- Female Flower Foot
- flower tattoo designs on foot.
- 3d flower tattoo, foot
- Foot Tattoo Designs That Make
- Best Tattoo Designs – Flower
- Flower Foot Tattoo 3
- Large flower foot tattoo
- flower tattoo designs for feet
- foot tattoo designs for women
- the flower background.
- Outstanding Foot
- flower tattoo designs for feet
- Feet tattoo
- house Flower flower tattoo
- Dragonfly and Flower Tattoo on
- Nice Flower Foot Tattoo
- Flower Tattoo Designs For Feet
- Girls Lotus Flower Tattoo
- daisy flower tattoo. Foot
images flower tattoo designs for feet 
wallpaper Female Flower Foot
.jpg "3d flower tattoo, foot")
2011 flower tattoo designs on foot.
more...
more...
2010 3d flower tattoo, foot
more...
hair Foot Tattoo Designs That Make
more...
hot Best Tattoo Designs – Flower
more...
house Flower Tattoo Designs For Feet
tattoo Flower Foot Tattoo 3
more...
pictures Large flower foot tattoo
dresses flower tattoo designs for feet
more...
makeup foot tattoo designs for women
girlfriend house Flower flower tattoo
hairstyles Outstanding Foot
Source URL: http://giantstepstalk.blogspot.com/2011/06/flower-tattoo-designs-for-feet.html
Visit tattoo for girls for Daily Updated Hairstyles Collection
Lasantha
09-25 09:15 AM
Just curious. Why do you claim ROW is receiving preferential treatment over India when all the countries get the same upper limit of the visas. Now if the Indians ask for more visas just because there are more Indians asking for green cards, wouldn't that be preferential treatment? :)
Quota system treats everybody anything but "equal". And this is not just the question of equality, because I am sure you agree that we are equals. It is the question of PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT. You are in the category getting preferential treatment, so you oppose any change, you "create" arguements that you were "promised" a system when you came, and thus any change to the system, before you get your green card would be WRONG and UNFAIR. So you should continue to get that PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT. And PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT to you is NOT WRONG AND UNFAIR. Right?
BTW, hope you liked the You tube video, Frank is really good. I do not want you to go, so that's why I posted the video. Hope it helped you to stick around. Now don't say you have the right to watch it 5 times and I can watch it only once because I am from India and you are ROW :D
Cheers,
Quota system treats everybody anything but "equal". And this is not just the question of equality, because I am sure you agree that we are equals. It is the question of PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT. You are in the category getting preferential treatment, so you oppose any change, you "create" arguements that you were "promised" a system when you came, and thus any change to the system, before you get your green card would be WRONG and UNFAIR. So you should continue to get that PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT. And PREFERENTIAL TREATMENT to you is NOT WRONG AND UNFAIR. Right?
BTW, hope you liked the You tube video, Frank is really good. I do not want you to go, so that's why I posted the video. Hope it helped you to stick around. Now don't say you have the right to watch it 5 times and I can watch it only once because I am from India and you are ROW :D
Cheers,
wallpaper Female Flower Foot
chanduv23
02-01 01:14 PM
H1B problems have nothing to do with retrogression.
If H1B employees are being mistreated by a certain class of employers, then what does that have to do with shortage of visa numbers?
Nothing.
Misuse and abuse of H1B program did not cause retrogression. And if the abuse ends, its not going to end retrogression. The H1B program does provide ammunition to anti-immigrants to use that paint-brush and paint the entire program of H1B and Employment based GC as bad. Fortune 500 companies dont engage in unethical behavior. The TCS, Wipro etc maybe do that. Small bodyshops certainly do that. I am yet to see a small body-shop, operated by a citizen of foriegn origin, working by the book and treating employees well.
But all said and done, these things make our life more difficult and exacerbate the situation that arose from retrogression. However, these things didnt cause retrogression.
At the most, these issues of H1B abuse may have provided support to some groups in keeping the H1B quota down. However, it has nothing to do with EB quota. In fact, IEEE-USA advocates bringing down H1B quota and RAISING the employment based GC quota, in order to remove factors that encourage employer abuse.
U have the point.
These issues are not causes for retrogression, but these issues make it difficult to fix retrogression.
IV moderators and members must not encourage things like "ABC company not paying bench salary for my wife though he took 3k from me to file for h1 and is holding her paystubs etc"" These are the things that will make it difficult to fix retrogression - in these kind of situations it is both employer and employee at fault.
If H1B employees are being mistreated by a certain class of employers, then what does that have to do with shortage of visa numbers?
Nothing.
