kshitijnt
04-01 07:59 PM
Some time back when I asked my chinese colleagues to join IV they commented that immigrationvoice.org is an "indian" immigration forum...
No wonder they felt that way.
So if stop discussing this thread, will they join us?
No wonder they felt that way.
So if stop discussing this thread, will they join us?
wallpaper Lady Gaga Poker Face Costume
sathweb
02-15 07:18 PM
Please stick to subject of this thread.
or
Please some one close this thread. Its already old news.
(Its going out of control)
or
Please some one close this thread. Its already old news.
(Its going out of control)
lazycis
02-12 10:06 PM
:confused:I apologize for my ignorance but
what is ROW ??
A row — also called a record or tuple—represents a single, implicitly structured data item in a table :) (I think the discussion becomes too hot, time to cool down, folks. The solution is not to remove per country limits, but to increase EB quota or at least to recapture lost visa numbers. Fight for removing per country limits will divide IV and is very unlikely to achieve something.)
what is ROW ??
A row — also called a record or tuple—represents a single, implicitly structured data item in a table :) (I think the discussion becomes too hot, time to cool down, folks. The solution is not to remove per country limits, but to increase EB quota or at least to recapture lost visa numbers. Fight for removing per country limits will divide IV and is very unlikely to achieve something.)
2011 Lady Gaga POKER FACE Vinyl LP
alisa
02-13 08:05 AM
This is great!!!
All my Indian friends who were fighting with me over the (1 or 2) unused EB-2 visas from ROW, well, you can have them my friends. I ain't getting any of them anyway.
All my Indian friends who were fighting with me over the (1 or 2) unused EB-2 visas from ROW, well, you can have them my friends. I ain't getting any of them anyway.
more...
Kushal
07-27 05:46 PM
I think Kushal went to check which 1099 form to fill.... looks like platinum- amway joker told him only the 1st four digits.
I want some Amway Joker to say that they don't do this kind of cheap and dirty things...... if you make so much money then why bother others.
Run from who?...you? I will see who runs from who? :)
Sorry to hear that someone lied to you, and it totally shows that person's integrity. But its nothing to do with Amway. Amway never told them to pick u up and take you to the meeting. It was his wrong decision. Probably they are not in business today either.
My platinum is US army Airborne division...SERVING his country. You saying something?
Sounds like you know something he doesn't know. Probably he or I should have checked from you.
I want some Amway Joker to say that they don't do this kind of cheap and dirty things...... if you make so much money then why bother others.
Run from who?...you? I will see who runs from who? :)
Sorry to hear that someone lied to you, and it totally shows that person's integrity. But its nothing to do with Amway. Amway never told them to pick u up and take you to the meeting. It was his wrong decision. Probably they are not in business today either.
My platinum is US army Airborne division...SERVING his country. You saying something?
Sounds like you know something he doesn't know. Probably he or I should have checked from you.
mallu
02-13 11:53 PM
....... If it wouldn't be Europeans, there wouldn't be technological advanced United States and we wouldn't want immigrate here. We are not migrating to Kongo or Sierra Leone, don't we?
That is right. Those who came here before 200 - 300 years ago and their descendants have built a strong nation, to which every one wants to immigrate. Those who waiting in line ( and working here ) also doing the nation building and feel who got here earlier built laws/rules to weed the later batch of immigrants.
That is right. Those who came here before 200 - 300 years ago and their descendants have built a strong nation, to which every one wants to immigrate. Those who waiting in line ( and working here ) also doing the nation building and feel who got here earlier built laws/rules to weed the later batch of immigrants.
more...
neocor
01-09 01:33 PM
I just got to this site via from immigration portal.
I have been reading a lot in the other forum and here about the ways to cure retrogression. Lobbying for more Visa's and other things that were part of the S.1932 bill are fine, however these things are not going to solve the retrogression problem even if such a bill gets passed.
No one seems to be talking about the real problem that is Labor Substitution. Abolishing Labor Substitution will itself take care of every retrogression problem.
The INS does not have the right tools to police the misue of this rule. This is resutling in a lot of problems for even those employees whose Labor's get substituted even if they are still working in the same company.
Any effort to reform immigration should start with first reforming the Labor Substitution rule (if not completely abolish).
I know that all the companies/employers and the lawyers community are against removing the Labor substitution, therefore it will never be removed, but atleast it should be reformed so that it can be better policed so that no one is able to misuse it and play with peoples lives. And in turn add to retregression.
