unitednations
02-19 12:20 AM
Since I am new to the boards; I don't know how much statistical analysis has been performed.
Here is some good material or ways to get the point across.
Following is hyperlink from OONET regarding stem positions.
http://online.onetcenter.org/find/stem/title?t=1&g=Go
Click on it and then pick a "on demand" profession and scroll to the bottom. At the bottom of each profession will have median salary; number of people doing the job in 2004 and projected need for the next 10 years.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Following is an excerpt for accountants:
Wages & Employment Trends
National
Median wages data collected from Accountants and Auditors.
Employment data collected from Accountants and Auditors.
Median wages (2004) $24.67 hourly, $51,310 annual
Employment (2004) 1,176,000 employees
Projected growth (2004-2014) Faster than average (21-35%)
Projected need (2004-2014) 486,000 additional employees
----------------------------------------------------------------
The IT jobs is broken down by manager, software engineer, programmer, etc., so a few numbers need to be added up.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Go to americas job bank, careerbuilder, monster and type the in demand professions, ie., "software engineer". See how many postings there are. There will probably be duplicates between the different boards.
See if careerbuilder, ajb, monster, etc., will give you statistics on how many of those positions were filled.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Try to see if you can get prevailing wage determination for eb2 positions across the country. I know off hand that an eb2 IT position in Edision is over $90,000; new hamshire is anywhere from $89,000 to $113,000; Austin, TX is about $106,000; Virigina is close to $106,000 (generally if it is bachelors plus five years of experience; it is in six digits or close to six digits).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The above will give a pretty good sense of the positions being sponsored; the salary levels, and the demand. Only thing missing is to correlate U.S. university graudates over the next 10 years and the gap between demand and supply of the skilled workers. Analysis has to be more facts then words and can't be too long winded.
Here is some good material or ways to get the point across.
Following is hyperlink from OONET regarding stem positions.
http://online.onetcenter.org/find/stem/title?t=1&g=Go
Click on it and then pick a "on demand" profession and scroll to the bottom. At the bottom of each profession will have median salary; number of people doing the job in 2004 and projected need for the next 10 years.
-------------------------------------------------------------
Following is an excerpt for accountants:
Wages & Employment Trends
National
Median wages data collected from Accountants and Auditors.
Employment data collected from Accountants and Auditors.
Median wages (2004) $24.67 hourly, $51,310 annual
Employment (2004) 1,176,000 employees
Projected growth (2004-2014) Faster than average (21-35%)
Projected need (2004-2014) 486,000 additional employees
----------------------------------------------------------------
The IT jobs is broken down by manager, software engineer, programmer, etc., so a few numbers need to be added up.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Go to americas job bank, careerbuilder, monster and type the in demand professions, ie., "software engineer". See how many postings there are. There will probably be duplicates between the different boards.
See if careerbuilder, ajb, monster, etc., will give you statistics on how many of those positions were filled.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Try to see if you can get prevailing wage determination for eb2 positions across the country. I know off hand that an eb2 IT position in Edision is over $90,000; new hamshire is anywhere from $89,000 to $113,000; Austin, TX is about $106,000; Virigina is close to $106,000 (generally if it is bachelors plus five years of experience; it is in six digits or close to six digits).
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
The above will give a pretty good sense of the positions being sponsored; the salary levels, and the demand. Only thing missing is to correlate U.S. university graudates over the next 10 years and the gap between demand and supply of the skilled workers. Analysis has to be more facts then words and can't be too long winded.
wallpaper 5556stin ieber selena gomez
vjkypally
09-14 03:08 PM
Tere Muh mein:) Ghee Shakkar:D
mirage
07-04 08:21 AM
One thing which is missing in the News article about this fiasco is they are sounding like some precedural hitch happened they are not sounding scandal, conspiratory, I mean their title should be like 'DOS plays joke on Legals', 'DOS arbitrary decisions hurt legals' types......
2011 hot Justin Bieber and Selena
inthehole
07-21 09:54 PM
I apologize if this question has been answered before.
I changed employer "A" after 8 years and joined employer "B" last month.
