yabayaba
06-11 10:41 AM
Done
wallpaper hair color highlights and
gondalguru
07-07 06:57 PM
Congrates to all who got approved with PD of 2004. Feels good to know that EB2 india with PD 2004 (Jan to March) getting approval.
nyte_crawler
04-08 11:53 PM
What was his visa status ?
2011 londe highlights and
zen
04-03 03:09 PM
o.k. ..I will first tell the issues which are preventing me from doing what you say.
whenever we/I come with ideas - some members come up with posts to attack and kill the idea. ( teli and sanju ..).
everything seems to be tied to donations ..but do people even think before parting with their money ?(it is their money and there is a saying for such attitude). some say donate for lobbying ... how much does that cost ? how much is needed ? no info is provided.
say we are raising 10K every month and say lobbying requires 500 K ...5 - 8 years will go just to reach that amount (by that time, some will say lobbying needs more money ) !!!
whenever we/I come with ideas - some members come up with posts to attack and kill the idea. ( teli and sanju ..).
everything seems to be tied to donations ..but do people even think before parting with their money ?(it is their money and there is a saying for such attitude). some say donate for lobbying ... how much does that cost ? how much is needed ? no info is provided.
say we are raising 10K every month and say lobbying requires 500 K ...5 - 8 years will go just to reach that amount (by that time, some will say lobbying needs more money ) !!!
more...
immigrant2007
08-12 08:18 AM
Hey Buddy,
recapture is not controversial and has nothing to do with economy...not sure where you got that from, recapture of EB numbers is what we are proposing - this will not take away any american jobs but only alleviate the wait times for folks like you and me. Also, we've to accept the fact that anything related to immigration will be controversial - there is no denying of it, unfortunately.
Coming to the donations, please don't donate in huge sums because you'll have huge expectations...I'd say start off in small steps - 6 USD per week for 6 months...I signed up for it and it took me 5 minutes and 150 USD for the next 6 months, not too bad right!
Thanks!
I agree recapture will not impact jobs much. Becuase all of them are already on job....
(atmost the jobs that spouses might take up after GC, but too will be minimum, anyone who wanted to work is already working on EADs of wahetvere is available to them)...
I like your suggestion on donations ...We should aim of a chain reaction type of campaign for EB3
recapture is not controversial and has nothing to do with economy...not sure where you got that from, recapture of EB numbers is what we are proposing - this will not take away any american jobs but only alleviate the wait times for folks like you and me. Also, we've to accept the fact that anything related to immigration will be controversial - there is no denying of it, unfortunately.
Coming to the donations, please don't donate in huge sums because you'll have huge expectations...I'd say start off in small steps - 6 USD per week for 6 months...I signed up for it and it took me 5 minutes and 150 USD for the next 6 months, not too bad right!
Thanks!
I agree recapture will not impact jobs much. Becuase all of them are already on job....
(atmost the jobs that spouses might take up after GC, but too will be minimum, anyone who wanted to work is already working on EADs of wahetvere is available to them)...
I like your suggestion on donations ...We should aim of a chain reaction type of campaign for EB3
VivekAhuja
09-18 02:17 PM
Reading the posts about the economy has just shown me how ignorant many of the IV members are.
The economy is just going through it's ~10-year cycle. While it is a concern, it is NOT the end of the world. It just strenghtens USA's position in the world. Once again, it has proved that "if USA sneezes, the world catches the cold". The 10-years economic cycle follows a kind of Darwin's Law of the Fittest. The firms that are bubbled up get washed away, the economy cleans up and rebounds back. The 1990s saw it, the year ~2001 saw it with the dot.com burst and ~2009-2010 is seeing it with the mortgage burst.
While it is each one's perogative as to what you want to invest into (good time to buy stocks, or buy gold), another thing to understand is FDIC does NOT insure just 100K per account in each bank. There are multiple ways to increase this insurance to over $2 million in the same bank by opening different type of accounts or having different beneficiaries. Consult your bank for details.
No amount of govt. intervention can change the economy. It has it's own mind and will take it's own course.
There is no need to panic, pack and run.
Let the economy go through it's colon flush.
