PlainSpeak
01-13 01:40 PM
Let me see if I understand PlainSpeak's language:
1. IV core needs to put a lot of resources to lobby for the DV bill, knowing full well that this bill will go nowhere!
2. Raise a false sense of hope among the EB3 community, again, knowing full well that its going to be dashed - just so that IV gains the trust of EB3 (I am EB3, and they have my trust without your logic!)
3. An exercise to gain trust by misleading!:D
I wonder why IV core did not come up with this brilliant idea ;)
Mr willigetgc to start off with here are a few facts
1. IV core needs to put a lot of resources to lobby for the DV bill
IV Core need not put a lot of resources to lobby for DV bill if they feel it is not worth the time and effort. that is for IV Core to decide and the decision is theirs to make after all they know about advocacy and lobbying
1. knowing full well that this bill will go nowhere!
That is my personal opinion and also the opinion of a whole bunch of people on this forum who do not agree with me but do agrree to teh fact that it has been 4 years since any immigration friendly bill came to be debated in congress. What wil make DV bill any different. This wil also go the same way. I would be surpirsed if it even comes up for debate
2. Raise a false sense of hope among the EB3 community, again, knowing full well that its going to be dashed - just so that IV gains the trust of EB3
My friend willigetgc what do EB3 people have besides hope. If you look at the statistics i will get GC in 19 year sand you with a priority date of May 07 (20 - 25 years). No reason not to hope for something and if IV really believes in what i suggested (I am sure it will go through all possible refinements) that would be a signal of not just hope but also action on part of IV to do something about EB Retrogressed folks. Now i am not saying it will happen and i am also not saying it will. All i am saying is here is a chnace to do something different which is also right because iot is not part of teh IV charter that IV is working to get relief for retrogressed EB
(I am EB3, and they have my trust without your logic!)
And what a great thing it is that you being an EB3 with a priority date of 2007 are working with EB2 hand in hand to get something done. It is great that you have trust with IV. Without trust nothing works. What i say is i have trust in IV i do not have trust that what they advocate is good for EB3. Semantics you may say but please read the lines carefully my friend. I hope you will understand
1. IV core needs to put a lot of resources to lobby for the DV bill, knowing full well that this bill will go nowhere!
2. Raise a false sense of hope among the EB3 community, again, knowing full well that its going to be dashed - just so that IV gains the trust of EB3 (I am EB3, and they have my trust without your logic!)
3. An exercise to gain trust by misleading!:D
I wonder why IV core did not come up with this brilliant idea ;)
Mr willigetgc to start off with here are a few facts
1. IV core needs to put a lot of resources to lobby for the DV bill
IV Core need not put a lot of resources to lobby for DV bill if they feel it is not worth the time and effort. that is for IV Core to decide and the decision is theirs to make after all they know about advocacy and lobbying
1. knowing full well that this bill will go nowhere!
That is my personal opinion and also the opinion of a whole bunch of people on this forum who do not agree with me but do agrree to teh fact that it has been 4 years since any immigration friendly bill came to be debated in congress. What wil make DV bill any different. This wil also go the same way. I would be surpirsed if it even comes up for debate
2. Raise a false sense of hope among the EB3 community, again, knowing full well that its going to be dashed - just so that IV gains the trust of EB3
My friend willigetgc what do EB3 people have besides hope. If you look at the statistics i will get GC in 19 year sand you with a priority date of May 07 (20 - 25 years). No reason not to hope for something and if IV really believes in what i suggested (I am sure it will go through all possible refinements) that would be a signal of not just hope but also action on part of IV to do something about EB Retrogressed folks. Now i am not saying it will happen and i am also not saying it will. All i am saying is here is a chnace to do something different which is also right because iot is not part of teh IV charter that IV is working to get relief for retrogressed EB
(I am EB3, and they have my trust without your logic!)
And what a great thing it is that you being an EB3 with a priority date of 2007 are working with EB2 hand in hand to get something done. It is great that you have trust with IV. Without trust nothing works. What i say is i have trust in IV i do not have trust that what they advocate is good for EB3. Semantics you may say but please read the lines carefully my friend. I hope you will understand
wallpaper rachel weisz rachel weisz
ilikekilo
07-10 08:02 PM
Changed my mind. Updated my message. I appreciate your defense.
appreciate your ego strength man...thanks for the edit...u r the man..
appreciate your ego strength man...thanks for the edit...u r the man..
hiralal
05-29 12:03 AM
if your gc in pending ..don't get tempted to buy a house. here is a good report.
