bigger problems to deal with.
May be incorrect details: Why would I put my correct details on the internet. Didn't someone educate me about Identity theft..;)
May be user was unaware of unpublished nomenclature: That sounds like the case. May be admins would like to publish the pool of words they are comfortable with and that may not be distraction.
No offense, but without letting the guy know beforehand is definitely not up to the mark. Give this guy a break.... . Lets not apply any rules retroactively....more than 80% of the handle names are ridiculous and does not seem to be coming from intelligent folks and people with exceptional abilities.
I agree we should respect other members and names should be decent..but I do not agree that names can be regulated by forum administrators with no set rules of engagement ....so many languages in the world...one decent meaning in one country/language can be offensive somewhere else.
What wonders me is that SO MANY easily understood obscene words in memberlist as handle were allowed by admin (F---GC,fuckadothead,xxxx,ussexy etc ) and 'Taliban' got hit by a 800 pound gurilla..;)..got banned....
I am looking forward to a REAL issue discussion and get over this handle issue. Lets move on...
Anyway we should close this issue.. I do find tawlibann's posts decent and non-offensive.. Only thing is we need to practice some respect to the communitity when chosing a handle... Its just not this.. there could be potentially other offensive handles.. So I'd say there should be a step/check in registration process to monitor/regulate handles... You won't like any handle offending your religious beliefs, dis-respecting your nation or humanity itself...
Just my 2 cents... We should stop this discussion and focus on immigration issues...
Trying to understand why Mr. Foggs was singled out...
May be obscene name: Humm ..much better than existing F---GC,fuckadothead, chumki, chumma, xxxx, coolhokie, ussexy, saksibaby, funkycatspangky, faaltoo and plenty ..check the member list.
May be obscene posts: No...his posts were very decent. He pleaded his case very politely. Never lost his cool even after being banned without being told.
May be meaning of Taliban is wrong: No, It means..someone who is seeking religious knowledge. Nothing wrong in it.
May be bad relation with US: Humm, US may not have good relations now, that was not the case earlier in late eighties and early nineties...not too far back..;)
May be having political cause: What about existing handles like FREE_KASHMIR, us-alien...etc
May be reference to terrorism: Having a same name "AbstractVision" as a terrorist organization somewhere in remote part of the world doesnot make me a terrorist.
May be religious name: Humm...not like existing jaihanuman, saibaba,saint.. .etc
May be country specific: Hum...Jai_Hind, JisDeshMeinGangaBehthiHai etc.. more than 500 handles have meaning related to India and in Hindi, Tamil etc
May be phone call was not received by proper person: Humm..did someone tell him to expect a call..;) Being a member doesnot to be glued to phone 24 hrs waiting for someone to call. A private message with time would have been the right way.
May be phone no. was fake: I had my previous cell number in my profile that I used 2 years back. I corrected this evening after this interesting post. I wasn't red flagged.
May be handle name was a distraction: If handle names are distractions, I wonder how far can we go....no offense. We have got bigger problems to deal with.
May be incorrect details: Why would I put my correct details on the internet. Didn't someone educate me about Identity theft..;)
May be user was unaware of unpublished nomenclature: That sounds like the case. May be admins would like to publish the pool of words they are comfortable with and that may not be distraction.
No offense, but without letting the guy know beforehand is definitely not up to the mark. Give this guy a break.... . Lets not apply any rules retroactively....more than 80% of the handle names are ridiculous and does not seem to be coming from intelligent folks and people with exceptional abilities.
I agree we should respect other members and names should be decent..but I do not agree that names can be regulated by forum administrators with no set rules of engagement ....so many languages in the world...one decent meaning in one country/language can be offensive somewhere else.
What wonders me is that SO MANY easily understood obscene words in memberlist as handle were allowed by admin (F---GC,fuckadothead,xxxx,ussexy etc ) and 'Taliban' got hit by a 800 pound gurilla..;)..got banned....
I am looking forward to a REAL issue discussion and get over this handle issue. Lets move on...
meridiani.planum
07-21 04:01 AM
Hello Gurus,
I have red in many places that there is some cases which are "Low hanging fruits" or "Ripe cases" when they say this what exactly this means? my understand is that for USCIS every case which has all proper supporting documents then they will adjudicate that case no matter what if VISA number available, can some one help in understanding what is "Low hanging fruits" or "Ripe cases" :confused::confused:
once you get past the I-140, the typical reasons for denial of I-485 are some criminal background, out of status >180 days, mistakes on forms etc.
IMO a simple case would be someone who:
- has never changed employers
- was employed with a large US corporation which is more likely to have paid him his salary every month (as opposed to a 3-4 person company where getting hold of the W-2 is the only way to confirm).
- was never denied any application (change of status / entry to US)
- has clear medical records
- has clear documents related to birth certificate
Complicated cases are when:
- someone has repeatedly changed and employers since entering the US. The IO will need to make sure status was maintained throughout all those transitions.
- some document was not submitted, or not submitted with transalations/affidavits etc. Commonly birth certificate issues.
I have red in many places that there is some cases which are "Low hanging fruits" or "Ripe cases" when they say this what exactly this means? my understand is that for USCIS every case which has all proper supporting documents then they will adjudicate that case no matter what if VISA number available, can some one help in understanding what is "Low hanging fruits" or "Ripe cases" :confused::confused:
once you get past the I-140, the typical reasons for denial of I-485 are some criminal background, out of status >180 days, mistakes on forms etc.
IMO a simple case would be someone who:
- has never changed employers
- was employed with a large US corporation which is more likely to have paid him his salary every month (as opposed to a 3-4 person company where getting hold of the W-2 is the only way to confirm).
- was never denied any application (change of status / entry to US)
- has clear medical records
- has clear documents related to birth certificate
Complicated cases are when:
- someone has repeatedly changed and employers since entering the US. The IO will need to make sure status was maintained throughout all those transitions.
- some document was not submitted, or not submitted with transalations/affidavits etc. Commonly birth certificate issues.
No comments:
Post a Comment