The economy is just going through it's ~10-year cycle. While it is a concern, it is NOT the end of the world. It just strenghtens USA's position in the world. Once again, it has proved that "if USA sneezes, the world catches the cold". The 10-years economic cycle follows a kind of Darwin's Law of the Fittest. The firms that are bubbled up get washed away, the economy cleans up and rebounds back. The 1990s saw it, the year ~2001 saw it with the dot.com burst and ~2009-2010 is seeing it with the mortgage burst.
While it is each one's perogative as to what you want to invest into (good time to buy stocks, or buy gold), another thing to understand is FDIC does NOT insure just 100K per account in each bank. There are multiple ways to increase this insurance to over $2 million in the same bank by opening different type of accounts or having different beneficiaries. Consult your bank for details.
No amount of govt. intervention can change the economy. It has it's own mind and will take it's own course.
There is no need to panic, pack and run.
Let the economy go through it's colon flush.
more...
chanduv23
07-13 01:57 PM
A RALLY IS BEING ORGANIZED IN SAN JOSE TOMORROW. PLEASE CHANNELIZE ALL YOUR POSITIVE ENERGY IN ACCOMPLISHING THIS TASK.
DONT WASTE TIME ON NEGATIVE ENERGY.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10086
DONT WASTE TIME ON NEGATIVE ENERGY.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10086
2010 strawberry londe hair with
retrohatao
01-26 03:04 PM
I find FBI security clearnce has been one of the hot issues which is causing many lime me to wait even though our cases are curent. I lost the opportunity some time back, got hit by the retrogression, still waiting for the FBI clearnace. Appreciate if it can be added as one of the hot issues.
more...
Macaca
01-31 04:52 PM
I am actually looking for a very simple answer : My husband whose EB-2 I-140 had been approved some time back, wants to quit his job & pursue MBA on F-1. Would the I-539 be approved in this case ? Or should he plan for H4.
BTW , he has no plans to travel out of country so stamping is not an issue.
Zima's post is not about stamping only. Applying for F1 from US means that the International Student office will mail I-20 and application to USCIS and you do not get a stamp on your passport. Applying for F1 in Embassy means that you take the same I-20 and apply at the embassy and get your passport satmped. Same rules should be applicable.
I think Zima's case is saying that you can not go to F1 (in Zima's case extend F1) with approved I-140. It probably also depends on when Zima's I-140 and F1 were filed/approved.
It certainly does not look good. I think USCIS has your I-140 file and your F1 application will be conected to it.
There was a related post sometime back. From what I remember, there was a person who got I-140 approved on F1 and then transferred to H1B.
BTW , he has no plans to travel out of country so stamping is not an issue.
Zima's post is not about stamping only. Applying for F1 from US means that the International Student office will mail I-20 and application to USCIS and you do not get a stamp on your passport. Applying for F1 in Embassy means that you take the same I-20 and apply at the embassy and get your passport satmped. Same rules should be applicable.
I think Zima's case is saying that you can not go to F1 (in Zima's case extend F1) with approved I-140. It probably also depends on when Zima's I-140 and F1 were filed/approved.
It certainly does not look good. I think USCIS has your I-140 file and your F1 application will be conected to it.
There was a related post sometime back. From what I remember, there was a person who got I-140 approved on F1 and then transferred to H1B.
hair Red Hair Highlights And
Jaime
09-11 03:54 PM
For the first time in its history, the U.S. faces the prospect of a reverse brain drain. New research by my team at the Pratt School of Engineering at Duke University shows that more than 1 million highly skilled professionals such as engineers, scientists, doctors, researchers, and their families are in line for a yearly allotment of only around 120,000 permanent-resident visas for employment-based principals and their families in the three main employment visa categories (EB-1, EB-2, and EB-3). These individuals entered the country legally to study or to work. They contributed to U.S. economic growth and global competitiveness. Now we've set the stage for them to return to countries such as India and China, where the economies are booming and their skills are in great demand. U.S. businesses large and small stand to lose critical talent, and workers who have gained valuable experience and knowledge of American industry may become potential competitors.
The problem is simple. There aren't enough permanent-resident visas available each year for skilled workers and their families. And there is a limit of fewer than 10,000 visas that can be issued to immigrants from any single country. So countries with the largest populations such as India and China are allocated the same number of visas as Iceland and Mongolia.