Following reforms are needed in Labor Substitution.
- First thing in the Labor Substitution reform is related to the Priority date. The Priority Date for a substituted Labor should the date when the Labor is substituted (or the I-140 filing date). It should not be be the date when the Labor was originally filed. This in itself will solve 90% of the problems related to retrogression.
- When a Labor is substituted it should be verified immediately to find if there is any I-140 or I-485 that is pending based on this Labor. If so then the Labor should be rejected immediately. Currently this is not done at the time the Labor is substituted, therefore the resulting 485 filing just amounts to add up into the backlog of Visa Number requirement, until the priority date becomes current for this 485.
- If an employee invokes the AC21 then that Labor should not be allowed to be substituted.
- There should be a limit to the time until which a Labor can be substituted. This could be debatable and could have other consequences, as the INS could invalidate any GC application that is been pending for more than the this duration.
In short the Labour substitution rule is in a mess and is getting miused a lot. People are getting fooled by the employers, and ultimately its making the retrogression more worse.
neocor
I have been reading a lot in the other forum and here about the ways to cure retrogression. Lobbying for more Visa's and other things that were part of the S.1932 bill are fine, however these things are not going to solve the retrogression problem even if such a bill gets passed.
No one seems to be talking about the real problem that is Labor Substitution. Abolishing Labor Substitution will itself take care of every retrogression problem.
The INS does not have the right tools to police the misue of this rule. This is resutling in a lot of problems for even those employees whose Labor's get substituted even if they are still working in the same company.
Any effort to reform immigration should start with first reforming the Labor Substitution rule (if not completely abolish).
I know that all the companies/employers and the lawyers community are against removing the Labor substitution, therefore it will never be removed, but atleast it should be reformed so that it can be better policed so that no one is able to misuse it and play with peoples lives. And in turn add to retregression.
Following reforms are needed in Labor Substitution.
- First thing in the Labor Substitution reform is related to the Priority date. The Priority Date for a substituted Labor should the date when the Labor is substituted (or the I-140 filing date). It should not be be the date when the Labor was originally filed. This in itself will solve 90% of the problems related to retrogression.
- When a Labor is substituted it should be verified immediately to find if there is any I-140 or I-485 that is pending based on this Labor. If so then the Labor should be rejected immediately. Currently this is not done at the time the Labor is substituted, therefore the resulting 485 filing just amounts to add up into the backlog of Visa Number requirement, until the priority date becomes current for this 485.
- If an employee invokes the AC21 then that Labor should not be allowed to be substituted.
- There should be a limit to the time until which a Labor can be substituted. This could be debatable and could have other consequences, as the INS could invalidate any GC application that is been pending for more than the this duration.
In short the Labour substitution rule is in a mess and is getting miused a lot. People are getting fooled by the employers, and ultimately its making the retrogression more worse.
neocor
2010 lady gaga poker face
Kodi
05-12 05:07 PM
This is an old artical I was able to dig up. These LTTE members have been living in colombo for 15 years. Its hard for the military to pin point terrorist among so many tamils. That's why they asked them to justify their stay in colombo. Its not a pretty situation, if the military doesn't question then the LTTE would have already taken over the capital.
This is just one incident, so far military have found many times, large number of weapons are explosives from houses in Colombo.
http://www.lankalibrary.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2818
This is just one incident, so far military have found many times, large number of weapons are explosives from houses in Colombo.
http://www.lankalibrary.com/phpBB/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=2818
more...
Marphad
04-01 12:33 PM
9-1-1, Fire Department, come soon!!!!!!!!!!!
OK. Enough of joke.
SK2006. It looks like you have a little misunderstanding. Let me put some facts in front of you:
1. I created the thread under "Interesting Topic" which is specially created for this purpose: "to discuss non-immigration topics".
2. You can not have more than 1-2 action items on IV per month. They are simply not doable. Thats the reason moderators converted IV format and tried to make it like a communication hub for immigrant community. People can discuss and share anything as community over here. You may see job related public group to discussing movies threads. There is nothing wrong in that. It keeps people visiting the forum and when the real action item comes, we don't need to keep sending private messages to people. They are just here.
- Point 2 explains why Pappu also posted on this thread.
3. Your dedication is appreciated regarding immigration issues. Please don't go away. I see you as a valuable asset in group.
OK. Enough of joke.