------------
MONDAY, MAY 25, 2009
OTHER VOICES
The Housing Hurricane Will Howl Again
WE'RE OUT OF THE EYE OF THE HURRICANE, but here comes the back half of the storm. A lot of people think that we've seen the worst of the housing crisis. They're talking about green shoots and glimmers of hope, when they should be back in the storm shelter, preparing for a flood of inventory that will overwhelm the markets and produce another round of falling prices
For the past few months there has been a semi-moratorium on foreclosures. Most institutions with delinquent mortgages didn't foreclose. The signs that blanket many neighborhoods have been posted by a fraction of the lenders. Now the rest of the banks are rushing to get their properties on the market.
[ov]
Christoph Hitz for Barron's
We're still supporting misguided programs that only add to inventory woes. They encourage builders to put up more homes and penalize anyone else trying to sell a home.
As a Florida real-estate broker who works with bank asset managers to dispose of foreclosed properties, I get a good view of this market. From December 2008 through mid-March 2009, the number of asset managers calling to discuss REO (real estate owned) properties on their client banks' books dropped by more than 80% from the level at which it previously had been running. In the past two months, however, asset managers have been busy, with most interested in how many properties we could handle at once.
Law firms for banks are once again lining up to file foreclosures and to process evictions. The asset managers we work with have warned us to expect a flood of properties, beginning in early June. This will hit as the number of potential buyers continues to dwindle. Builders, traditional sellers and investors who entered too early are already loaded with REO properties.
ALL OF THE OBAMA administration's attempts to revive, resuscitate and shock the housing markets into recovery have failed. Potential buyers can't purchase homes when they are losing their jobs, regardless of how attractive the credits and mortgages are. The price of homes will continue to fall until the properties are affordable for potential buyers.
If an investor could purchase a home and rent it out for close to breakeven, we might be getting close to a bottom. But we are nowhere close to that level in most critical markets. Until it is approached, prices will continue to fall. In fact, the negative cash flow now evident, along with the flood of properties coming into the inventory pool, warn of lower prices.
There's no light at the end of the tunnel yet. We're still supporting builders through misguided programs that are only adding to the inventory woes. California decided to offer a $10,000 credit to buyers of new homes, on top of the $8,000 federal credit. But California made the $10,000 available only for new homes purchased directly from builders. That shows the power of the builders' lobby, but it only adds to California's housing-industry problem. It encourages builders to construct dwellings we don't need, and it penalizes anyone else trying to sell a home.
Housing inventory soon will flood a market in which more than 500,000 homes are being built each year, even though the annual sales pace for new homes is closer to 300,000. We must also deal with a system clogged with impossible short sales, a surge of second and vacation homes being dumped, and third-wave flippers realizing that they entered the market too soon.
FOR THE BANKS, the back half of the hurricane will destroy balance sheets, unless the Obama administration comes up with another plan to mythically mark these assets on the books. Or we might see some chimerical plan to write down mortgage payments, or move toxic mortgages into a dark pool, or create some new illusion that glosses over the problem.
Our experience with banks' selling REOs is they realize about 50%-75% of what they initially think they will get. Moreover, their expenses to bring these properties to market and manage them are growing. Court systems bogged down with foreclosures are raising fees so that they can hire additional staff. More and more homeowners being evicted are stripping homes to the bone, removing appliances, fixtures, carpet, cabinets, air handlers, motorized garage-door openers and anything else that they can carry off or sell.
Unemployment presents a two-pronged problem. If homeowners lose their jobs, they have difficulty meeting mortgage payments. And a high jobless rate forces more people to put their homes on the market.
During the housing bubble, many second homes were purchased with the mythical equity from primary residences. These second homes are coming onto the market at an alarming rate, as many middle- and upper-class sellers need to raise cash. In some very exclusive private communities in Florida, where home prices are in the seven figures, more than 50% of the homes are on the market. (For more on the vacation-home market, see Cover Story.)
Unfortunately, there are no signs of recovery, despite the hype and the twisting of numbers in many media reports. The end of the unofficial moratorium on foreclosures, combined with rising unemployment, signals that the back half of this housing hurricane is only just beginning.