I have LCA approval copy,I140 approval copy and I485 receipt notice copy. I never had access to my employer A's attorney before and the attorney cannot & will not talk to me now.
Now I am with employer "B" using my EAD. Since all the queries or any RFE's would still go to my previous employer's attorney, I would like to file a change of representation G-28 with a new attorney so that I can receive any future communication from USCIS.
But few attorneys I contacted are asking me for my LCA papers from my employer "A" to get my job description. My employer A will not give it to me.
Also they are insisting that I must send a AC21 portability letter to USCIS on behalf of my new employer B. My new employer B is a big multinational company with heavy Bureaucracy and does not understand AC21 law. As long as I have an EAD, I will be employed by employer "B".
Even though I understand the reasons behind the attorney's suggestions, my question is
1. Can't I just file the Change of Representation G-28 form to make sure that I receive any future communication from USCIS and respond to the same or similar job question if I get an RFE?.
2. Also am I or my new employer B breaking any laws by not sending the AC21 portability letter to USCIS?
(my I140 is approved on 2005 and will not be revoked by my ex employer. Changed job after more than 200 days since I filed my I485)
Thank you.
I changed employer "A" after 8 years and joined employer "B" last month.
I have LCA approval copy,I140 approval copy and I485 receipt notice copy. I never had access to my employer A's attorney before and the attorney cannot & will not talk to me now.
Now I am with employer "B" using my EAD. Since all the queries or any RFE's would still go to my previous employer's attorney, I would like to file a change of representation G-28 with a new attorney so that I can receive any future communication from USCIS.
But few attorneys I contacted are asking me for my LCA papers from my employer "A" to get my job description. My employer A will not give it to me.
Also they are insisting that I must send a AC21 portability letter to USCIS on behalf of my new employer B. My new employer B is a big multinational company with heavy Bureaucracy and does not understand AC21 law. As long as I have an EAD, I will be employed by employer "B".
Even though I understand the reasons behind the attorney's suggestions, my question is
1. Can't I just file the Change of Representation G-28 form to make sure that I receive any future communication from USCIS and respond to the same or similar job question if I get an RFE?.
2. Also am I or my new employer B breaking any laws by not sending the AC21 portability letter to USCIS?
(my I140 is approved on 2005 and will not be revoked by my ex employer. Changed job after more than 200 days since I filed my I485)
Thank you.
more...
Saburi
07-23 10:35 AM
Go ahead.
Hello this question is for Lawyer, i will like to find out how can somebody find out if the I 140 is been revoked by the old employer.
Please help me out i will like to find out the way to find out as my employer told me he will revoke my I 140 but have not got any information from USCIS aslo the the online status shows case approved in sep 2006.
Please let me know if it is revoke would Uscis send a letter or the online system would say any changes online.
Thanks Saburi
Hello this question is for Lawyer, i will like to find out how can somebody find out if the I 140 is been revoked by the old employer.
Please help me out i will like to find out the way to find out as my employer told me he will revoke my I 140 but have not got any information from USCIS aslo the the online status shows case approved in sep 2006.
Please let me know if it is revoke would Uscis send a letter or the online system would say any changes online.
Thanks Saburi
arunmurthy
09-17 03:12 PM
Cousin of my friend got an email that his card production has been ordered.
He falls in EB3I (PD Aug. 2005). I could not believe it but my friend told me that
EB3I would see significant movement in coming months.
Gus Hang on and tighten your seat belts. We will have a wild ride if he is true.
He falls in EB3I (PD Aug. 2005). I could not believe it but my friend told me that
EB3I would see significant movement in coming months.
Gus Hang on and tighten your seat belts. We will have a wild ride if he is true.
more...
samay
07-06 12:03 PM
My LC applied in Feb 2008
LC approved Apr 2008
I-140 Applied May 2008
My 6th yr H1B expires Dec 2008
H1B Maxout Jan 2008
I am short by around 20 days Should i recapture the days by going out of country for 20 days and apply H1B 1yr extension, Will i Qualify for 3 yrs in this case...?
or should i just Apply for I-140 PP in Oct 2008 and 3 yr H1B Extension without worrying about recapturing 20 days.