SK2006. It looks like you have a little misunderstanding. Let me put some facts in front of you:
1. I created the thread under "Interesting Topic" which is specially created for this purpose: "to discuss non-immigration topics".
2. You can not have more than 1-2 action items on IV per month. They are simply not doable. Thats the reason moderators converted IV format and tried to make it like a communication hub for immigrant community. People can discuss and share anything as community over here. You may see job related public group to discussing movies threads. There is nothing wrong in that. It keeps people visiting the forum and when the real action item comes, we don't need to keep sending private messages to people. They are just here.
- Point 2 explains why Pappu also posted on this thread.
3. Your dedication is appreciated regarding immigration issues. Please don't go away. I see you as a valuable asset in group.
hair Lady Gaga
gc_on_demand
09-24 03:42 PM
What if EB2 ROW person has labor approved but I 140 pending . because of C person can apply for 485 but will not consume visas.
So if DOS and USCIS decides and if USCIS loose focus from approving Eb2 ROW and EB1 case for a while and technically create no demand for them leaving more spill to Eb2 india and china that can make Eb2 india C.
Don't forget that if date is current and still USCIS keep your AOS pending some how you cannot do anything..
So if DOS and USCIS decides and if USCIS loose focus from approving Eb2 ROW and EB1 case for a while and technically create no demand for them leaving more spill to Eb2 india and china that can make Eb2 india C.
Don't forget that if date is current and still USCIS keep your AOS pending some how you cannot do anything..
more...
Roger Binny
05-28 11:46 PM
Problem is with out any attorney's support or making a case for them they cannot file it, stupid creativity by legal folks and these sweat shop clowns.
Same thing happened with labor substitution, these clowns sold their labor certifications to just came in tards for a premium, and they got their GC's.
Fr****ekkkkkin loop holes.
Same thing happened with labor substitution, these clowns sold their labor certifications to just came in tards for a premium, and they got their GC's.
Fr****ekkkkkin loop holes.
hot Sounfont. Mario Paint
Pineapple
12-14 05:10 PM
I can understand your concerns.. and no, I do no resent your comment. I rather welcome a different viewpoint! IV, I emphatically maintain is made up ordinary people, like you and me, regardless of nationality and culture. I'm not a core member, but that, in itself, is the point - there is no top-down hierarchy, no "party line". IV is us. It is the very embodiment of the philosophy, "Of the people, by the people, and for the people" .
If it were any different, I would not be here.
That said, let me address your concerns. You (and anyone else) is free to disagree.
Let us say all country quotas are removed. In that case, yes, you will see a majority of GCs going to people of Indian and Chinese extraction. But to say that the removal of country quota is going to disadvantage people of other countries is a mathematical fallacy.
Let me explain it this way, using an analogy. Suppose you take part in a lotto game. The prizes (GC) are limited. Say there is only one prize and you have 100 participants. Also, further, let us say 80 are from California and 20 are from Pennsylvania.
If you play the game several times, you will see that 80 % of the prizes go to people from California.
But, that does not mean that you will improve your chances of winning if you move from Pennsylvania to California!!
Your odds are exactly the same - 1 in 100.
Removing country quotas would have the same consequence: If would actually give everyone a level playing field, and everyone would have the same shot at making the coveted quota of 140,000 EB GCs.
But when you have quotas, the probabilities are severely distorted. Especially when you have arbitrary quotas. (Why 7 %? Why not 9 %? Why not 5.247 %?).
In this case, if you are from India or China, you are seriously disadvantaged, while someone from a smaller country gets an unfair advantage. This is not complex political philosophy. It is school boy arithmetic.
You see what I mean?
When an Indian or Chinese asks for no country quotas, he/she is not asking for more.. He/she can no more control the wind as control where he/she is born. He/she is just asking to have a fair chance just as anyone else in the world. Why should he/she be penalized for being born in a big country?
I hope you see what I mean.
Anyway, the thread is about whether we can make a constitutionality argument in the court. The issue of "fairness" is quite settled as I explained above.
I know what I am about to say will trigger a lot of reaction and some resentment, but it has to be said on behalf of those who are not Indian. I think the per country limit is to ensure that people of all nationalities and races have an equal opportunity to obtain a green card and to ensure that no one nationality, group, or even sector (i.e. IT) monopolizes the so few visas that are available. In fact, in the visa lottery, countries become excluded when the number of immigrants from them reach a certain point, so we are lucky they do not do that in the Employment-based system!