Misuse and abuse of H1B program did not cause retrogression. And if the abuse ends, its not going to end retrogression. The H1B program does provide ammunition to anti-immigrants to use that paint-brush and paint the entire program of H1B and Employment based GC as bad. Fortune 500 companies dont engage in unethical behavior. The TCS, Wipro etc maybe do that. Small bodyshops certainly do that. I am yet to see a small body-shop, operated by a citizen of foriegn origin, working by the book and treating employees well.
But all said and done, these things make our life more difficult and exacerbate the situation that arose from retrogression. However, these things didnt cause retrogression.
At the most, these issues of H1B abuse may have provided support to some groups in keeping the H1B quota down. However, it has nothing to do with EB quota. In fact, IEEE-USA advocates bringing down H1B quota and RAISING the employment based GC quota, in order to remove factors that encourage employer abuse.
U have the point.
These issues are not causes for retrogression, but these issues make it difficult to fix retrogression.
IV moderators and members must not encourage things like "ABC company not paying bench salary for my wife though he took 3k from me to file for h1 and is holding her paystubs etc"" These are the things that will make it difficult to fix retrogression - in these kind of situations it is both employer and employee at fault.
eastindia
01-22 10:28 AM
You need to understand how legal system works. Lawyer can not file lawsuite by himself/herself. It has to come from Employer, that too, when employer's H1-B petition is denied based on memo info or H1-B worker is denied entry. Damages (or Loss) must be shown before a civil suit can be filed.
Have a good day!
_________________
Not a legal advice.
They can challenge the legality of the memo. You do not need employer for that.
Have a good day!
_________________
Not a legal advice.
They can challenge the legality of the memo. You do not need employer for that.
2011 flower tattoo designs on foot.
gk_2000
04-18 06:14 PM
Many in IV will know that I have never opposed legal porting. However, I disagree that this is a way to get out of the mess. There is a fixed total number of Visa available. Per current rule this first comes to EB2 and is consumed completely leaving nothing for EB 3. If all (or majority) EB 3 moves to EB 2, the chocking will be in EB2 . So the "mess" just shifts its position.
The true way is -- 1) Recapture, 2) Exclude dependents from Visa Number
As I see it, the only persons benefited are the ones having the priority dates in ancient times. I think we really should not mind letting them have their GC's, being our seniors.
Yes, later year porters might end up having to wait. It's all in the game, fortunately or unfortunately. One thing is for sure, we as a whole, have an uphill battle
If it really comes to matter, I think it should be easy for an EB2 to port to EB3 if the dates are current for him in the different category. So if I were EB2 today, I wouldn't be so apprehensive :)
The true way is -- 1) Recapture, 2) Exclude dependents from Visa Number
As I see it, the only persons benefited are the ones having the priority dates in ancient times. I think we really should not mind letting them have their GC's, being our seniors.
Yes, later year porters might end up having to wait. It's all in the game, fortunately or unfortunately. One thing is for sure, we as a whole, have an uphill battle
If it really comes to matter, I think it should be easy for an EB2 to port to EB3 if the dates are current for him in the different category. So if I were EB2 today, I wouldn't be so apprehensive :)
more...
satishku_2000
05-24 08:29 PM
Any one one knew if this H1B fee increase applies for 1 year extensions too if the bill gets passed in the current form?
They should make H1s valid only for 3 months so that they can have a constant source of income to fund the INS that needs so much money going forward to legalize 20 million people.
They should make H1s valid only for 3 months so that they can have a constant source of income to fund the INS that needs so much money going forward to legalize 20 million people.
desi3933
03-22 11:26 AM
I was referring to "AC21 Memo" not the "AC21 law".
I agree with your statement that AC21 is a law.
ok, probably you meant memos issued by USCIS for AC-21 implementation.
Would you please explain what you meant by "real memo" when you wrote
AC21 memo is a real memo
I am not aware that there multiple kinds of memos.
I agree with your statement that AC21 is a law.
ok, probably you meant memos issued by USCIS for AC-21 implementation.
Would you please explain what you meant by "real memo" when you wrote
AC21 memo is a real memo
I am not aware that there multiple kinds of memos.
more...
cool4maverick
11-09 07:38 PM
I have checked with my company's lawyer and he said I can maintain H1 status with my current employer and use EAD for part time job. I read murthy chat transcripts and same topic was discussed with two different answers. I have read at many websites different and I read mixed responses from different lawyers....point is nobody knows for sure if you can maintain your H1 status while working part time on EAD...
In any case, I will be working part time on EAD and I will inform my HR about my status change from H1 to EAD on my I-9 to be on safe side.