Visa Delays Deprive U.S. of Talent The result is that wait times for employment visas currently stretch from four to six years for immigrants from countries such as India and China, and all indications are that these delays will get longer. Based on a 2003 study of new legal immigrants to the U.S. called the New Immigrant Survey, we estimate that in 2003, about 1 in 3 professionals who had been through the immigration process either planned to leave the U.S. or were uncertain about remaining. Media reports and other anecdotal evidence indicate that many skilled workers have indeed begun to return home.
Much of the current public debate on immigration centers on concerns over low-skilled immigrants entering the U.S. illegally. We do need to develop fair policies to deal with this problem. But skilled immigrants who enter the U.S. legally are a different issue. Professor Richard Devon of Pennsylvania State University estimates that in the U.S. about $200,000 is invested in a child by the time they gain a bachelor's degree in engineering. That means that the U.S. gains billions of dollars in benefit from educated professionals who leave other countries to come here. And we lose billions when they return home. Additionally, we end up training highly skilled workers in our markets, technology, and way of doing business.
Consider this: Earlier research by my team found that more than half of the engineering and technology companies started in Silicon Valley and a quarter of those started nationwide from 1995 to 2006 had immigrant founders. These companies employed 450,000 workers and generated $52 billion in revenue in 2006. Their founders tended to be very highly educated in science, technology, math, and engineering-related disciplines, with 96% of them holding bachelor's degrees and 75% holding master's degrees or PhDs (see BusinessWeek.com, 6/11/07, "Immigrants: Key U.S. Business Founders").
Patents: Evidence of Entrepreneurial Activity We also uncovered some puzzling data on patent filings. When we analyzed the international patent database maintained by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), we found that 1 in every 4 patent applications from the U.S. in 2006 listed a foreign national residing in the U.S. as an inventor. This number had increased threefold over an eight-year period and didn't take into account inventors who had become U.S. citizens before applying for a patent.
We realized that these foreign-national inventors were not likely to be from the same immigrant group that was founding high-tech companies. They were likely to be PhD students and employees of U.S. corporations who are in the U.S. on temporary visas. Temporary-visa holders can't easily start their own companies�their visas require them to work full time for the company that sponsored them.
For our new research, we reanalyzed the WIPO patent database to look at which immigrant groups and corporations were applying for the most patents. To understand the foreign-national data, we examined extensive information published by the Homeland Security Dept., the Labor Dept., and the State Dept. We also reviewed the New Immigrant Survey to gain insight into the immigration process and to examine the potential that, even after becoming permanent residents, skilled immigrants might return home.
Here is what we found:
� Foreign nationals contributed to more than half of the international patents filed by companies such as Qualcomm (QCOM) (72%), Merck (MRK) (65%), General Electric (GE) (64%), Siemens (SI) (63%), and Cisco (CSCO) (60%). Their contributions were relatively small at Microsoft (MSFT) (3%) and General Motors (GM) (6%). Surprisingly, 41% of the patents filed by the U.S. government had foreign nationals listed as inventors.
� Foreign nationals contributed to 25.6% of all U.S. international patent applications in 2006, but the numbers were much higher in several states such as New Jersey (37%), California (36%), and Massachusetts (32%).
� In 2006, 16.8% of international patent applications from the U.S. had inventors with Chinese names and 36% of these (or 5.5% of the total) were foreign nationals. Similarly, 13.7% had Indian names and 40% (or 6.2% of the total) were foreign nationals.
� Both Indian and Chinese inventors tended to file most patents in the fields of medicine, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, and electronics.
Our analysis of the immigration data produced the most startling results.
"Immigration Limbo" We estimate that, as of Sept. 30, 2006, there were 500,040 individuals in the main employment-based visa categories and an additional 555,044 family members in line for permanent-resident status in the U.S. An additional 126,421 with job offers were waiting abroad. In total, there were 1,181,505 educated and skilled professionals waiting to gain legal permanent-resident status.
In the 2005-06 academic year, there were 259,717 international students in the U.S. There were an additional 38,096 in practical training�many of these are PhD researchers.
One thing is certain: If we wait five years to fix immigration policy, the unskilled workers will still be here, but the skilled workers who are in "immigration limbo" will be long gone. Our loss will be the gain of countries we are increasingly competing with in the new global landscape.