I think that by wanting to remove the per country limit so more Indians can avail of the green card quota is both asking for "special treatment" and a slap in the face for all the non-Indian IV members. The more I read the threads on this site, the more I feel that this organization is geared just to one ethnic group. I am sure that Indians probably make up the majority of members, but the founders of IV (I hope) did not want this organization to become one-sided! Please be considerate of ALL members and try to come up with suggestions that would benefit ALL members!!!:mad:
If it were any different, I would not be here.
That said, let me address your concerns. You (and anyone else) is free to disagree.
Let us say all country quotas are removed. In that case, yes, you will see a majority of GCs going to people of Indian and Chinese extraction. But to say that the removal of country quota is going to disadvantage people of other countries is a mathematical fallacy.
Let me explain it this way, using an analogy. Suppose you take part in a lotto game. The prizes (GC) are limited. Say there is only one prize and you have 100 participants. Also, further, let us say 80 are from California and 20 are from Pennsylvania.
If you play the game several times, you will see that 80 % of the prizes go to people from California.
But, that does not mean that you will improve your chances of winning if you move from Pennsylvania to California!!
Your odds are exactly the same - 1 in 100.
Removing country quotas would have the same consequence: If would actually give everyone a level playing field, and everyone would have the same shot at making the coveted quota of 140,000 EB GCs.
But when you have quotas, the probabilities are severely distorted. Especially when you have arbitrary quotas. (Why 7 %? Why not 9 %? Why not 5.247 %?).
In this case, if you are from India or China, you are seriously disadvantaged, while someone from a smaller country gets an unfair advantage. This is not complex political philosophy. It is school boy arithmetic.
You see what I mean?
When an Indian or Chinese asks for no country quotas, he/she is not asking for more.. He/she can no more control the wind as control where he/she is born. He/she is just asking to have a fair chance just as anyone else in the world. Why should he/she be penalized for being born in a big country?
I hope you see what I mean.
Anyway, the thread is about whether we can make a constitutionality argument in the court. The issue of "fairness" is quite settled as I explained above.
I know what I am about to say will trigger a lot of reaction and some resentment, but it has to be said on behalf of those who are not Indian. I think the per country limit is to ensure that people of all nationalities and races have an equal opportunity to obtain a green card and to ensure that no one nationality, group, or even sector (i.e. IT) monopolizes the so few visas that are available. In fact, in the visa lottery, countries become excluded when the number of immigrants from them reach a certain point, so we are lucky they do not do that in the Employment-based system!
I think that by wanting to remove the per country limit so more Indians can avail of the green card quota is both asking for "special treatment" and a slap in the face for all the non-Indian IV members. The more I read the threads on this site, the more I feel that this organization is geared just to one ethnic group. I am sure that Indians probably make up the majority of members, but the founders of IV (I hope) did not want this organization to become one-sided! Please be considerate of ALL members and try to come up with suggestions that would benefit ALL members!!!:mad:
more...
house Lady Gaga#39;s #39;Poker Face#39;
desi3933
06-15 03:54 PM
........
........
1. If the outsourcing companies would pay on an avg at 80K per head for the "well qualified" people, I am even ok with their dumping their dumping the L1s here. Why is it that you guys are ok with the L1s being dumped at 40K-60K salaries ? Shouldn't they get paid high too ? This is what I am arguing for. If the outsourcing cos don't want to pay this rate, then keep them in the country of origin. No need to depress wages here. Is this a wrong thing to ask ?
......
Where did you get that 80k number? You think 80k is good salary for that job, someone else may say 65k, I may say 90k. The salary, among other things, is determined by market forces. If you can't find enough people with xyz then company will be forced to offer more.
As long as there are people who are ready to work on salary 52k (example), employer will not pay 70k. As long as employer is following all the legal requirements, no one can dictate salary for the job.
I am a US citizen of Indian origin with background in Computer Science, Finance, and Business Laws. I have been in this country for 11+ years and I have seen so many changes in tech world. Nobody talks of sign-on bonus on H1B anymore. I am dot net architect and I am seeing lot of competition for jobs and this is causing downtrend pressure on salary. But, instead of, blaming someone else for the competition, I am taking it head on. We need to keep working on our skillset and employer will pay the salary. Like they say, for the right candidate salary is not a constraint.
Let us not forget our struggling days of H1. The least, we can do, is to encourage our fellow immigrants who are waiting for their green cards.