I work for a very big company and I have my LC, I140 and EAD approved. I am hoping for the best that my AOS won't be denied. If my AOS application gets denied then I do not think any other company would be able to get it approved. It is true that I will get some time buffer if I am on H1 and my AOS gets denied but I do not want to be limited by work authorization limitations...
Thats my oppinion...
In any case, I will be working part time on EAD and I will inform my HR about my status change from H1 to EAD on my I-9 to be on safe side.
I work for a very big company and I have my LC, I140 and EAD approved. I am hoping for the best that my AOS won't be denied. If my AOS application gets denied then I do not think any other company would be able to get it approved. It is true that I will get some time buffer if I am on H1 and my AOS gets denied but I do not want to be limited by work authorization limitations...
Thats my oppinion...
2010 3d flower tattoo, foot
PD_Dec2002
07-10 09:07 PM
However this smacks of unfairness as well. See this comment on Greg Siskind's blog (http://blogs.ilw.com/gregsiskind/2007/07/service-centers.html#comments) in response to the news about TSC holding the applications while NSC's been retirning them and some July 02 packages have been returned as well.
Greg,
Where did you get this news? If they partially returned some cases received on July 02, it is very very very unfair for those got returned. They were the first getting in the line and now they have to wait at the end of the line??? If USCIS is going to treat the returned cases that way, they will face more lawsuits to come. If they are to hold later on cases, they have have have to allow the returned cases to be sent back and put in front of the line, with delivery notice as the proof of getting sent back.
This is very annoying notice indeed.
Posted by: no more patience | July 10, 2007 at 05:02 PM
----------------------
Thanks,
Jayant
Greg,
Where did you get this news? If they partially returned some cases received on July 02, it is very very very unfair for those got returned. They were the first getting in the line and now they have to wait at the end of the line??? If USCIS is going to treat the returned cases that way, they will face more lawsuits to come. If they are to hold later on cases, they have have have to allow the returned cases to be sent back and put in front of the line, with delivery notice as the proof of getting sent back.
This is very annoying notice indeed.
Posted by: no more patience | July 10, 2007 at 05:02 PM
----------------------
Thanks,
Jayant
more...
dallasdude
05-13 11:05 AM
This might come as a surprise to some of you, but someone needs to say it out loud. GET A LIFE FOLKS!!!! there is more to life then EB, GC and all. it seem all we desi's can think of is how to get a green card so we can live here with peace and never have to worry bout getting laid off or anything.
Few points:
1) having gc is a privilege not a right.
2) US has every right to choose whom they want to have in their country.
3) If getting PR or citizenship of a western country is the goal there are many countries which have a fair point based system.
4) Considering the number of fraud's committed by Indian body shoppers and people who use them, i am not surprised USCIS is extra careful when it comes to Indian applications. Anyone who got his wife with no exp with software dev an h1b visa from some cheat in Jersey knows what i am talking bout . My freind got his wife an H1 after showing she knew software testing even though her major was fine arts and all she was good at was web surfing :)
5) have a back up. i came here in 2001 as student and have seen it all. I am on h1b since 2004. i knew we have too many people whose sole aim in life is a American GC. to avoid becoming one of those who check processing dates first thing in morning, i applied for Canadian PR, got it in 8 months and i am not even gonna bother applying for labor, i-140 and all those precious life controlling documents.
Wake up friends, you have options. Don't let your life depend on you application status.
Nitin
I'm proud of you. Very well said indeed. Just ignore the haters.
Few points:
1) having gc is a privilege not a right.
2) US has every right to choose whom they want to have in their country.
3) If getting PR or citizenship of a western country is the goal there are many countries which have a fair point based system.
4) Considering the number of fraud's committed by Indian body shoppers and people who use them, i am not surprised USCIS is extra careful when it comes to Indian applications. Anyone who got his wife with no exp with software dev an h1b visa from some cheat in Jersey knows what i am talking bout . My freind got his wife an H1 after showing she knew software testing even though her major was fine arts and all she was good at was web surfing :)
5) have a back up. i came here in 2001 as student and have seen it all. I am on h1b since 2004. i knew we have too many people whose sole aim in life is a American GC. to avoid becoming one of those who check processing dates first thing in morning, i applied for Canadian PR, got it in 8 months and i am not even gonna bother applying for labor, i-140 and all those precious life controlling documents.
Wake up friends, you have options. Don't let your life depend on you application status.
Nitin
I'm proud of you. Very well said indeed. Just ignore the haters.
hair Foot Tattoo Designs That Make
diptam
05-24 01:32 PM
it would make our plans to go back even more certian.. A MASS EXODUS of HIGH TECH WORKERS.. is exactly what this country needs..way to go!