------------
MONDAY, MAY 25, 2009
OTHER VOICES
The Housing Hurricane Will Howl Again
WE'RE OUT OF THE EYE OF THE HURRICANE, but here comes the back half of the storm. A lot of people think that we've seen the worst of the housing crisis. They're talking about green shoots and glimmers of hope, when they should be back in the storm shelter, preparing for a flood of inventory that will overwhelm the markets and produce another round of falling prices
For the past few months there has been a semi-moratorium on foreclosures. Most institutions with delinquent mortgages didn't foreclose. The signs that blanket many neighborhoods have been posted by a fraction of the lenders. Now the rest of the banks are rushing to get their properties on the market.
[ov]
Christoph Hitz for Barron's
We're still supporting misguided programs that only add to inventory woes. They encourage builders to put up more homes and penalize anyone else trying to sell a home.
As a Florida real-estate broker who works with bank asset managers to dispose of foreclosed properties, I get a good view of this market. From December 2008 through mid-March 2009, the number of asset managers calling to discuss REO (real estate owned) properties on their client banks' books dropped by more than 80% from the level at which it previously had been running. In the past two months, however, asset managers have been busy, with most interested in how many properties we could handle at once.
Law firms for banks are once again lining up to file foreclosures and to process evictions. The asset managers we work with have warned us to expect a flood of properties, beginning in early June. This will hit as the number of potential buyers continues to dwindle. Builders, traditional sellers and investors who entered too early are already loaded with REO properties.
ALL OF THE OBAMA administration's attempts to revive, resuscitate and shock the housing markets into recovery have failed. Potential buyers can't purchase homes when they are losing their jobs, regardless of how attractive the credits and mortgages are. The price of homes will continue to fall until the properties are affordable for potential buyers.
If an investor could purchase a home and rent it out for close to breakeven, we might be getting close to a bottom. But we are nowhere close to that level in most critical markets. Until it is approached, prices will continue to fall. In fact, the negative cash flow now evident, along with the flood of properties coming into the inventory pool, warn of lower prices.
There's no light at the end of the tunnel yet. We're still supporting builders through misguided programs that are only adding to the inventory woes. California decided to offer a $10,000 credit to buyers of new homes, on top of the $8,000 federal credit. But California made the $10,000 available only for new homes purchased directly from builders. That shows the power of the builders' lobby, but it only adds to California's housing-industry problem. It encourages builders to construct dwellings we don't need, and it penalizes anyone else trying to sell a home.
Housing inventory soon will flood a market in which more than 500,000 homes are being built each year, even though the annual sales pace for new homes is closer to 300,000. We must also deal with a system clogged with impossible short sales, a surge of second and vacation homes being dumped, and third-wave flippers realizing that they entered the market too soon.
FOR THE BANKS, the back half of the hurricane will destroy balance sheets, unless the Obama administration comes up with another plan to mythically mark these assets on the books. Or we might see some chimerical plan to write down mortgage payments, or move toxic mortgages into a dark pool, or create some new illusion that glosses over the problem.
Our experience with banks' selling REOs is they realize about 50%-75% of what they initially think they will get. Moreover, their expenses to bring these properties to market and manage them are growing. Court systems bogged down with foreclosures are raising fees so that they can hire additional staff. More and more homeowners being evicted are stripping homes to the bone, removing appliances, fixtures, carpet, cabinets, air handlers, motorized garage-door openers and anything else that they can carry off or sell.
Unemployment presents a two-pronged problem. If homeowners lose their jobs, they have difficulty meeting mortgage payments. And a high jobless rate forces more people to put their homes on the market.
During the housing bubble, many second homes were purchased with the mythical equity from primary residences. These second homes are coming onto the market at an alarming rate, as many middle- and upper-class sellers need to raise cash. In some very exclusive private communities in Florida, where home prices are in the seven figures, more than 50% of the homes are on the market. (For more on the vacation-home market, see Cover Story.)
Unfortunately, there are no signs of recovery, despite the hype and the twisting of numbers in many media reports. The end of the unofficial moratorium on foreclosures, combined with rising unemployment, signals that the back half of this housing hurricane is only just beginning.
2011 Rachel Weisz - Agora
gc_chahiye
06-28 05:08 PM
Still, just because DOS told USCIS "Visas are exhausted" doesnt mean they should stop ACCEPTING new petitions. They can stop APPROVING new ones, but why stop ACCEPTING new petitions. Visa bulletins guide the filing as well as approval of petitions. If visa bulletins is current, then they can both accept and approve petitions.
right, and the worry (as is also noted in the AILA complaint that someone posted earlier) is that USCIS can consider the update from DOS to be the 'updated' Visa Bulletin.