The problem is simple. There aren't enough permanent-resident visas available each year for skilled workers and their families. And there is a limit of fewer than 10,000 visas that can be issued to immigrants from any single country. So countries with the largest populations such as India and China are allocated the same number of visas as Iceland and Mongolia.
Visa Delays Deprive U.S. of Talent The result is that wait times for employment visas currently stretch from four to six years for immigrants from countries such as India and China, and all indications are that these delays will get longer. Based on a 2003 study of new legal immigrants to the U.S. called the New Immigrant Survey, we estimate that in 2003, about 1 in 3 professionals who had been through the immigration process either planned to leave the U.S. or were uncertain about remaining. Media reports and other anecdotal evidence indicate that many skilled workers have indeed begun to return home.
Much of the current public debate on immigration centers on concerns over low-skilled immigrants entering the U.S. illegally. We do need to develop fair policies to deal with this problem. But skilled immigrants who enter the U.S. legally are a different issue. Professor Richard Devon of Pennsylvania State University estimates that in the U.S. about $200,000 is invested in a child by the time they gain a bachelor's degree in engineering. That means that the U.S. gains billions of dollars in benefit from educated professionals who leave other countries to come here. And we lose billions when they return home. Additionally, we end up training highly skilled workers in our markets, technology, and way of doing business.
Consider this: Earlier research by my team found that more than half of the engineering and technology companies started in Silicon Valley and a quarter of those started nationwide from 1995 to 2006 had immigrant founders. These companies employed 450,000 workers and generated $52 billion in revenue in 2006. Their founders tended to be very highly educated in science, technology, math, and engineering-related disciplines, with 96% of them holding bachelor's degrees and 75% holding master's degrees or PhDs (see BusinessWeek.com, 6/11/07, "Immigrants: Key U.S. Business Founders").
Patents: Evidence of Entrepreneurial Activity We also uncovered some puzzling data on patent filings. When we analyzed the international patent database maintained by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO), we found that 1 in every 4 patent applications from the U.S. in 2006 listed a foreign national residing in the U.S. as an inventor. This number had increased threefold over an eight-year period and didn't take into account inventors who had become U.S. citizens before applying for a patent.
We realized that these foreign-national inventors were not likely to be from the same immigrant group that was founding high-tech companies. They were likely to be PhD students and employees of U.S. corporations who are in the U.S. on temporary visas. Temporary-visa holders can't easily start their own companies�their visas require them to work full time for the company that sponsored them.
For our new research, we reanalyzed the WIPO patent database to look at which immigrant groups and corporations were applying for the most patents. To understand the foreign-national data, we examined extensive information published by the Homeland Security Dept., the Labor Dept., and the State Dept. We also reviewed the New Immigrant Survey to gain insight into the immigration process and to examine the potential that, even after becoming permanent residents, skilled immigrants might return home.
Here is what we found:
� Foreign nationals contributed to more than half of the international patents filed by companies such as Qualcomm (QCOM) (72%), Merck (MRK) (65%), General Electric (GE) (64%), Siemens (SI) (63%), and Cisco (CSCO) (60%). Their contributions were relatively small at Microsoft (MSFT) (3%) and General Motors (GM) (6%). Surprisingly, 41% of the patents filed by the U.S. government had foreign nationals listed as inventors.
� Foreign nationals contributed to 25.6% of all U.S. international patent applications in 2006, but the numbers were much higher in several states such as New Jersey (37%), California (36%), and Massachusetts (32%).
� In 2006, 16.8% of international patent applications from the U.S. had inventors with Chinese names and 36% of these (or 5.5% of the total) were foreign nationals. Similarly, 13.7% had Indian names and 40% (or 6.2% of the total) were foreign nationals.
� Both Indian and Chinese inventors tended to file most patents in the fields of medicine, pharmaceuticals, semiconductors, and electronics.
Our analysis of the immigration data produced the most startling results.
"Immigration Limbo" We estimate that, as of Sept. 30, 2006, there were 500,040 individuals in the main employment-based visa categories and an additional 555,044 family members in line for permanent-resident status in the U.S. An additional 126,421 with job offers were waiting abroad. In total, there were 1,181,505 educated and skilled professionals waiting to gain legal permanent-resident status.