If CIR S.1348 results as a death sentence to the draems of thousands of
hightech workers and eventually it results to a exodus i'm sure they will realize the mistake at the end.
When they will see that No one is interested in this country to study and Pursue STEM ( even with scholarship) and their problem is still unresolved they probably have to spend Double the Money to bringback Indians here.
OR
Pay 3 times if they want us to do that from Offshore.... No Compromise man !!
If CIR S.1348 results as a death sentence to the draems of thousands of
hightech workers and eventually it results to a exodus i'm sure they will realize the mistake at the end.
When they will see that No one is interested in this country to study and Pursue STEM ( even with scholarship) and their problem is still unresolved they probably have to spend Double the Money to bringback Indians here.
OR
Pay 3 times if they want us to do that from Offshore.... No Compromise man !!
more...
485Mbe4001
11-27 12:49 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/27/opinion/27brooks.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
NY Times Op-Ed Columnist
Follow the Fundamentals
By DAVID BROOKS
Published: November 27, 2007
Lou Dobbs is winning. He’s not winning personally. He’s not going to start winning presidential awards or elite respect. But his message is winning. Month by month the ideas that once prevailed on the angry fringe enter the mainstream and turn into conventional wisdom.
Once there was a majority in favor of liberal immigration policies, but apparently that’s not true anymore, at least if you judge by campaign rhetoric. Once there was a bipartisan consensus behind free trade, but that’s not true anymore, either. Even Republicans, by a two-to-one majority, believe free trade is bad for America, according to a Wall Street Journal/NBC poll.
Once upon a time, the fact that hundreds of millions of people around the world are rising out of poverty would have been a source of pride and optimism. But if you listen to the presidential candidates, improvements in the developing world are menacing. Their speeches constitute a symphony of woe about lead-painted toys, manipulated currencies and stolen jobs.
And if Dobbsianism is winning when times are good, you can imagine how attractive it’s going to seem if we enter the serious recession that Larry Summers convincingly and terrifyingly forecasts in yesterday’s Financial Times. If the economy dips as seriously as that, the political climate could shift in ugly ways.
So it’s worth pointing out now more than ever that Dobbsianism is fundamentally wrong. It plays on legitimate anxieties, but it rests at heart on a more existential fear — the fear that America is under assault and is fundamentally fragile. It rests on fears that the America we once knew is bleeding away.
And that’s just not true. In the first place, despite the ups and downs of the business cycle, the United States still possesses the most potent economy on earth. Recently the World Economic Forum and the International Institute for Management Development produced global competitiveness indexes, and once again they both ranked the United States first in the world.
In the World Economic Forum survey, the U.S. comes in just ahead of Switzerland, Denmark, Sweden and Germany (China is 34th). The U.S. gets poor marks for macroeconomic stability (the long-term federal debt), for its tax structure and for the low savings rate. But it leads the world in a range of categories: higher education and training, labor market flexibility, the ability to attract global talent, the availability of venture capital, the quality of corporate management and the capacity to innovate.
William W. Lewis of McKinsey surveyed global competitive in dozens of business sectors a few years ago, and concluded, “The United States is the productivity leader in virtually every industry.”
Second, America’s fundamental economic strength is rooted in the most stable of assets — its values. The U.S. is still an astonishing assimilation machine. It has successfully absorbed more than 20 million legal immigrants over the past quarter-century, an extraordinary influx of human capital. Americans are remarkably fertile. Birthrates are relatively high, meaning that in 2050, the average American will be under 40, while the average European, Chinese and Japanese will be more than a decade older.
The American economy benefits from low levels of corruption. American culture still transmits some ineffable spirit of adventure. American students can’t compete with, say, Singaporean students on standardized tests, but they are innovative and creative throughout their lives. The U.S. standard of living first surpassed the rest of the world’s in about 1740, and despite dozens of cycles of declinist foreboding, the country has resolutely refused to decay.
Third, not every economic dislocation has been caused by trade and the Chinese. Between 1991 and 2007, the U.S. trade deficit exploded to $818 billion from $31 billion. Yet as Robert Samuelson has pointed out, during that time the U.S. created 28 million jobs and the unemployment rate dipped to 4.6 percent from 6.8 percent.
That’s because, as Robert Lawrence of Harvard and Martin Baily of McKinsey have calculated, 90 percent of manufacturing job losses are due to domestic forces. As companies become more technologically advanced, they shed workers (the Chinese shed 25 million manufacturing jobs between 1994 and 2004).