There is nothing that prevents DOS from issuing a visa bulletin at any time and making it effective then-and-there. AILA has raised concerns with this, that it is a problematic thing to do, but it seems to be well within the law. I dont think there is a chance of a lawsuit here.
right, and the worry (as is also noted in the AILA complaint that someone posted earlier) is that USCIS can consider the update from DOS to be the 'updated' Visa Bulletin.
There is nothing that prevents DOS from issuing a visa bulletin at any time and making it effective then-and-there. AILA has raised concerns with this, that it is a problematic thing to do, but it seems to be well within the law. I dont think there is a chance of a lawsuit here.
more...
paskal
07-18 08:38 PM
Hi Paskal,
We dont have any official source of available visas for EB2 India as of now.
But based on the information availale it seems there would be about 30k visas, which are about 10 times more than what its been now (3,267 VISAS for EB2 India), available for EB2 India. Even though China shares with us for these visas, it would be minimal for china sharing as because china had already a cutoff date of Jan 2006 by Jul 2007. EB2 India has to be current pretty soon as of the increase in visa numbers allotment to almost about 10 times due to the horizontal fallout.
We need your inputs as well, on this calculation of estimated visas for EB2 India.
.................................................. ...
Originally Posted by sumagiri :
There are some significant flaws in your analysis. If you correct them, the number comes to around 25K.
First. The family spill over has to be applied to all categories. So the total number is 140,000 + 19,000.
Second. You calculated EB1/2/3 gets 1/3 which is not correct. They use only 28.6% not 33.3% This makes difference.
Third. The EB1+EB2 combined 70K already counted 9,800 visas for India. We should not add them again.
According to USCIS/DOS testimonies they will usually end up using only 95% of total quota. They go conservatively because they must ensure that they won't use up even a single visa more than what law allows.So total available is approximately 159000*.95 = 151050
Third. EB1, EB2, EB3 each will get 28.6%. Not one third (33.3%). That makes lot of difference. So each category will get around 43,200.
EB4 and EB5 combined will get around 21,449
Now again, going by statistics and your assumptions that EB1 and EB2 takes up 70K and EB4, EB5 takes up around 10K. The unused visas are
((43,200*2)+21,449) - (70,000+10000) = 27849.
So the total EB2 visa usage will be around 70K + 25K =95K.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=20167&highlight=vdlrao&page=7
but the spillover is done quarterly per USCIS.
we do not know how much of the stimated 20K (for India, assuming the erst is China) is already used up, assuming this is the total number if unused GC for the year.
We dont have any official source of available visas for EB2 India as of now.
But based on the information availale it seems there would be about 30k visas, which are about 10 times more than what its been now (3,267 VISAS for EB2 India), available for EB2 India. Even though China shares with us for these visas, it would be minimal for china sharing as because china had already a cutoff date of Jan 2006 by Jul 2007. EB2 India has to be current pretty soon as of the increase in visa numbers allotment to almost about 10 times due to the horizontal fallout.
We need your inputs as well, on this calculation of estimated visas for EB2 India.
.................................................. ...
Originally Posted by sumagiri :
There are some significant flaws in your analysis. If you correct them, the number comes to around 25K.
First. The family spill over has to be applied to all categories. So the total number is 140,000 + 19,000.
Second. You calculated EB1/2/3 gets 1/3 which is not correct. They use only 28.6% not 33.3% This makes difference.
Third. The EB1+EB2 combined 70K already counted 9,800 visas for India. We should not add them again.
According to USCIS/DOS testimonies they will usually end up using only 95% of total quota. They go conservatively because they must ensure that they won't use up even a single visa more than what law allows.So total available is approximately 159000*.95 = 151050
Third. EB1, EB2, EB3 each will get 28.6%. Not one third (33.3%). That makes lot of difference. So each category will get around 43,200.
EB4 and EB5 combined will get around 21,449
Now again, going by statistics and your assumptions that EB1 and EB2 takes up 70K and EB4, EB5 takes up around 10K. The unused visas are
((43,200*2)+21,449) - (70,000+10000) = 27849.
