ragz4u
03-16 03:29 PM
WASHINGTON – The Senate Judiciary Committee today reached agreement on proposals for a new guest-worker program and a plan to allow the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants living in the United States to become permanent residents.
Less than 24 hours after most experts and Capitol Hill watchers believed the committee would be unable to get a bill to the Senate floor by Majority Leader Bill Frist's March 27 deadline, committee Chairman Arlen Specter had brokered deals between some key senators on the complex issue.
No formal votes were taken and committee staffs were preparing to spend the next 10 days drafting language that would put in place the compromises reached. It appeared that at least a dozen of the 18 members on the panel would be prepared to back this deal. The committee plans to meet first thing in the morning on March 27. It is not yet known whether Frist will allow the panel to finish and send its bill to the Senate floor or if he still plans to bring up a more limited, possibly enforcement-only measure.
But even if nothing scuttles the compromise between now and when lawmakers get back from recess, and if the Senate passes a bill with these elements, there would remain a steep battle to get agreement from the House. The House passed an enforcement-based measure in December that doesn't include a guest-worker program or a plan for undocumented immigrants in the United States now.
Early this afternoon, Frist announced his intention to introduce a bill before next week’s recess that would deal with enforcement of immigration laws but will not include any of the controversial guest-worker or illegal immigrant provisions. Officials in Frist’s office say he is doing this to ensure that there is a bill ready on the floor if the committee fails to pass one. If Specter does get a bill out of committee, said Frist press secretary Amy Call, that could be substituted for the majority leader’s measure.
The most likely scenario, said ardent supporters of immigration reform who were pleasantly stunned by today's events, is that this will end in a stalemate, only to be brought up again in the next Congress. But they say it's important that the Senate go on record as supporting comprehensive change.
For the first time, Specter, R-Pa., who said he spent hours on the phone last night with Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., agreed to Kennedy's plan to deal with the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants. Specter would have allowed these people to work indefinitely but not get green cards. Kennedy wanted to give them a path to legalization.
Specter agreed this morning with Kennedy's approach, provided that these illegal immigrants would not be able to start legalization proceedings until the backlog of 3 million people now waiting in countries around the world for their chance to come to the United States legally get their green cards.
The deal reached on a new guest-worker plan says that 400,000 new guest workers would be allowed into the country each year. Under the proposal authored by Kennedy and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., that number would have been unlimited. But Kennedy, a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, agreed to a cap and also agreed that after working for two years, these new guest workers would have to go back to their home countries and reapply for another stint as guest workers, one that could last up to six years. But first they'd have to stay in their home countries for one year.
Built into this compromise, however, is a chance for these workers to get a waiver and not go home based on how long they have been employed here or if they are considered essential to a U.S. employer's business.
The plan also allows guest workers to apply for permanent U.S. residency, something not included in either Specter's bill or the other major proposal under consideration, the bill by Sens. John Cornyn, R-Texas and Jon Kyl, R-Ariz.
Kennedy essentially compromised with Cornyn, who chairs the immigration subcommittee. The deal takes parts of each of their proposals.
Not all members of the committee agreed with these compromises.
Kyl said he still believed the illegal immigrants would get preference over those waiting legally in line overseas because the undocumented would be able to stay in the U.S. and work until their turn at a green card came. Those waiting to come here legally don't have that option, he said.
And several committee members most opposed to a guest-worker program – most notably Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., were not at this morning's session.
Less than 24 hours after most experts and Capitol Hill watchers believed the committee would be unable to get a bill to the Senate floor by Majority Leader Bill Frist's March 27 deadline, committee Chairman Arlen Specter had brokered deals between some key senators on the complex issue.
No formal votes were taken and committee staffs were preparing to spend the next 10 days drafting language that would put in place the compromises reached. It appeared that at least a dozen of the 18 members on the panel would be prepared to back this deal. The committee plans to meet first thing in the morning on March 27. It is not yet known whether Frist will allow the panel to finish and send its bill to the Senate floor or if he still plans to bring up a more limited, possibly enforcement-only measure.