Meanwhile, the number of jobs actually lost to outsourcing is small, and recent reports suggest the outsourcing trend is slowing down. They are swamped by the general churn of creative destruction. Every quarter the U.S. loses somewhere around seven million jobs, and creates a bit more than seven million more. That double-edged process is the essence of a dynamic economy.
I’m writing this column from Beijing. I can look out the window and see the explosive growth. But as the Chinese will be the first to tell you, their dazzling prosperity is built on fragile foundations. In the United States, the situation is the reverse. We have obvious problems. But the foundations of American prosperity are strong. The U.S. still has much more to gain than to lose from openness, trade and globalization.
NY Times Op-Ed Columnist
Follow the Fundamentals
By DAVID BROOKS
Published: November 27, 2007
Lou Dobbs is winning. He’s not winning personally. He’s not going to start winning presidential awards or elite respect. But his message is winning. Month by month the ideas that once prevailed on the angry fringe enter the mainstream and turn into conventional wisdom.
Once there was a majority in favor of liberal immigration policies, but apparently that’s not true anymore, at least if you judge by campaign rhetoric. Once there was a bipartisan consensus behind free trade, but that’s not true anymore, either. Even Republicans, by a two-to-one majority, believe free trade is bad for America, according to a Wall Street Journal/NBC poll.
Once upon a time, the fact that hundreds of millions of people around the world are rising out of poverty would have been a source of pride and optimism. But if you listen to the presidential candidates, improvements in the developing world are menacing. Their speeches constitute a symphony of woe about lead-painted toys, manipulated currencies and stolen jobs.
And if Dobbsianism is winning when times are good, you can imagine how attractive it’s going to seem if we enter the serious recession that Larry Summers convincingly and terrifyingly forecasts in yesterday’s Financial Times. If the economy dips as seriously as that, the political climate could shift in ugly ways.
So it’s worth pointing out now more than ever that Dobbsianism is fundamentally wrong. It plays on legitimate anxieties, but it rests at heart on a more existential fear — the fear that America is under assault and is fundamentally fragile. It rests on fears that the America we once knew is bleeding away.
And that’s just not true. In the first place, despite the ups and downs of the business cycle, the United States still possesses the most potent economy on earth. Recently the World Economic Forum and the International Institute for Management Development produced global competitiveness indexes, and once again they both ranked the United States first in the world.
In the World Economic Forum survey, the U.S. comes in just ahead of Switzerland, Denmark, Sweden and Germany (China is 34th). The U.S. gets poor marks for macroeconomic stability (the long-term federal debt), for its tax structure and for the low savings rate. But it leads the world in a range of categories: higher education and training, labor market flexibility, the ability to attract global talent, the availability of venture capital, the quality of corporate management and the capacity to innovate.
William W. Lewis of McKinsey surveyed global competitive in dozens of business sectors a few years ago, and concluded, “The United States is the productivity leader in virtually every industry.”
Second, America’s fundamental economic strength is rooted in the most stable of assets — its values. The U.S. is still an astonishing assimilation machine. It has successfully absorbed more than 20 million legal immigrants over the past quarter-century, an extraordinary influx of human capital. Americans are remarkably fertile. Birthrates are relatively high, meaning that in 2050, the average American will be under 40, while the average European, Chinese and Japanese will be more than a decade older.
The American economy benefits from low levels of corruption. American culture still transmits some ineffable spirit of adventure. American students can’t compete with, say, Singaporean students on standardized tests, but they are innovative and creative throughout their lives. The U.S. standard of living first surpassed the rest of the world’s in about 1740, and despite dozens of cycles of declinist foreboding, the country has resolutely refused to decay.
Third, not every economic dislocation has been caused by trade and the Chinese. Between 1991 and 2007, the U.S. trade deficit exploded to $818 billion from $31 billion. Yet as Robert Samuelson has pointed out, during that time the U.S. created 28 million jobs and the unemployment rate dipped to 4.6 percent from 6.8 percent.
That’s because, as Robert Lawrence of Harvard and Martin Baily of McKinsey have calculated, 90 percent of manufacturing job losses are due to domestic forces. As companies become more technologically advanced, they shed workers (the Chinese shed 25 million manufacturing jobs between 1994 and 2004).
Meanwhile, the number of jobs actually lost to outsourcing is small, and recent reports suggest the outsourcing trend is slowing down. They are swamped by the general churn of creative destruction. Every quarter the U.S. loses somewhere around seven million jobs, and creates a bit more than seven million more. That double-edged process is the essence of a dynamic economy.