So the total EB2 visa usage will be around 70K + 25K =95K.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=20167&highlight=vdlrao&page=7
but the spillover is done quarterly per USCIS.
we do not know how much of the stimated 20K (for India, assuming the erst is China) is already used up, assuming this is the total number if unused GC for the year.
katrina
02-01 02:34 PM
US news has covered a book by David Heenan -- "Flight Capital" that essentially deals with the fact that high powered immigrants are leaving this country -- for whatever reason -- and how its bad for America. BAD FOR AMERICA. forget about it being bad of GC aspirants. ITS BAD FOR AMERICA. And we have one of america's own high powered former CEO saying that
http://www.flight-capital.com/
This man has no vested interested in talking about this. Obviously he does not need a GC and he is not on H1. He makes our case. How anti-immigration congressional measure are hurting America as a nation as much as it hurts aspiring immigrants.
This is an independent non-partisan source who can be quoted in our cause.
http://www.greatandhra.com/business/greencard_usa.html
and there is another good article with the same topic.
Check out this article in the Wall Street Journal - by Gary Becker, a Nobel Price Winner..alas this administration in immune to such logic
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
By GARY S. BECKER
November 30, 2005; Page A18
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
* * *
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
* * *
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
http://www.flight-capital.com/
This man has no vested interested in talking about this. Obviously he does not need a GC and he is not on H1. He makes our case. How anti-immigration congressional measure are hurting America as a nation as much as it hurts aspiring immigrants.
This is an independent non-partisan source who can be quoted in our cause.
http://www.greatandhra.com/business/greencard_usa.html
and there is another good article with the same topic.
Check out this article in the Wall Street Journal - by Gary Becker, a Nobel Price Winner..alas this administration in immune to such logic
Give Us Your Skilled Masses
By GARY S. BECKER
November 30, 2005; Page A18
With border security and proposals for a guest-worker program back on the front page, it is vital that the U.S. -- in its effort to cope with undocumented workers -- does not overlook legal immigration. The number of people allowed in is far too small, posing a significant problem for the economy in the years ahead. Only 140,000 green cards are issued annually, with the result that scientists, engineers and other highly skilled workers often must wait years before receiving the ticket allowing them to stay permanently in the U.S.
An alternate route for highly skilled professionals -- especially information technology workers -- has been temporary H-1B visas, good for specific jobs for three years with the possibility of one renewal. But Congress foolishly cut the annual quota of H-1B visas in 2003 from almost 200,000 to well under 100,000. The small quota of 65,000 for the current fiscal year that began on Oct. 1 is already exhausted!
This is mistaken policy. The right approach would be to greatly increase the number of entry permits to highly skilled professionals and eliminate the H-1B program, so that all such visas became permanent. Skilled immigrants such as engineers and scientists are in fields not attracting many Americans, and they work in IT industries, such as computers and biotech, which have become the backbone of the economy. Many of the entrepreneurs and higher-level employees in Silicon Valley were born overseas. These immigrants create jobs and opportunities for native-born Americans of all types and levels of skills.
So it seems like a win-win situation. Permanent rather than temporary admissions of the H-1B type have many advantages. Foreign professionals would make a greater commitment to becoming part of American culture and to eventually becoming citizens, rather than forming separate enclaves in the expectation they are here only temporarily. They would also be more concerned with advancing in the American economy and less likely to abscond with the intellectual property of American companies -- property that could help them advance in their countries of origin.
Basically, I am proposing that H-1B visas be folded into a much larger, employment-based green card program with the emphasis on skilled workers. The annual quota should be multiplied many times beyond present limits, and there should be no upper bound on the numbers from any single country. Such upper bounds place large countries like India and China, with many highly qualified professionals, at a considerable and unfair disadvantage -- at no gain to the U.S.
* * *
To be sure, the annual admission of a million or more highly skilled workers such as engineers and scientists would lower the earnings of the American workers they compete against. The opposition from competing American workers is probably the main reason for the sharp restrictions on the number of immigrant workers admitted today. That opposition is understandable, but does not make it good for the country as a whole.
Doesn't the U.S. clearly benefit if, for example, India's government spends a lot on the highly esteemed Indian Institutes of Technology to train scientists and engineers who leave to work in America? It certainly appears that way to the sending countries, many of which protest against this emigration by calling it a "brain drain."
Yet the migration of workers, like free trade in goods, is not a zero sum game, but one that usually benefits the sending and the receiving country. Even if many immigrants do not return home to the nations that trained them, they send back remittances that are often sizeable; and some do return to start businesses.