But even if nothing scuttles the compromise between now and when lawmakers get back from recess, and if the Senate passes a bill with these elements, there would remain a steep battle to get agreement from the House. The House passed an enforcement-based measure in December that doesn't include a guest-worker program or a plan for undocumented immigrants in the United States now.
Early this afternoon, Frist announced his intention to introduce a bill before next week’s recess that would deal with enforcement of immigration laws but will not include any of the controversial guest-worker or illegal immigrant provisions. Officials in Frist’s office say he is doing this to ensure that there is a bill ready on the floor if the committee fails to pass one. If Specter does get a bill out of committee, said Frist press secretary Amy Call, that could be substituted for the majority leader’s measure.
The most likely scenario, said ardent supporters of immigration reform who were pleasantly stunned by today's events, is that this will end in a stalemate, only to be brought up again in the next Congress. But they say it's important that the Senate go on record as supporting comprehensive change.
For the first time, Specter, R-Pa., who said he spent hours on the phone last night with Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass., agreed to Kennedy's plan to deal with the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants. Specter would have allowed these people to work indefinitely but not get green cards. Kennedy wanted to give them a path to legalization.
Specter agreed this morning with Kennedy's approach, provided that these illegal immigrants would not be able to start legalization proceedings until the backlog of 3 million people now waiting in countries around the world for their chance to come to the United States legally get their green cards.
The deal reached on a new guest-worker plan says that 400,000 new guest workers would be allowed into the country each year. Under the proposal authored by Kennedy and Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., that number would have been unlimited. But Kennedy, a senior member of the Judiciary Committee, agreed to a cap and also agreed that after working for two years, these new guest workers would have to go back to their home countries and reapply for another stint as guest workers, one that could last up to six years. But first they'd have to stay in their home countries for one year.
Built into this compromise, however, is a chance for these workers to get a waiver and not go home based on how long they have been employed here or if they are considered essential to a U.S. employer's business.
The plan also allows guest workers to apply for permanent U.S. residency, something not included in either Specter's bill or the other major proposal under consideration, the bill by Sens. John Cornyn, R-Texas and Jon Kyl, R-Ariz.
Kennedy essentially compromised with Cornyn, who chairs the immigration subcommittee. The deal takes parts of each of their proposals.
Not all members of the committee agreed with these compromises.
Kyl said he still believed the illegal immigrants would get preference over those waiting legally in line overseas because the undocumented would be able to stay in the U.S. and work until their turn at a green card came. Those waiting to come here legally don't have that option, he said.
And several committee members most opposed to a guest-worker program – most notably Sen. Jeff Sessions, R-Ala., were not at this morning's session.
wallpaper 05-08 Chrysler 300 JDM Black
akhilmahajan
07-14 01:34 PM
Simply send the check of $5 to Immigration Voice at the address listed in the first post as if you were paying a utility bill. That way your bank will send IV a check of $5.00 (or whatever amount you want it to) and IV gets the WHOLE $5 and no fees are deducted.
Sent for me and my wife.
GO IV GO
Sent for me and my wife.
GO IV GO
Napoleon
03-11 01:25 AM
http://www.uscis.gov/files/pressrelease/AC21Intrm122705.pdf
as per this document, you can port to yourself. (Question #8)
But below are the reasons why I am backing off of opening an LLC on spouse name and porting to that.
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=4654000912&m=8231099851
also google 'UntanglingSkein_BIB_15jan07.pdf"
http://www.morganlewis.com/pubs/UntanglingSkein_BIB_15jan07.pdf
"This suggests, fairly clearly, that any communication to the USCIS per the Cronin Memo that the adjustment applicant intends to become self-employed is likely to trigger an RFE to inquire into the legitimacy of this arrangement. Legitimacy in this context is likely to be gauged by the concrete steps the beneficiary has taken in furtherance of the self-employment arrangement, understanding that only full-time and permanent employment will suffice for immigration purposes. Such steps would include the completion of legal and corporate formalities, the securing of financing, the purchase or lease of business premises and equipment,the development of a detailed business plan, the hiring of employees, and any other measures typically taken in the establishment of a business. Vague aspirational statements, however ambitious, about future plans to develop a business are unlikely, in the absence of tangible proof, to be accepted as probative of the requisite legitimacy of the self-employer and job offer."