I’m writing this column from Beijing. I can look out the window and see the explosive growth. But as the Chinese will be the first to tell you, their dazzling prosperity is built on fragile foundations. In the United States, the situation is the reverse. We have obvious problems. But the foundations of American prosperity are strong. The U.S. still has much more to gain than to lose from openness, trade and globalization.
hot Best Tattoo Designs – Flower
immi_twinges
07-15 07:38 AM
singed and done!
It was mentioned in the other thread.
It was mentioned in the other thread.
more...
house Flower Tattoo Designs For Feet
visa_reval
04-08 02:35 PM
Received soft luds for wife and son on the 3rd, 4th and 6th of this month. No lud for my app. wonder what's going on.
tattoo Flower Foot Tattoo 3
bebar
09-15 05:37 PM
18003755283
1-2-1 receipt number# 1-1-3-4
Can I get link for New POJ method of reaching Nebraska IO.
Anyone Please ?
1-2-1 receipt number# 1-1-3-4
Can I get link for New POJ method of reaching Nebraska IO.
Anyone Please ?
more...
pictures Large flower foot tattoo
alterego
01-30 04:39 AM
I dont think companies are really geared to file for 140 within 45 days of labor approval.
Most of the companies take 4-6 weeks to just send the documents the lawyers request for filing 140. Then the lawyers, most likely forget something and request more documents. It takes another 2 weeks for company to send those.
All in all, on average I think companies need 3 months after approved labor to be ready to Fedex that 140 petition. No malicious intent on the part of employer, its just how things are. 45 days is going to make things difficult for many companies and many of the lazy, slow, procrastinating law firms.
When the Dept of labour can process PERM in generally 6-8 weeks or less and the USCIS can offer premium processing of 140 in 2 weeks or less, what the heck is wrong in expecting these large companies and law firms to get up off thier lazy slow procrastinating backsides and file within 45 days?
That said, in the final ruling I suspect they will make some modification to this time frame.
Most of the companies take 4-6 weeks to just send the documents the lawyers request for filing 140. Then the lawyers, most likely forget something and request more documents. It takes another 2 weeks for company to send those.
All in all, on average I think companies need 3 months after approved labor to be ready to Fedex that 140 petition. No malicious intent on the part of employer, its just how things are. 45 days is going to make things difficult for many companies and many of the lazy, slow, procrastinating law firms.
When the Dept of labour can process PERM in generally 6-8 weeks or less and the USCIS can offer premium processing of 140 in 2 weeks or less, what the heck is wrong in expecting these large companies and law firms to get up off thier lazy slow procrastinating backsides and file within 45 days?
That said, in the final ruling I suspect they will make some modification to this time frame.
dresses flower tattoo designs for feet
ab_tak_chappan
08-13 06:51 PM
chaanakya i fully agree with your assessment!
Yes, that is right, I said �plight of EB2-India�.
I am a passive observer of these forums. But some of the ridiculous notions floating around here have motivated me to vent. First and foremost, the law as written is highly favorable to people in EB3 categories, even from India. Here is how...
Take my example (and there are thousands like myself)....came to the US 8 years ago, spent 5 years working day and night to earn a PhD on a low (barely sustainable) stipend, got FIRST job saw decent money for the first time 6 years after I came.
Now, compare this to a person working an EB3-job for the last 8 years. Not only does this person do a real job that hopefully provides a respectable income but this person also has the option of moving to EB2 after 5 years of experience. So, at the end of the day in 2008; this person comes out ahead of me in terms of money, in terms of priority date (if ported) and most likely in terms of GC.
There are complaints all over the forum which have the stink of pretentiousness such as �oh..i am a poor EB3 waiting for n number of years� etc etc. What you guys seem to forget is that YOU are NOT an EB3, it is your JOB that is EB3. You have all the opportunities that were/are available to a person who sweated it out in the university system here to gain more qualifications and get an EB2 job. You CHOSE not to. The general discussion seems to center around cribbing about the US immigration system (Immigration by the way is a privilege defined by laws, not a birthright) and then blaming the EB2 crowd when they finally see the system implement the law as intended in the first place (horizontal spillover rules).
All these posts that refer to �my career is over because my gc is delayed� are nothing but a pathetic excuse. Law of supply and demand....if you have a skillset that is valuable, you will be fine with or without GC anywhere in the world. It takes a bunch of documents to remain here legally, all you need is a passport to go back if the system here seems so bad.
For all the attacks that are bound to happen, here is the fodder.....this is probably my first and last post, I haven�t contributed a dime to IV, will work here as long as I like it and if not, India is a great country and provides enough opportunities for any skillset !!
Yes, that is right, I said �plight of EB2-India�.
I am a passive observer of these forums. But some of the ridiculous notions floating around here have motivated me to vent. First and foremost, the law as written is highly favorable to people in EB3 categories, even from India. Here is how...