Hello
In order to qualify for a three year extension one has to have an approved I-140. From the given facts I understand you will be eligible for one year H-1 B extension in February 2008. You can apply for an extension of H-1 B for a recapture of the days you spent outside India. You are not required to get out of US so long as your petition for extension is pending with the USCIS. Alternatively you can apply for premium processing of I-140 (when it commences). The benefit of course will be that you will be able to get a three year extension. You will have to weigh the cost of the PP with the cost of the H-1 B extension.
LC approved Apr 2008
I-140 Applied May 2008
My 6th yr H1B expires Dec 2008
H1B Maxout Jan 2008
I am short by around 20 days Should i recapture the days by going out of country for 20 days and apply H1B 1yr extension, Will i Qualify for 3 yrs in this case...?
or should i just Apply for I-140 PP in Oct 2008 and 3 yr H1B Extension without worrying about recapturing 20 days.
Hello
In order to qualify for a three year extension one has to have an approved I-140. From the given facts I understand you will be eligible for one year H-1 B extension in February 2008. You can apply for an extension of H-1 B for a recapture of the days you spent outside India. You are not required to get out of US so long as your petition for extension is pending with the USCIS. Alternatively you can apply for premium processing of I-140 (when it commences). The benefit of course will be that you will be able to get a three year extension. You will have to weigh the cost of the PP with the cost of the H-1 B extension.
2010 Selena Gomez and Justin Bieber
srikondoji
06-26 12:44 PM
hope so.
So regardless of what August bulletin says, USCIS can just, on a whim stop accepting 485 petitions in Mid July just because they have received "Too many" and the mail room clerk is tired ? I dont know but it really does not sound like something USCIS can do on a whim without publishing a change in the rule first.
So regardless of what August bulletin says, USCIS can just, on a whim stop accepting 485 petitions in Mid July just because they have received "Too many" and the mail room clerk is tired ? I dont know but it really does not sound like something USCIS can do on a whim without publishing a change in the rule first.
more...
potatoeater
03-31 11:40 PM
Chhota Shakeel planned to kill Varun Gandhi
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Chhota-Shakeel-planned-to-kill-Varun-Gandhi/articleshow/4341949.cms
Chhota Shakeel makes his entry into grand indian election mela :)
What else is coming.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Chhota-Shakeel-planned-to-kill-Varun-Gandhi/articleshow/4341949.cms
Chhota Shakeel makes his entry into grand indian election mela :)
What else is coming.
hair images justin bieber and
RandyK
05-01 02:46 PM
Dude,
DO NOT bring politics into this forum.
LTTE is a terrorist organization banned all over the world, first by India and US.
If you go read about the situation on the UN site you will find out that the civilians are held hostage by the LTTE and that is the main reason for the civilians to be in this situation.
If you want to see what LTTE is doing to their OWN people click on the link below and click on the link on the right hand side on top. You will see like 20 LTTE terrorists shooting at like 5000 tamils trying to escape from them. This was taken from a UAV of the SL Gov like a week ago.
http://www.defence.lk/hm/hm.asp
DO NOT bring politics into this forum.
LTTE is a terrorist organization banned all over the world, first by India and US.
If you go read about the situation on the UN site you will find out that the civilians are held hostage by the LTTE and that is the main reason for the civilians to be in this situation.
If you want to see what LTTE is doing to their OWN people click on the link below and click on the link on the right hand side on top. You will see like 20 LTTE terrorists shooting at like 5000 tamils trying to escape from them. This was taken from a UAV of the SL Gov like a week ago.
http://www.defence.lk/hm/hm.asp
more...
walking_dude
02-13 02:43 PM
Are you sure you understood it fully?
I wrote " if you think ", meaning a lot of harping on is happening based on the assumption that removal of country limits will impact ROW badly. It's not the fact. Though it has been explained a number of times that its not the case, some members obstinately stick to their guns and regurgitate it again!
Taking some sentence written by me out-of-context does not prove anything.
Can I ask you a question? How much of IV goals you have supported till date? How many IV activities you have participated? How much you have contributed? I'm interested in knowing. If you haven't , whether you have incentive or not, it doesn't make even a teeny difference to the movement.