.
........
1. If the outsourcing companies would pay on an avg at 80K per head for the "well qualified" people, I am even ok with their dumping their dumping the L1s here. Why is it that you guys are ok with the L1s being dumped at 40K-60K salaries ? Shouldn't they get paid high too ? This is what I am arguing for. If the outsourcing cos don't want to pay this rate, then keep them in the country of origin. No need to depress wages here. Is this a wrong thing to ask ?
......
Where did you get that 80k number? You think 80k is good salary for that job, someone else may say 65k, I may say 90k. The salary, among other things, is determined by market forces. If you can't find enough people with xyz then company will be forced to offer more.
As long as there are people who are ready to work on salary 52k (example), employer will not pay 70k. As long as employer is following all the legal requirements, no one can dictate salary for the job.
I am a US citizen of Indian origin with background in Computer Science, Finance, and Business Laws. I have been in this country for 11+ years and I have seen so many changes in tech world. Nobody talks of sign-on bonus on H1B anymore. I am dot net architect and I am seeing lot of competition for jobs and this is causing downtrend pressure on salary. But, instead of, blaming someone else for the competition, I am taking it head on. We need to keep working on our skillset and employer will pay the salary. Like they say, for the right candidate salary is not a constraint.
Let us not forget our struggling days of H1. The least, we can do, is to encourage our fellow immigrants who are waiting for their green cards.
.
tattoo Lady Gaga is
jhaalaa
01-13 02:49 PM
When folks transfer to a new employers using AC21 (where AC21 is otherwise valid) -
0. NOT APPLICABLE: for folks who only use the EAD for the AC21 and do not use H1 transfer.
1. OK: for folks where you work directly for the new H1 transfer sponsor.
2. DIFFICULT: When H1 transfer using AC21 is sought from a sponsor just to meet AC21 criteria, while one works as a consultant.
AC21 Beware - is specially meant for those wishing to seek AC21 from a small consulting company - because finding some big employer who would presently write a job description in the offer letter to match the criteria ("same or similar") that was advertised for the Labor certificate underlying a I-485 petition that has been pending 7 or more years back does not seem very practical.
_______________________________
In general, for folks on H1 or those planning to get one -
A. Folks who work directly for the H1 sponsors are OK.
B. With this memo, meeting 'Employee-Employer relationship' shall become tougher to prove for small and specially third party consulting company employees who work elsewhere and for an unrelated (to what is stated on the LCA petition used for the H1) client.
It does not mean that its all going to be dark for all with no hope.
Just that, keeping all necessary documentation, proof of communication of work, duties, progress, status, performance assessments, time sheets, documented business processes, projects related documentation, client-vendor communication, service agreements, etc shall become very tedious for small consulting businesses.
Best Wishes for all
0. NOT APPLICABLE: for folks who only use the EAD for the AC21 and do not use H1 transfer.
1. OK: for folks where you work directly for the new H1 transfer sponsor.
2. DIFFICULT: When H1 transfer using AC21 is sought from a sponsor just to meet AC21 criteria, while one works as a consultant.
AC21 Beware - is specially meant for those wishing to seek AC21 from a small consulting company - because finding some big employer who would presently write a job description in the offer letter to match the criteria ("same or similar") that was advertised for the Labor certificate underlying a I-485 petition that has been pending 7 or more years back does not seem very practical.
_______________________________
In general, for folks on H1 or those planning to get one -
A. Folks who work directly for the H1 sponsors are OK.
B. With this memo, meeting 'Employee-Employer relationship' shall become tougher to prove for small and specially third party consulting company employees who work elsewhere and for an unrelated (to what is stated on the LCA petition used for the H1) client.
It does not mean that its all going to be dark for all with no hope.
Just that, keeping all necessary documentation, proof of communication of work, duties, progress, status, performance assessments, time sheets, documented business processes, projects related documentation, client-vendor communication, service agreements, etc shall become very tedious for small consulting businesses.
Best Wishes for all
more...
pictures Lady Gaga Face Paint Picture
syzygy
02-12 10:31 PM
This is only way to set things in order. Number of people stuck in retrogression today due to USCIS misdeeds is much larger than few years back when Rajiv Khanna lost the lawsuit. And old results shouldn't hold fresh efforts.
dresses Lady+gaga+poker+face+
AirWaterandGC
05-10 09:05 PM
Thanks cableman.