Take my example (and there are thousands like myself)....came to the US 8 years ago, spent 5 years working day and night to earn a PhD on a low (barely sustainable) stipend, got FIRST job saw decent money for the first time 6 years after I came.
Now, compare this to a person working an EB3-job for the last 8 years. Not only does this person do a real job that hopefully provides a respectable income but this person also has the option of moving to EB2 after 5 years of experience. So, at the end of the day in 2008; this person comes out ahead of me in terms of money, in terms of priority date (if ported) and most likely in terms of GC.
There are complaints all over the forum which have the stink of pretentiousness such as �oh..i am a poor EB3 waiting for n number of years� etc etc. What you guys seem to forget is that YOU are NOT an EB3, it is your JOB that is EB3. You have all the opportunities that were/are available to a person who sweated it out in the university system here to gain more qualifications and get an EB2 job. You CHOSE not to. The general discussion seems to center around cribbing about the US immigration system (Immigration by the way is a privilege defined by laws, not a birthright) and then blaming the EB2 crowd when they finally see the system implement the law as intended in the first place (horizontal spillover rules).
All these posts that refer to �my career is over because my gc is delayed� are nothing but a pathetic excuse. Law of supply and demand....if you have a skillset that is valuable, you will be fine with or without GC anywhere in the world. It takes a bunch of documents to remain here legally, all you need is a passport to go back if the system here seems so bad.
For all the attacks that are bound to happen, here is the fodder.....this is probably my first and last post, I haven�t contributed a dime to IV, will work here as long as I like it and if not, India is a great country and provides enough opportunities for any skillset !!
more...
makeup foot tattoo designs for women
sundarpn
06-01 10:31 PM
Cool.
How does one go about writing to the senator's office for an individual's case?
Can you share how you went about this?
thx
Folks - another update on my case.
As i had been following up my case with the help from my Senator's office, they requested USCIS to give a written decision on my MTR.
Here is the written decision that USCIS gave
"On March 27, 2009, you filed a motion to reopen. You indicated the use of the applicant's ability to "port" under section 106(c) of the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act (AC21). The requirements were met and the motion to reopen was approved.
CONCLUSION: It is concluded that the grounds stated for denial have been overcome.
ORDER: It is ordered that the motion to reopen be approved. The Form I-485 is "pre-adjudicated" awaiting visa availability."
I hope this encourages people to go ahead with AC21
How does one go about writing to the senator's office for an individual's case?
Can you share how you went about this?
thx
Folks - another update on my case.
As i had been following up my case with the help from my Senator's office, they requested USCIS to give a written decision on my MTR.
Here is the written decision that USCIS gave
"On March 27, 2009, you filed a motion to reopen. You indicated the use of the applicant's ability to "port" under section 106(c) of the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act (AC21). The requirements were met and the motion to reopen was approved.
CONCLUSION: It is concluded that the grounds stated for denial have been overcome.
ORDER: It is ordered that the motion to reopen be approved. The Form I-485 is "pre-adjudicated" awaiting visa availability."
I hope this encourages people to go ahead with AC21
girlfriend house Flower flower tattoo
seattleGC
05-24 02:18 PM
Thats not entirely correct. Three of the most vocal supporters of us are
Sen. Brownback(R) - Kansas
Sen. Hagel(R) - Nebraska
Sen Coryn(R) - Texas
They are from the so-called conservative states.
I haven't heard anything positive for our cause from senators from the so-called sophisticated/liberal states like Illinois (Dick Durnbin & Obama) , NY , MH (Kennedy and Kerry), CA (Boxer and Fienstein) for our cause. In fact they have gone towards family immigration and are screwing us in the process.
If you might notice that all these Senators who are coming up with these brilliant ideas are either from some god forsaken place in the US where there is nothing except a WalMart and a Church or the Senator doesnt know his economics right and is using VOTE BANK POLITICS parallel that to the recent Mayawati being elected in UP & AB & AMbani getting hit in scams and SEZs.
...
Sen. Brownback(R) - Kansas
Sen. Hagel(R) - Nebraska
Sen Coryn(R) - Texas
They are from the so-called conservative states.
I haven't heard anything positive for our cause from senators from the so-called sophisticated/liberal states like Illinois (Dick Durnbin & Obama) , NY , MH (Kennedy and Kerry), CA (Boxer and Fienstein) for our cause. In fact they have gone towards family immigration and are screwing us in the process.