Experience shows that countries providing a good economic and political environment can attract back many of the skilled men and women who have previously left. Whether they return or not, they gain knowledge about modern technologies that becomes more easily incorporated into the production of their native countries.
Experience also shows that if America does not accept greatly increased numbers of highly skilled professionals, they might go elsewhere: Canada and Australia, to take two examples, are actively recruiting IT professionals.
Since earnings are much higher in the U.S., many skilled immigrants would prefer to come here. But if they cannot, they may compete against us through outsourcing and similar forms of international trade in services. The U.S. would be much better off by having such skilled workers become residents and citizens -- thus contributing to our productivity, culture, tax revenues and education rather than to the productivity and tax revenues of other countries.
* * *
I do, however, advocate that we be careful about admitting students and skilled workers from countries that have produced many terrorists, such as Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. My attitude may be dismissed as religious "profiling," but intelligent and fact-based profiling is essential in the war against terror. And terrorists come from a relatively small number of countries and backgrounds, unfortunately mainly of the Islamic faith. But the legitimate concern about admitting terrorists should not be allowed, as it is now doing, to deny or discourage the admission of skilled immigrants who pose little terrorist threat.
Nothing in my discussion should be interpreted as arguing against the admission of unskilled immigrants. Many of these individuals also turn out to be ambitious and hard-working and make fine contributions to American life. But if the number to be admitted is subject to political and other limits, there is a strong case for giving preference to skilled immigrants for the reasons I have indicated.
Other countries, too, should liberalize their policies toward the immigration of skilled workers. I particularly think of Japan and Germany, both countries that have rapidly aging, and soon to be declining, populations that are not sympathetic (especially Japan) to absorbing many immigrants. These are decisions they have to make. But America still has a major advantage in attracting skilled workers, because this is the preferred destination of the vast majority of them. So why not take advantage of their preference to come here, rather than force them to look elsewhere?
Mr. Becker, the 1992 Nobel laureate in economics, is University Professor of Economics and Sociology at the University of Chicago and the Rose-Marie and Jack R. Anderson Senior Fellow at Stanford's Hoover Institution.
more...
NNReddy
09-04 01:29 AM
True_facts, you cannot denigrate dead people. I know you are coward, because you cant say what you can say with your own ID. Go to every village in AP, people are better off now than 5 years ago,that's YSR's legacy. YSR improved irrigation, infrastructure across state and percapita income in state.
2010 tattoo rachel weisz wallpaper
vjkypally
09-23 05:41 PM
Like I said earlier March is the real bottleneck for year 2005. More than 3000 applications.October bulletin has already moved to Jan22'2005. From other tracking sites there are not too many Feb'2005 applications. But we have plenty of March 2005 applicants. Once it crosses March it will zoom ahead to end of 2005.
But it could be September 2010 by the time it comes to March,2005.
But it could be September 2010 by the time it comes to March,2005.
more...
mallu
02-15 10:42 PM
...I do not foresee my Jan 2003 EB-2 India PD becoming current any time soon. ....
Why ? You got the number of EB2 India cases pending that have PD before yours ?
Why ? You got the number of EB2 India cases pending that have PD before yours ?
hair rachel weisz wallpaper hq.
conchshell
07-29 02:41 PM
I think the idea being circulated by the Ron and Murtys of this world that DOL pushed out the dates to get CP to use up the numbers that USCIS is incapable or unwilling to use seems to go down the drain I don't think DOL cares about 100 odd visas that much.:)
Exactly .. that was the purpose behind taking a rough count of CP filers scheduled for GC stamping at US Consulates in India. With the data we have, Ron's argument does not carry much wait.
Exactly .. that was the purpose behind taking a rough count of CP filers scheduled for GC stamping at US Consulates in India. With the data we have, Ron's argument does not carry much wait.
more...
hopefulgc
09-23 04:12 PM
or let me be the president of usa if i buy 10 houses.
Jokes apart.. i think nixtor's idea is worth pursuing.
why not ask for citizenship if we buy 2 houses?. I will even buy that toxic debt from banks, if i get citizenship and a gori.
Jokes apart.. i think nixtor's idea is worth pursuing.
why not ask for citizenship if we buy 2 houses?. I will even buy that toxic debt from banks, if i get citizenship and a gori.
hot rachel weisz wallpaper hq.
gcformeornot
01-13 08:55 PM
Can USCIS face legal challenges on this? It was just a memo, no law has been changed by the Government; the laws are just the same they were when they let it about a million people or so through these IT consulting companies.