I did read that part and hence my question was if I am in the fourth/fifth year of my CA PR when I decide to go to CA, will I be allowed at least in the country.
Another question was if I am in my 4th/5th year and know that it might take me another year before I go to CA, can I apply for CA PR again, even when I already have my CA PR OR if I apply for my CA PR immediately after my current CA PR expires, would I get it again (assuming I have the necessary points)
Thanks again to everyone who tries to shed some light.
I got this from: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/pub/imm-law.html#act12
Permanent residents
Persons who have been admitted to Canada as permanent residents have the right to come to the country and remain here, provided they have not lost that status or it has not been established that they have engaged in activities, such as criminal acts, that would otherwise subject them to removal.
Conditions may be imposed for a certain period on some permanent residents, such as entrepreneurs. A permanent resident must live in Canada for at least 730 days (two years) within a five-year period. In some situations, time spent outside Canada may count. All permanent residents must comply with this residency requirement or risk losing their status.
According to the website, you will lose your status if you go to Canada in the 5th year because you won't be able to attain the requirement of living in Canada for at least 730 days (two years) within a five-year period. Actually, after you pass your 3rd year, you will be in risk for the permanent status.
I did read that part and hence my question was if I am in the fourth/fifth year of my CA PR when I decide to go to CA, will I be allowed at least in the country.
Another question was if I am in my 4th/5th year and know that it might take me another year before I go to CA, can I apply for CA PR again, even when I already have my CA PR OR if I apply for my CA PR immediately after my current CA PR expires, would I get it again (assuming I have the necessary points)
Thanks again to everyone who tries to shed some light.
I got this from: http://www.cic.gc.ca/english/pub/imm-law.html#act12
Permanent residents
Persons who have been admitted to Canada as permanent residents have the right to come to the country and remain here, provided they have not lost that status or it has not been established that they have engaged in activities, such as criminal acts, that would otherwise subject them to removal.
Conditions may be imposed for a certain period on some permanent residents, such as entrepreneurs. A permanent resident must live in Canada for at least 730 days (two years) within a five-year period. In some situations, time spent outside Canada may count. All permanent residents must comply with this residency requirement or risk losing their status.
According to the website, you will lose your status if you go to Canada in the 5th year because you won't be able to attain the requirement of living in Canada for at least 730 days (two years) within a five-year period. Actually, after you pass your 3rd year, you will be in risk for the permanent status.
more...
makeup images Lady Gaga Poker Face
chanduv23
07-04 08:36 AM
Macaca, pappu and gang - can we compile a funny animation cartoon with a message in flash and upload it on youtube?
I have flash on my laptop, if someone can give me the material, I can compile a slideshow ???? Any thoughts??
I have flash on my laptop, if someone can give me the material, I can compile a slideshow ???? Any thoughts??
girlfriend Lady Gaga#39;s “Poker Face”
eb2waiter
05-09 05:01 PM
for those in US GC and thinking of applying to canadian pr...
DONT DO IT !!!
You just end up spending around 3k-6k for you and your dependants, and it will go unused since you are waiting for US GC.
the best way for canadian shit is to go back to India when you are sure you will not get the US GC. You can then think of canadian PR from India.
The canadian government just takes your money and you dont get jobs easily. Most of the jobs are for people with job experience "INSIDE CANADA".
India is a good place to shit too. Your daily toilet does not HAVE to be in some other country if the restrooms in US are closed forever.
---DISCLAIMER: ABOVE ARE MY VIEWS ONLY AND MAY BE FALSE---
DONT DO IT !!!
You just end up spending around 3k-6k for you and your dependants, and it will go unused since you are waiting for US GC.
the best way for canadian shit is to go back to India when you are sure you will not get the US GC. You can then think of canadian PR from India.
The canadian government just takes your money and you dont get jobs easily. Most of the jobs are for people with job experience "INSIDE CANADA".
India is a good place to shit too. Your daily toilet does not HAVE to be in some other country if the restrooms in US are closed forever.
---DISCLAIMER: ABOVE ARE MY VIEWS ONLY AND MAY BE FALSE---
hairstyles Emotional: Lady Gaga is
old_hat
05-03 01:33 AM
wow so many people here have intolerance for a differing opinion/view point. very petty name calling on forum or as ratings on posts. people are not open to facts or difference of opinions. and whoever is posting fu's to my posts you are basically wasting your energy. i am not going to get riled on an internet forum discussion and i would suggest you do the same. take a chill pill.