Is the cumulative effect of all three measures good for me (reduced wait time, or no change in wait time), or bad for me (increased wait time.)?
I read this, and I was referring to this:
So, does recapture and the increase in quota and the removal of the country limits, result in a greater wait time for me, as the comment above seems to imply. It would, if the recapture and the increase are not large enough to offset the effects of the removal of the per-country limit on ROW.
Coz if it does, then I don't have an incentive to support your goals, do I?
I wrote " if you think ", meaning a lot of harping on is happening based on the assumption that removal of country limits will impact ROW badly. It's not the fact. Though it has been explained a number of times that its not the case, some members obstinately stick to their guns and regurgitate it again!
Taking some sentence written by me out-of-context does not prove anything.
Can I ask you a question? How much of IV goals you have supported till date? How many IV activities you have participated? How much you have contributed? I'm interested in knowing. If you haven't , whether you have incentive or not, it doesn't make even a teeny difference to the movement.
Is the cumulative effect of all three measures good for me (reduced wait time, or no change in wait time), or bad for me (increased wait time.)?
I read this, and I was referring to this:
So, does recapture and the increase in quota and the removal of the country limits, result in a greater wait time for me, as the comment above seems to imply. It would, if the recapture and the increase are not large enough to offset the effects of the removal of the per-country limit on ROW.
Coz if it does, then I don't have an incentive to support your goals, do I?
hot Justin Bieber amp; Selena Gomez#39;s
snathan
08-16 01:55 AM
Can you point to a single post praising the immigration system.
He is confused immigration with security system
He is confused immigration with security system
more...
house pics of justin bieber and
Macaca
06-27 11:03 AM
From pages 36-37 of CIS Ombudsman's 2007 Annual Report to Congress (http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/CISOMB_Annual%20Report_2007.pdf).
In the 2006 Annual Report (at p. 16, AR 2006 -- 02), the Ombudsman also recommended that USCIS assign visa numbers to employment-based green card applications as applicants file them. The Ombudsman continues to recommend that USCIS work with DOS to reinstate that process which existed in the early 1980s, wherein DOS issued visa numbers for both employment and family-based applications for applicants as they applied rather than as they were approved. This process would ensure that USCIS does not accept more applications than the number of visas available.
With respect to the recommendation that USCIS assign visa numbers to cases as they are received, the process the Ombudsman describes was the process in place a number of years ago. DOS, which manages overall visa number allocations, modified that process to the procedure in effect today. It is their policy to allocate visa numbers to USCIS adjustment cases only as the point of approval is reached.
However, through the tri-agency meetings, DOS explained that the modification to the program occurred in the early 1980s because INS could not adhere to the requirements to return unused visa numbers immediately. The Ombudsman understands that DOS prefers that cases are reported qualified for a visa earlier than at approval. In the last several months, there have been several suggestions on how to accomplish that task, but operational concerns remain. The Ombudsman hopes that USCIS and DOS can reestablish the older program with improved processing and technology to ensure timely and accurate reporting of cases ready-to-issue and to prevent the future loss of visa numbers.
In the 2006 Annual Report (at p. 16, AR 2006 -- 02), the Ombudsman also recommended that USCIS assign visa numbers to employment-based green card applications as applicants file them. The Ombudsman continues to recommend that USCIS work with DOS to reinstate that process which existed in the early 1980s, wherein DOS issued visa numbers for both employment and family-based applications for applicants as they applied rather than as they were approved. This process would ensure that USCIS does not accept more applications than the number of visas available.
With respect to the recommendation that USCIS assign visa numbers to cases as they are received, the process the Ombudsman describes was the process in place a number of years ago. DOS, which manages overall visa number allocations, modified that process to the procedure in effect today. It is their policy to allocate visa numbers to USCIS adjustment cases only as the point of approval is reached.