Now they go back and say that was a misinterpretation of existing laws :eek:
don't you think. AC21 (the famous Yates Memo) is also a memo. People expect USCIS to follow it though.... :o
Now they go back and say that was a misinterpretation of existing laws :eek:
don't you think. AC21 (the famous Yates Memo) is also a memo. People expect USCIS to follow it though.... :o
more...
house 43 Rachel Weisz Wallpapers
pappu
06-15 12:35 PM
I believe in luck in the GC process. Before 2005 PERM process, many folks applied in states where Labor was fast. They were able to get greencards within a couple of years while others were stuck in Labor Backlog centers (http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=67&Itemid=50). Some cleared all hurdles and got stuck in namechecks for years. Until 2007 Namecheck was a big scare. (http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=81&Itemid=61)
Many people could not file in July 07 for various reasons. Some people were born in India but were brought up in other country. Even they are stuck. Some people decided to rise in their careers and changed jobs on H1. While they did rise, but lost in the grreencard PD race.
So definitely luck pays its role.
Many people could not file in July 07 for various reasons. Some people were born in India but were brought up in other country. Even they are stuck. Some people decided to rise in their careers and changed jobs on H1. While they did rise, but lost in the grreencard PD race.
So definitely luck pays its role.
tattoo Download this Rachel Weisz
Googler
02-20 03:03 PM
And then there this piece of info from Ron Gotcher posted on Feb 14, 2008
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4285
"Last night, at a meeting of the American Immigration Lawyer's Assocation Southern California chapter, Charles Oppenheim spoke. Mr. Oppenheim is the officer within the Visa Office tasked with calculating visa bulletin cutoff dates each month. He offered the following thoughts as to cutoff date movement in the upcoming months:
In April, India and China EB2 will be set at 12/01/2003
EB3 for India and China will slow down for the rest of the fiscal year."
I am riveted by this because I spoke to Oppenheim just the day before this meeting (he referred to it). This was the conversation in which he told me that at present EB-2 India would only get numbers leftover from EB-1 India -- the problem is he doesn't know either exactly how many EB-2 India adjudicated applications there are in any specific PD range -- so every month he makes wild guesses, with the intent of using up visas. So I guess at least as of 2/14/08 he thought moving the date to 12/1/03 would more than mop up whatever was leftover from EB-1 India. Given the end of the FBI boondoggle (the effects of which have not been quantified by Oppenheim or USCIS) I'd predict that even a date in early 2002 would be good enough to mop up. Let us see if he changes his mind by mid March.
See update on this discussion on this thread (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=17450).
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4285
"Last night, at a meeting of the American Immigration Lawyer's Assocation Southern California chapter, Charles Oppenheim spoke. Mr. Oppenheim is the officer within the Visa Office tasked with calculating visa bulletin cutoff dates each month. He offered the following thoughts as to cutoff date movement in the upcoming months:
In April, India and China EB2 will be set at 12/01/2003
EB3 for India and China will slow down for the rest of the fiscal year."
I am riveted by this because I spoke to Oppenheim just the day before this meeting (he referred to it). This was the conversation in which he told me that at present EB-2 India would only get numbers leftover from EB-1 India -- the problem is he doesn't know either exactly how many EB-2 India adjudicated applications there are in any specific PD range -- so every month he makes wild guesses, with the intent of using up visas. So I guess at least as of 2/14/08 he thought moving the date to 12/1/03 would more than mop up whatever was leftover from EB-1 India. Given the end of the FBI boondoggle (the effects of which have not been quantified by Oppenheim or USCIS) I'd predict that even a date in early 2002 would be good enough to mop up. Let us see if he changes his mind by mid March.
See update on this discussion on this thread (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=17450).
more...
pictures rachel weisz wallpaper
msyedy
03-19 01:02 PM
Try this http://britishexpats.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=33
If you need help post there ....other small questions I can help u (free)
I am not a lawyer, but I can do it for you. I can gaurantee that you will get it if I do it. It is very very very simple. You can do it too.
But you think by moviing to Canada you will be in a better position.
I am a canadian immigrant and have been in US since I got my canadian GC because they do not have any jobs, I just took it during recession so that I can go to canada if laid off and it will be easier for me to come back to america.