PlainSpeak
01-13 01:21 PM
Few questions for the self proclaimed expert analyst who started this thread -
1) How many lawmakers have you met to represent these provisions you claim to be so passionate about?
2) Have you visited capitol hill and tried to understand what the congress thinks about EB legislation? I did - during the IV advocacy event last year with hundreds of eb2 and eb3 members.
3) How many members here have you actually worked worked with? Because the people I know here who actually do the grass root work with me (both eb2 and eb3) do not care about theb category they belong to.
I know you do not have any real responses...only abuses which you responded with on the other thread.
Its funny how plainspeak is the one usually doling out the abuses but claims to be the victim.
Few questions for the self proclaimed expert analyst who started this thread -
1) How many lawmakers have you met to represent these provisions you claim to be so passionate about?
2) Have you visited capitol hill and tried to understand what the congress thinks about EB legislation? I did - during the IV advocacy event last year with hundreds of eb2 and eb3 members.
3) How many members here have you actually worked worked with? Because the people I know here who actually do the grass root work with me (both eb2 and eb3) do not care about theb category they belong to.
I know you do not have any real responses...only abuses which you responded with on the other thread.
Its funny how plainspeak is the one usually doling out the abuses but claims to be the victim.
Ahhh my friend forever_waiting, how are you. It is good to see your reply to the post. Will be do this the civilized way or the old way??
In direct response to your post
First i am not a expert nor an analyst musch less a self proclaimed expert analyst. Take that as a given and we can procced further
1) How many lawmakers have you met to represent these provisions you claim to be so passionate about?
None because i do not believe in supporting, representing or furthering the agenda of an organization which has loop holes in it and is determental to my case
2) Have you visited capitol hill and tried to understand what the congress thinks about EB legislation?
I did - during the IV advocacy event last year with hundreds of eb2 and eb3 members.
No i have not. Why do i need to visit capitol hill and view in person what congress thinks about EB legislation when i can do the same by watching CSPAN(I am a regular watcher expecially when there is something immigrant related going on. All a process of expanding my knowlesge of immigration or do you think i got up yesterday morning and decided that i want to fight with IV. If you did then i am sorry i gave you more credit then that. And please do not start a new thread about how lazy i am and how i want others to work for me and how i just want the benefit without effort. That would be old and stale. If there is something to be done in which i believe i will be the first to jump in and volunteer
3) How many members here have you actually worked worked with? Because the people I know here who actually do the grass root work with me (both eb2 and eb3) do not care about theb category they belong to.
YES and i never said you are not fair. I know EB2 and EB23 owkr toghether in IV. My efforts of meeting people have been made outside the scope of what you and others do. I am being modest when i say this but i was the first person in my company to make generate awareness about what IV did and how it is helping immigrants like us and encouraged them to visit the website and read about what IV is all about. This is about 75 to 100 indains (EB2 and EB3) in an organization of size 500 during teh time period 2006 to 2007. Now most of them were EB2 so they got their green card and i am sure are no longer on the IV forum anymore. I am sure those who are still on IV forum are EB3 like me. How much they parrticipate, it is hard to tell. Maybe they were smarter than me and got dissalusioned with IV way before i did. They might be porting or they might not be for all i know
Besides that i am pretty much regular on Murthy where i have provided advise or tried to help people with information whne i could (O f course all of this was H1B/ Visit Visa stuff). Even today on IV forum i am trying my level best to help peopl ewith information related to AOS/EAD/140/485 etc
I am sorry because what i did till now is nowhere near what you and other IV volunteers are doing but i do what i can when i can.
My friend forever_waiting, I hope i answered everything to your satisfaction
As to the below
I know you do not have any real responses...only abuses which you responded with on the other thread. Its funny how plainspeak is the one usually doling out the abuses but claims to be the victim. I am sorry i am done trying to explain it to you all over again. May god grant you wisdom
1) How many lawmakers have you met to represent these provisions you claim to be so passionate about?
2) Have you visited capitol hill and tried to understand what the congress thinks about EB legislation? I did - during the IV advocacy event last year with hundreds of eb2 and eb3 members.
3) How many members here have you actually worked worked with? Because the people I know here who actually do the grass root work with me (both eb2 and eb3) do not care about theb category they belong to.
I know you do not have any real responses...only abuses which you responded with on the other thread.