If you might notice that all these Senators who are coming up with these brilliant ideas are either from some god forsaken place in the US where there is nothing except a WalMart and a Church or the Senator doesnt know his economics right and is using VOTE BANK POLITICS parallel that to the recent Mayawati being elected in UP & AB & AMbani getting hit in scams and SEZs.
...
hairstyles Outstanding Foot
glus
07-10 01:46 PM
I guess USCIS is getting pretty smart. To be a plaintiff in the lawsuit, your application has to get rejected. By holding your application, it is probably preventing you to be a plaintiff. Smart F***ing A**es
It does NOT need to be rejected. It can be rejected, or, there is a reasonable expectation it will get rejected. This is established by USCIS press release that they will reject all applications. Thus, the applications can sit there and the lawsuit will move forward.
It does NOT need to be rejected. It can be rejected, or, there is a reasonable expectation it will get rejected. This is established by USCIS press release that they will reject all applications. Thus, the applications can sit there and the lawsuit will move forward.
titanicman
10-17 09:12 PM
i have been sending money 2 india for past 20 months .and they remit money with in 5 working days and ihave received the exchange rates prevailed on tht day. i have tried other remittance but feel icici isthe best. [my personal opinion.]
gk_2000
04-22 07:54 PM
Ok. But how does this apply to immigration?
On the page you quote, below is what I see -
The Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice enforces federal laws that prohibit discrimination in:
Education
Employment
Housing
Lending
Public Accommodations
Law Enforcement / Police Misconduct
Voting
The "per-country limit" is definitely unfair within the realm of employment-based immigration due to the outdated and irrelevant law which needs reform. However skewing this to make it a civil rights issue is pushing it a bit too much.
So coming back to Immigration (which is what, I believe, we are discussing), below is what I came across on congress.gov.
The Supreme Court has ruled that the Congressional power to regulate naturalization, from Article 1, Section 8, includes the power to regulate immigration (see, for example, Hampton v. Mow Sun Wong, 426 U.S. 88 [1976]
In other words, the Constitution does not specifically mention immigration but based on the above, delegates power to the Congress to pass laws to regulate immigration. This Article of the Constitution also clarifies the part about rules for immigrants and quotas being set at the Federal level and not State level.
The above is a fact, not my opinion. Therefore, No - I do not agree that your reasoning has any direct parallel to our case since the correct approach and reasoning involves challenging a Supreme Court Ruling on Article 1 of the Constitution, which you would agree is next to impossible.
There are far too many points here to address at one go. Let me touch upon this for starters:
The Article 1, Section 8 has this clause, regarding the power of congress:
Clause 4: To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization
Are we disputing the fact that congress has the power to establish a uniform rule of naturalization?
No. We are not. We are just saying, that the current Rule of Naturalization is in violation of the discrimination clause in the constitution, and ought to be disregarded. We are not asking to strip congress of this power, so this argument you make is not relevant. Agreed?
More later ..
On the page you quote, below is what I see -
The Civil Rights Division of the Department of Justice enforces federal laws that prohibit discrimination in:
Education
Employment
Housing
Lending
Public Accommodations
Law Enforcement / Police Misconduct
Voting
The "per-country limit" is definitely unfair within the realm of employment-based immigration due to the outdated and irrelevant law which needs reform. However skewing this to make it a civil rights issue is pushing it a bit too much.
So coming back to Immigration (which is what, I believe, we are discussing), below is what I came across on congress.gov.
The Supreme Court has ruled that the Congressional power to regulate naturalization, from Article 1, Section 8, includes the power to regulate immigration (see, for example, Hampton v. Mow Sun Wong, 426 U.S. 88 [1976]
In other words, the Constitution does not specifically mention immigration but based on the above, delegates power to the Congress to pass laws to regulate immigration. This Article of the Constitution also clarifies the part about rules for immigrants and quotas being set at the Federal level and not State level.
The above is a fact, not my opinion. Therefore, No - I do not agree that your reasoning has any direct parallel to our case since the correct approach and reasoning involves challenging a Supreme Court Ruling on Article 1 of the Constitution, which you would agree is next to impossible.
There are far too many points here to address at one go. Let me touch upon this for starters:
The Article 1, Section 8 has this clause, regarding the power of congress:
Clause 4: To establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization
Are we disputing the fact that congress has the power to establish a uniform rule of naturalization?
No. We are not. We are just saying, that the current Rule of Naturalization is in violation of the discrimination clause in the constitution, and ought to be disregarded. We are not asking to strip congress of this power, so this argument you make is not relevant. Agreed?
More later ..
Source URL: http://giantstepstalk.blogspot.com/2011/06/flower-tattoo-designs-for-feet.html
Visit tattoo for girls for Daily Updated Hairstyles Collection