However, through the tri-agency meetings, DOS explained that the modification to the program occurred in the early 1980s because INS could not adhere to the requirements to return unused visa numbers immediately. The Ombudsman understands that DOS prefers that cases are reported qualified for a visa earlier than at approval. In the last several months, there have been several suggestions on how to accomplish that task, but operational concerns remain. The Ombudsman hopes that USCIS and DOS can reestablish the older program with improved processing and technology to ensure timely and accurate reporting of cases ready-to-issue and to prevent the future loss of visa numbers.
tattoo Shirtless Justin Bieber Kisses
caliducas
07-24 07:12 PM
a) Now you can pay for 80% of the list you mentioned using Internet and e-seva kendras
b) With Right For Information act you can drag people to thier knees if someone asks for bribe.
d) You can have to see the move Die Hard 4
e & f) what about the products here from China
g) Well it depends on the kids
Actually, It's not any different from latin american countries. I'm from Venezuela. My sister is in India right now and she says that she's having problems with power failures, flooding in the area where she lives, and other problems. That's not any different from our country when we don't have water for hours almost every single day, plus everything that has been said here that is inconvenient.
So I would say like others have said in this forum. Think about your kids and the future of your family before making such an important decision since it's not only about us.
Good luck everybody with your GC!!!
b) With Right For Information act you can drag people to thier knees if someone asks for bribe.
d) You can have to see the move Die Hard 4
e & f) what about the products here from China
g) Well it depends on the kids
Actually, It's not any different from latin american countries. I'm from Venezuela. My sister is in India right now and she says that she's having problems with power failures, flooding in the area where she lives, and other problems. That's not any different from our country when we don't have water for hours almost every single day, plus everything that has been said here that is inconvenient.
So I would say like others have said in this forum. Think about your kids and the future of your family before making such an important decision since it's not only about us.
Good luck everybody with your GC!!!
more...
pictures justin bieber and selena gomez
mbartosik
12-13 05:43 PM
When an argument is held in the Supreme Court you often hear the justices asking "What if" type questions, some of them verge on being narrow circumstances, but to declare something unconstitutional can have a wide impact and is a fundamental, so it should account for odd circumstances too.
So here goes a potential set of arguments:
Q> What if the Congress was unable to discriminate in other categories of immigration based on nation of birth? Would that mean that in time of war, immigrants would have to be admitted from a country with whom we were at war?
Q> Would Congress no longer be permitted to try to balance the ethnic makeup of the country?
I agree it is unfair on individuals, on groups, and it does smell, but I doubt that it is unconstitutional. I take the pragmatic view in my prior post on this thread (many posts back).
Extending my pragmatic view:
Even if it were found to be unconstitutional, then Congress can always amend the constitution, and if a Supreme Court ruling affected more than just EB category, then I would not be surprised to see an amendment. Then the only advantage would be to draw attention to the issue. But you know that the anti's would just make the argument --- "Look the evil immigrants are trying to write our immigration policy", and that would be an easy argument to make so then we would see something more restrictive in the end.
So even if we won, we would likely loss.
Just being pragmatic.
(I'm not a lawyer - and my H1B enforces this)
So here goes a potential set of arguments:
Q> What if the Congress was unable to discriminate in other categories of immigration based on nation of birth? Would that mean that in time of war, immigrants would have to be admitted from a country with whom we were at war?
Q> Would Congress no longer be permitted to try to balance the ethnic makeup of the country?
I agree it is unfair on individuals, on groups, and it does smell, but I doubt that it is unconstitutional. I take the pragmatic view in my prior post on this thread (many posts back).
Extending my pragmatic view:
Even if it were found to be unconstitutional, then Congress can always amend the constitution, and if a Supreme Court ruling affected more than just EB category, then I would not be surprised to see an amendment. Then the only advantage would be to draw attention to the issue. But you know that the anti's would just make the argument --- "Look the evil immigrants are trying to write our immigration policy", and that would be an easy argument to make so then we would see something more restrictive in the end.
So even if we won, we would likely loss.
Just being pragmatic.
(I'm not a lawyer - and my H1B enforces this)
dresses and Selena Gomez kissing
gcpool
03-20 10:03 AM
I have heard that Job are not easily available there and the taxes are high.
Think about it. I know people who have filed and almost got it and have decided to stay. (Waste of time and money).
Hi, I am seriously planning to start Canadian immigration after wasting 7 years of my life in chasing GC. Can anybody suggest some good lawyers/attorneies/agencies who are not money suckers like US immigration attornies ? Also, somebody mentioned that one can apply Can immigration by himself. Is there any issue with that ?