Many of my friends have moved back to US after migrating because of the unemployement reasons. High Taxes.
It is upto you, I wish you best of luck, If you want to move
If you need help post there ....other small questions I can help u (free)
I am not a lawyer, but I can do it for you. I can gaurantee that you will get it if I do it. It is very very very simple. You can do it too.
But you think by moviing to Canada you will be in a better position.
I am a canadian immigrant and have been in US since I got my canadian GC because they do not have any jobs, I just took it during recession so that I can go to canada if laid off and it will be easier for me to come back to america.
Many of my friends have moved back to US after migrating because of the unemployement reasons. High Taxes.
It is upto you, I wish you best of luck, If you want to move
dresses rachel weisz in stealing
harikris
06-03 09:18 PM
Work-arounds, we are so familiar with such as AOS, EAD, H1B beyond 6 yrs, etc., are easier to get in. For the current situation, simple work-around could be to adjudicate a case when all is good except the visa number, and send an interim GC card until visa number is available. When visa number is available, interim card could be replaced with a permanent card. In a nutshell, replace EAD/AP with an interim permanent resident card, and replace it with a permanent card when visa number is available.
Call it interim GC or EAD it does not matter. I don't think we should advocate introducing one more step in an already convoluted process. What if they agree to giving an interim GC with an incremental benefit to what is already available under EAD?
Call it interim GC or EAD it does not matter. I don't think we should advocate introducing one more step in an already convoluted process. What if they agree to giving an interim GC with an incremental benefit to what is already available under EAD?
more...
makeup Rachel Weisz wallpaper
waitingmygc
01-14 12:24 PM
First, please stop comparing companies in this thread at least because we are diverting from topic.
I am totally convinced with users like jetflyer, kondur_007 and others that �if it goes smooth then next will be EAD, then I-485 approvals�.
At least this is the time to think beyond boundaries (like EB-3, EB-2, working as FT, working with consulting company, states and countries), if not then don�t distract the efforts.
I am totally convinced with users like jetflyer, kondur_007 and others that �if it goes smooth then next will be EAD, then I-485 approvals�.
At least this is the time to think beyond boundaries (like EB-3, EB-2, working as FT, working with consulting company, states and countries), if not then don�t distract the efforts.
girlfriend Rachel Weisz Widescreen
Lasantha
12-14 04:46 PM
I agree. But the reason for that is not the per country ceiling. It's the fact that the total EB quotas (140,000) is not realistic to the present situation. That needs to be increased and there's your solution.
(Believe me, I do understnad your fustration. I really do)
"equal chance to have go at his GC"
I don't have an issue with equal chance...thats exactly what i am asking for.
(Believe me, I do understnad your fustration. I really do)
"equal chance to have go at his GC"
I don't have an issue with equal chance...thats exactly what i am asking for.
hairstyles HOt Rachel Weisz Biography
belmontboy
08-15 04:17 PM
Welcome to our troubles Mr SRK.
Nobody cared for hapless NRI's all these days.
One fine day, Mr SRK gets the treatment, and suddenly everybody starts jumping.
Nice to see every Brown skinned being treated the same way.
Nobody cared for hapless NRI's all these days.
One fine day, Mr SRK gets the treatment, and suddenly everybody starts jumping.
Nice to see every Brown skinned being treated the same way.
amslonewolf
04-28 07:01 PM
Matthew Ohs website has it.. Check out immigration-law..
dvb123
09-14 03:07 PM
1. I-140 premium processing will increase ROW applications
2. 29 months opt is causing ROW applicants to bypass
H1-B and go for GC directly
3. Due to pre-adjudication Labor substitution applicants with substituted priority dates are in frontline
4. Porting from EB3 to EB2 is being done for atleast 10% EB3 applicants with recapture of priority date
5. Perm was introduced in early 2005 and lot of EB2 applications labors were approved in 2005
Hence EB2 will not cross 2005. If it crosses it will come back in a month.
2. 29 months opt is causing ROW applicants to bypass
H1-B and go for GC directly
3. Due to pre-adjudication Labor substitution applicants with substituted priority dates are in frontline
4. Porting from EB3 to EB2 is being done for atleast 10% EB3 applicants with recapture of priority date
5. Perm was introduced in early 2005 and lot of EB2 applications labors were approved in 2005
Hence EB2 will not cross 2005. If it crosses it will come back in a month.