Its funny how plainspeak is the one usually doling out the abuses but claims to be the victim.
Few questions for the self proclaimed expert analyst who started this thread -
1) How many lawmakers have you met to represent these provisions you claim to be so passionate about?
2) Have you visited capitol hill and tried to understand what the congress thinks about EB legislation? I did - during the IV advocacy event last year with hundreds of eb2 and eb3 members.
3) How many members here have you actually worked worked with? Because the people I know here who actually do the grass root work with me (both eb2 and eb3) do not care about theb category they belong to.
I know you do not have any real responses...only abuses which you responded with on the other thread.
Its funny how plainspeak is the one usually doling out the abuses but claims to be the victim.
Ahhh my friend forever_waiting, how are you. It is good to see your reply to the post. Will be do this the civilized way or the old way??
In direct response to your post
First i am not a expert nor an analyst musch less a self proclaimed expert analyst. Take that as a given and we can procced further
1) How many lawmakers have you met to represent these provisions you claim to be so passionate about?
None because i do not believe in supporting, representing or furthering the agenda of an organization which has loop holes in it and is determental to my case
2) Have you visited capitol hill and tried to understand what the congress thinks about EB legislation?
I did - during the IV advocacy event last year with hundreds of eb2 and eb3 members.
No i have not. Why do i need to visit capitol hill and view in person what congress thinks about EB legislation when i can do the same by watching CSPAN(I am a regular watcher expecially when there is something immigrant related going on. All a process of expanding my knowlesge of immigration or do you think i got up yesterday morning and decided that i want to fight with IV. If you did then i am sorry i gave you more credit then that. And please do not start a new thread about how lazy i am and how i want others to work for me and how i just want the benefit without effort. That would be old and stale. If there is something to be done in which i believe i will be the first to jump in and volunteer
3) How many members here have you actually worked worked with? Because the people I know here who actually do the grass root work with me (both eb2 and eb3) do not care about theb category they belong to.
YES and i never said you are not fair. I know EB2 and EB23 owkr toghether in IV. My efforts of meeting people have been made outside the scope of what you and others do. I am being modest when i say this but i was the first person in my company to make generate awareness about what IV did and how it is helping immigrants like us and encouraged them to visit the website and read about what IV is all about. This is about 75 to 100 indains (EB2 and EB3) in an organization of size 500 during teh time period 2006 to 2007. Now most of them were EB2 so they got their green card and i am sure are no longer on the IV forum anymore. I am sure those who are still on IV forum are EB3 like me. How much they parrticipate, it is hard to tell. Maybe they were smarter than me and got dissalusioned with IV way before i did. They might be porting or they might not be for all i know
Besides that i am pretty much regular on Murthy where i have provided advise or tried to help people with information whne i could (O f course all of this was H1B/ Visit Visa stuff). Even today on IV forum i am trying my level best to help peopl ewith information related to AOS/EAD/140/485 etc
I am sorry because what i did till now is nowhere near what you and other IV volunteers are doing but i do what i can when i can.
My friend forever_waiting, I hope i answered everything to your satisfaction
As to the below
I know you do not have any real responses...only abuses which you responded with on the other thread. Its funny how plainspeak is the one usually doling out the abuses but claims to be the victim. I am sorry i am done trying to explain it to you all over again. May god grant you wisdom
extra_mint
09-15 06:10 PM
There are no Spill over rules for splitting the visa's b/w I and C. Instead the Rule about spill over requires the PD (cutoff) for 2 countries to be same.
Infact if you look at any old VB (last quarter) where dates for China and India are same then that is the month for spill overs.
Cutoff for China will never advance India dates for spill overs.
There are 2.5 EB2-I application per EB2-C application. And EB2 China had cutoff dates of early 2005 in 2009 (they did not enjoy too much spillover in 2009). So my guess it that China will use its 3k annual limit + spillover numbers (depending on how much EB2-C dates move). The spillover would be split 25% china and 75% India.
Infact if you look at any old VB (last quarter) where dates for China and India are same then that is the month for spill overs.
Cutoff for China will never advance India dates for spill overs.
There are 2.5 EB2-I application per EB2-C application. And EB2 China had cutoff dates of early 2005 in 2009 (they did not enjoy too much spillover in 2009). So my guess it that China will use its 3k annual limit + spillover numbers (depending on how much EB2-C dates move). The spillover would be split 25% china and 75% India.