In the 2005-06 academic year, there were 259,717 international students in the U.S. There were an additional 38,096 in practical training�many of these are PhD researchers.
One thing is certain: If we wait five years to fix immigration policy, the unskilled workers will still be here, but the skilled workers who are in "immigration limbo" will be long gone. Our loss will be the gain of countries we are increasingly competing with in the new global landscape.
more...
ronhira
04-09 05:29 PM
You don't like members blaming CIS, could have said in one line
i don't..... becoz i' not in sarah palin brigade of mindless freaks who have to find someone to blame others for the sake of it..... we live in a complicated world..... just becoz we applied with uscis..... & just becoz they've to approve applications..... it doesn't mean
backlogs & delays is uscis fault..... the least amongst us can easily figure out that the problem is with the congress, not with cis.....
y the hell do u blame cis...... r they not allocating 140K per year..... what more do u want from them....... oh well...... for the sarah palin brigade on this forum i'm now an outcast.....
i don't..... becoz i' not in sarah palin brigade of mindless freaks who have to find someone to blame others for the sake of it..... we live in a complicated world..... just becoz we applied with uscis..... & just becoz they've to approve applications..... it doesn't mean
backlogs & delays is uscis fault..... the least amongst us can easily figure out that the problem is with the congress, not with cis.....
y the hell do u blame cis...... r they not allocating 140K per year..... what more do u want from them....... oh well...... for the sarah palin brigade on this forum i'm now an outcast.....
hot hot Dirty Blonde Hair
champu
03-09 03:07 PM
Eb2-i : 15-feb-04
eb3-i: 01-nov-01
Wondering who was doing GC during Nov 2001 time frame? Why the dates have not moved to 2003 when economy started showing signs of recovery? Do we have folks with PD for the last quarter of 2001.:confused:
One more point...
People looking for GC sponsoring employer may want to talk to these evergreen companies...;)
eb3-i: 01-nov-01
Wondering who was doing GC during Nov 2001 time frame? Why the dates have not moved to 2003 when economy started showing signs of recovery? Do we have folks with PD for the last quarter of 2001.:confused:
One more point...
People looking for GC sponsoring employer may want to talk to these evergreen companies...;)
more...
house Blonde Hair With Lowlights And
Horace Jones
08-02 09:03 AM
Unfortunately it seems that others have run into similar situations, where an employer has promised to sponsor an H1 visa and then revoked that promise. Here is an example of a similar situation, where the immigrant party is a speech pathologist in Florida: My employer promised to sponsor me for Green Card and has now withdrawn that offer. I am a Speech Pathologist - Yahoo! Answers (http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071203071112AAiWfB1)
tattoo londe hair highlights
jonty_11
07-09 06:36 PM
I came across this law about the departmental control of numerical limitations, and I'd appreciate it if you all could post your interpretations of the same.
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
text in bold has a GREY area....'plus remaining balance from previous months.'
They can always say the additional approvals were left over from previous months...
DOS Reg 22 CFR �42.51:
(a) Centralized control. Centralized control of the numerical limitations on immigration specified in INA 201, 202, and 203 is established in the Department. The Department shall limit the number of immigrant visas that may be issued and the number of adjustments of status that may be granted to aliens subject to these numerical limitations to a number:
(1) Not to exceed 27 percent of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) in any of the first three quarters of any fiscal year; and
(2) Not to exceed, in any month of a fiscal year, 10% of the world-wide total made available under INA 203(a), (b) and (c) plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year.
Source: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2004/aprqtr/pdf/22cfr42.33.pdf
Assuming that USCIS approved (based on which it supposedly requested visa numbers from DOS) 60,000+ I-485 applications between June 13 and July 2, would it or would it not be in violation of the clause in bold ?
Specifically, can anyone come up with a proper explanation of the words "plus any balance remaining from authorizations for preceding months in the same fiscal year" and why, if so is the case, USCIS may not have violated the law?
PS:People seem to be focusing on the eligibility to file the I-485 application when immigrant visa numbers are/aren't available in this thread. I am quite new to the procedures involved in processing green card applications and also to IV. If this question is out of place or silly, please pardon my naivette. I'd really appreciate it if a senior member could nevertheless answer the question.:)
Note: The information in this post is the personal opinion of the author and is not to be construed as legal advice.
text in bold has a GREY area....'plus remaining balance from previous months.'