Thanks
Think about it. I know people who have filed and almost got it and have decided to stay. (Waste of time and money).
Hi, I am seriously planning to start Canadian immigration after wasting 7 years of my life in chasing GC. Can anybody suggest some good lawyers/attorneies/agencies who are not money suckers like US immigration attornies ? Also, somebody mentioned that one can apply Can immigration by himself. Is there any issue with that ?
Thanks
more...
makeup Selena Gomez and Justin Bieber
vxg
06-04 11:44 PM
Not really the biggest barrier is same or similar job. It is absolutely unfair no not let someone grow into different areas and keep the job exciting. I personally had to pass on so many opportunities even within my own company because of similar job constraint. In fact in many good companies including mine the executives encourage you to get experience in different areas of business before you are considered ready for executive positions and the VP of my division clearly told this to my director that i need to move on to a different job area. In general the AC 21 is risky and if you are waiting for 6-7 years you may not want to take the risk as USCIS make decisions which are unreasonable. AC 21 is also not a law and is subject to interpretation. The deal is that it is completely unfair to not let a person grow professionally and let him or her try different careers. Granted some folks may like to stay in same job area and continue what they are doing and these changes will not impact them but for those who want to try something different every few years this same or similar job rule is a curse.
This benefit already exists under AC21 (after 180 days of filing). Allowing you to ditch sponsoring employer on the first day of filing I-485 defeats the whole idea of employer sponsorship.
This benefit already exists under AC21 (after 180 days of filing). Allowing you to ditch sponsoring employer on the first day of filing I-485 defeats the whole idea of employer sponsorship.
girlfriend Justin Bieber amp; Selena
justin150377
07-27 06:15 PM
I am in my sixth year on an H1-B expiring Sept 13, 2008 also noted on I-94. My attorney will be applying for an H1 extension based on an approved I-140 and pending I-485. They are also applying for EAD and AP renewal (expiring Oct 2nd, 2008). I am currently in EB3 Worldwide with a PD of Oct 2, 2006. I will need to travel outside the country on Oct 2nd. My H1-B will be pending before but not approved by Sept 13th. Can I still re-enter on a pending H1 extension or will I have to switch to EAD/AP assuming those are approved before my Oct 2nd travel date? Thank you for your time.
hairstyles justin bieber and selena gomez
grupak
12-13 01:40 PM
"Fairness or not is not the issue. Question is can it be challenged in a court? "
--I guess fairness is the issue and that is what you are asking for by challenging the court.
"As an unrelated side note, the current quota system is something that has evolved from past policies some of which was used to restrict citizens of certain countries."
--To some extent,there is truth to what you said. And it is there prerogative. There could be many geopolitical,societal, economic and national security reasons behind who they restrict and who they allow.
The OP was whether the country quota is constitutional. My interest was to find out if the current laws and regulations are violated by the country quota.
As lazycis pointed out, SC seems to uphold the current situation.
I was not looking into arguing in a court whether a particular regulation is fair or not. The law is what it is (what I or you consider fair or unfair is immaterial), question was : Is the law being implemented or not? Seems like it is.
To change the law, we as IV are lobbying and meeting lawmakers already.
Unless a constitutional lawyer says otherwise, I see no reason to pursue the country quota in a court, considering lazycis post.
--I guess fairness is the issue and that is what you are asking for by challenging the court.
"As an unrelated side note, the current quota system is something that has evolved from past policies some of which was used to restrict citizens of certain countries."
--To some extent,there is truth to what you said. And it is there prerogative. There could be many geopolitical,societal, economic and national security reasons behind who they restrict and who they allow.
The OP was whether the country quota is constitutional. My interest was to find out if the current laws and regulations are violated by the country quota.
As lazycis pointed out, SC seems to uphold the current situation.
I was not looking into arguing in a court whether a particular regulation is fair or not. The law is what it is (what I or you consider fair or unfair is immaterial), question was : Is the law being implemented or not? Seems like it is.
To change the law, we as IV are lobbying and meeting lawmakers already.
Unless a constitutional lawyer says otherwise, I see no reason to pursue the country quota in a court, considering lazycis post.
hpandey
06-14 12:40 PM
To be honest, I do agree that the US needs qualified people with skillsets. The real question is "Are the people from the desi consulting companies the real qualified lot ? " Just to get my background details out of the way. I am a new member, from India ofcourse, and I have recently applied for my citizenship. Now with this huge deluge of immigrants, especially from the desi consulting companies, I feel that my quality of life is getting adversely impacted. Do not rush to conclusions that I am anti Indian or anti immigrant. 12 years back when I first got my H1 visa, the requirements to qualify were strict. Staffing companies to a decent extent followed rules and tried to get the best and the brightest. Once the dot com boom started, people from all walks of life entered IT. This was true of not just the Indians but also of people in the US. Soon after the bust, the value proposition from these staffing companies was simply low cost. This is not to blame the staffing companies. They behaved in an economically rational way.
Consider this scenario. If you run a consulting company, wouldn't you try to maximize your profits by staffing people in projects at the least cost ? This is econmically rational. You wouldn't worry much about the quality of the deliverables and all you would care is to dump as many bodies as possible at the client site or offshore and get the maximum bang for the buck.
In this scenario, how is it feasible to expect immigrational justice when the bodies themselves dont provide exceptional talent and skills but simply offer low cost ? Now you would be tempted to bring in the analogous case of illegal low skilled immigrants. Remember they are just that - low skilled workers. They dont "steal" the jobs of high skilled workers. But this dumping of IT workforce has completely brought down the standard of living of the IT workers here. To be honest, those who get green cards today would feel the same way five years from now when the next wave of so called "skilled IT immigrants" offer even lower wages and destroy the quality of life.
In summary, this retrogression is good in a way. The truly best and the brightest would still be employed until their turn for adjournment comes in. Only the weak are currently scared of the delays. I went through the same torrid GC phase after the tech meltdown in 2001. I was not worried of my job then but many people whom I knew got clobbered and were forced to leave. This is the darwinian flush and it will take its toll. Trust me this the bitter truth. If you people still consider that all the people on H1/L1 are part of the best and the brightest, they are WRONG. Only a small % (probably 20%) are the true best and the brightest and a good 50% will be flushed out. Sorry to say this and hey give me the red dots.
You have got the same Indian mentality that most of the people here that once we got a GC and citizenship let us close the doors behind us. Just because you got lucky and got your GC in time and are now applying for Citizenship you are saying that all others who come after you are not as qualified as you or "best and the brightest" .
For your knowledge I see a lot of intelligent people everyday from all walks of life - Indians, Americans, Chinese, Russians etc etc. A person does not becomhe intelligent by the number of degrees he has but by the logic sense that he has and how he applies to his daily life.
Who are you to judge the people coming after you that they are not skilled or the best and brightest.
I don't wish bad for anyone but if you are saying retrogression is good then beware you are wishing for the curse of a lot of people who have been unfairly standing in the queue for 8 - 10 years while a lot of people from 2006 got their GC.
Consider this scenario. If you run a consulting company, wouldn't you try to maximize your profits by staffing people in projects at the least cost ? This is econmically rational. You wouldn't worry much about the quality of the deliverables and all you would care is to dump as many bodies as possible at the client site or offshore and get the maximum bang for the buck.
In this scenario, how is it feasible to expect immigrational justice when the bodies themselves dont provide exceptional talent and skills but simply offer low cost ? Now you would be tempted to bring in the analogous case of illegal low skilled immigrants. Remember they are just that - low skilled workers. They dont "steal" the jobs of high skilled workers. But this dumping of IT workforce has completely brought down the standard of living of the IT workers here. To be honest, those who get green cards today would feel the same way five years from now when the next wave of so called "skilled IT immigrants" offer even lower wages and destroy the quality of life.
In summary, this retrogression is good in a way. The truly best and the brightest would still be employed until their turn for adjournment comes in. Only the weak are currently scared of the delays. I went through the same torrid GC phase after the tech meltdown in 2001. I was not worried of my job then but many people whom I knew got clobbered and were forced to leave. This is the darwinian flush and it will take its toll. Trust me this the bitter truth. If you people still consider that all the people on H1/L1 are part of the best and the brightest, they are WRONG. Only a small % (probably 20%) are the true best and the brightest and a good 50% will be flushed out. Sorry to say this and hey give me the red dots.