They can always say the additional approvals were left over from previous months...
more...
pictures londe hair highlights
REEF�
02-16 05:08 PM
....
Owned.
--
Nice 3D render ;P 3rdworldmang.
Owned.
--
Nice 3D render ;P 3rdworldmang.
dresses hot Her hair color usually
485Question
09-18 10:46 PM
All I want to stress are these keywords in all our prints "Legal - Highly Skilled"
And well learned.
And well learned.
more...
makeup Blonde Highlights And
rajeshalex
07-13 06:57 PM
Can IV use FOIA to
1 get the visa numbers allocated by USCIS for the past one year ?
2 pending 485 applns grouped by country/EB category/priority date?
I think this will clear lot of speculations/and if needed we can do something regarding the visa number wastage/retrogression.
Rajesh
1 get the visa numbers allocated by USCIS for the past one year ?
2 pending 485 applns grouped by country/EB category/priority date?
I think this will clear lot of speculations/and if needed we can do something regarding the visa number wastage/retrogression.
Rajesh
girlfriend Shakira londe hair with black
paskal
07-03 02:41 AM
I've said it before and I'll say it again - I don't see how the per country limit is unfair! It was set up so that immigrants from ALL nations would have EQUAL opportunity to immigrate to the U.S. and to prevent any one (or two) countries from monopolizing the visa numbers. Getting rid of the per country limit would most certainly lead to immigration from a limited number of sources (countries) and thus jeopardize the diversity of the immigration process. Getting rid of it would be like robbing Peter to pay Paul because those countries who are severely retrogressed now would only see limited benefits and those who are not all that retrogressed would fall backwards - is that fair!? It seems these forms are dominated by "certain" groups who have their own agenda and don't really care about ROW! It makes me feel uncomfortable being an IV member from ROW!
iv supports a package of measures that includes the recapture and STEM exemptions, not removal of country quotas in isolation. the idea is not to redistribute pain (though frankly country quotas give disproportionate pain to some- for what? being born "wrong'") but to end retrogression by simultaneously increasing numbers available and ending country quotas.
if you want to think about "fair" and "monopolies", i urge you to think of the current monopoly. i am an EB2 in health care- every ROW person with me, waltzes to current GCs and mine is many years away. i cannot change anything about the way i work for years...does my career have the same value as one from ROW? i did not apply for the job as an indian and i was not given a job as one. i had some qualifications that counted....why then are they suddenly subservient to my place of birth?
iv supports a package of measures that includes the recapture and STEM exemptions, not removal of country quotas in isolation. the idea is not to redistribute pain (though frankly country quotas give disproportionate pain to some- for what? being born "wrong'") but to end retrogression by simultaneously increasing numbers available and ending country quotas.
if you want to think about "fair" and "monopolies", i urge you to think of the current monopoly. i am an EB2 in health care- every ROW person with me, waltzes to current GCs and mine is many years away. i cannot change anything about the way i work for years...does my career have the same value as one from ROW? i did not apply for the job as an indian and i was not given a job as one. i had some qualifications that counted....why then are they suddenly subservient to my place of birth?
hairstyles dresses londe hair highlights
gcformeornot
08-29 03:55 PM
most of the desi consultants seem to be concentrated in NJ or Chicago. Are there any reliable desi consultants for H-1 in CA? What are the websites which give info in this direction?
What are the steps to be followed and things to watch out for in selecting a desi consultant?
like Reliable Desi Consultant? I think they become Extinct with dinosaurs!
What are the steps to be followed and things to watch out for in selecting a desi consultant?
like Reliable Desi Consultant? I think they become Extinct with dinosaurs!
ujjwal_p
10-10 05:45 PM
If verified, you would end up in eating ham burger.
Allow me :
"We get caught laundering money, we're not going to white color resort prison. No, no, no. We're going to Federal pound me in the a** prison" -- Office Space
Allow me :
"We get caught laundering money, we're not going to white color resort prison. No, no, no. We're going to Federal pound me in the a** prison" -- Office Space
h1techSlave
03-22 10:42 AM
I have noticed that the % prior to Jan 2004 is a whopping 44.06. I have a bad feeling that this group (prior to Jan 2004) is growing. :eek:
No comments:
Post a Comment