You have got the same Indian mentality that most of the people here that once we got a GC and citizenship let us close the doors behind us. Just because you got lucky and got your GC in time and are now applying for Citizenship you are saying that all others who come after you are not as qualified as you or "best and the brightest" .
For your knowledge I see a lot of intelligent people everyday from all walks of life - Indians, Americans, Chinese, Russians etc etc. A person does not becomhe intelligent by the number of degrees he has but by the logic sense that he has and how he applies to his daily life.
Who are you to judge the people coming after you that they are not skilled or the best and brightest.
I don't wish bad for anyone but if you are saying retrogression is good then beware you are wishing for the curse of a lot of people who have been unfairly standing in the queue for 8 - 10 years while a lot of people from 2006 got their GC.
pointlesswait
09-23 01:01 PM
well said sayantan..
This whole idea of linking GC to probable purchasing homes..is insane!
it stops short of black mailing...
The 700Bn or whatever the final number is not entirely a drain.....
the thing with all these exotic securities is not that they are completely worthless but that there is no market for these right now and hence are illiquid - so if someone had the ability to keep these securities for a long term (say 30 years - since most mortgages are for 30 years) on their balance sheet - they may not lose as much money as they would if they tried to liquidate these investments in the short term.
Financial Institutions typically borrow short term to invest in long term investments and keep renewing the short term borrowings - since the underlying investment has become illiquid - it has become difficult to raise financing against it. the govt, howver, can take a long term view and be patient....who knows.....in the end - the Govt may actually come out with positive cash flow at the end of all this mess. So, the bail-out plan may not be as bad an idea as media is portraying it to be.........in short-term - it does take US into further indebtedness.
I already have a GC - so this debate does not impact me personally - but this is against the basic principals of natural justice.......GC applicants were placed into certain EB categories based on job descriptions and qualifications and then within queues assigned priority dates based on certain logic and are currently being approved based on PD and country quotas..........all these rules were known and published prior to companies and people applying for these GCs.....
No matter what the incremental benefit is, I think its blatantly unfair (like it was blatantly unfair to push some people to labor backlog centers and approving people with later PDs first) to change the rules of engagement and prioritization midway through the process and give preference to someone based on an ability to invest certain $$s in an house.......buying a house is a commercial and lifestyle decision........should not be a precursor to a USCIS adjudication.......
keep the red dots coming folks!
This whole idea of linking GC to probable purchasing homes..is insane!
it stops short of black mailing...
The 700Bn or whatever the final number is not entirely a drain.....
the thing with all these exotic securities is not that they are completely worthless but that there is no market for these right now and hence are illiquid - so if someone had the ability to keep these securities for a long term (say 30 years - since most mortgages are for 30 years) on their balance sheet - they may not lose as much money as they would if they tried to liquidate these investments in the short term.
Financial Institutions typically borrow short term to invest in long term investments and keep renewing the short term borrowings - since the underlying investment has become illiquid - it has become difficult to raise financing against it. the govt, howver, can take a long term view and be patient....who knows.....in the end - the Govt may actually come out with positive cash flow at the end of all this mess. So, the bail-out plan may not be as bad an idea as media is portraying it to be.........in short-term - it does take US into further indebtedness.
I already have a GC - so this debate does not impact me personally - but this is against the basic principals of natural justice.......GC applicants were placed into certain EB categories based on job descriptions and qualifications and then within queues assigned priority dates based on certain logic and are currently being approved based on PD and country quotas..........all these rules were known and published prior to companies and people applying for these GCs.....
No matter what the incremental benefit is, I think its blatantly unfair (like it was blatantly unfair to push some people to labor backlog centers and approving people with later PDs first) to change the rules of engagement and prioritization midway through the process and give preference to someone based on an ability to invest certain $$s in an house.......buying a house is a commercial and lifestyle decision........should not be a precursor to a USCIS adjudication.......
keep the red dots coming folks!