Also, one relevant footnote in the document -
"At the AILA National Conference in 2003, a USCIS officer indicated that an attempt to invoke �106(c) in a selfemployment context is likely to raise �a big red flag� for an adjudicator, and that self-employment may be viewed as �an easy alternative� for aliens who are unable to find employment to sustain their adjustment-of-status applications. Schorr & Yale-Loehr, supra note 2, at 499. It should also be noted that the Memos view the possibility of an adjustment applicant becoming a public charge (and thus being inadmissible under INA �212(a)(4)) as being �a relevant inquiry� and that an RFE requesting information about a self-employment arrangement is likely to probe whether or not the applicant has sufficient financial resources to avoid becoming such a public charge."
Question #3 and #4 should conclude this discussion.
Also how do you define an established company.
If I stay employed for 2-3 yrs on my spouse's LLC and bring 200K each year, is that established?
as per this document, you can port to yourself. (Question #8)
But below are the reasons why I am backing off of opening an LLC on spouse name and porting to that.
http://murthyforum.atinfopop.com/4/OpenTopic?a=tpc&s=1024039761&f=4654000912&m=8231099851
also google 'UntanglingSkein_BIB_15jan07.pdf"
http://www.morganlewis.com/pubs/UntanglingSkein_BIB_15jan07.pdf
"This suggests, fairly clearly, that any communication to the USCIS per the Cronin Memo that the adjustment applicant intends to become self-employed is likely to trigger an RFE to inquire into the legitimacy of this arrangement. Legitimacy in this context is likely to be gauged by the concrete steps the beneficiary has taken in furtherance of the self-employment arrangement, understanding that only full-time and permanent employment will suffice for immigration purposes. Such steps would include the completion of legal and corporate formalities, the securing of financing, the purchase or lease of business premises and equipment,the development of a detailed business plan, the hiring of employees, and any other measures typically taken in the establishment of a business. Vague aspirational statements, however ambitious, about future plans to develop a business are unlikely, in the absence of tangible proof, to be accepted as probative of the requisite legitimacy of the self-employer and job offer."
Also, one relevant footnote in the document -
"At the AILA National Conference in 2003, a USCIS officer indicated that an attempt to invoke �106(c) in a selfemployment context is likely to raise �a big red flag� for an adjudicator, and that self-employment may be viewed as �an easy alternative� for aliens who are unable to find employment to sustain their adjustment-of-status applications. Schorr & Yale-Loehr, supra note 2, at 499. It should also be noted that the Memos view the possibility of an adjustment applicant becoming a public charge (and thus being inadmissible under INA �212(a)(4)) as being �a relevant inquiry� and that an RFE requesting information about a self-employment arrangement is likely to probe whether or not the applicant has sufficient financial resources to avoid becoming such a public charge."
Question #3 and #4 should conclude this discussion.
Also how do you define an established company.
If I stay employed for 2-3 yrs on my spouse's LLC and bring 200K each year, is that established?
2011 Next. Chrysler 300C
rajuram
06-09 11:16 PM
multiple year eads & ap - may or may not happen
visa recapture - no chance
visa increase - will not happen
still contribute??
visa recapture - no chance
visa increase - will not happen
still contribute??
more...
LuckyPaji
07-24 02:21 PM
I don't know much about the process, I just came to America less than 1 year back, but I know my lawyer was supposed to mail application to reach on July 2, 2007 instead he made a mistake to reach on June 29, 2007 because he said July 1, 2007 was a Sunday so he would rather be early than late. USCIS accepted and receipted me.
I am the manager in my brother's gas station in LA. He got a investor visa when he came from Punjab but now he is citizen. I am on EB3. I have Bachelors in Business Administration from Panjab University in Chandigarh. I can't be EB1 or EB2, I barely made it through college :D
I am the manager in my brother's gas station in LA. He got a investor visa when he came from Punjab but now he is citizen. I am on EB3. I have Bachelors in Business Administration from Panjab University in Chandigarh. I can't be EB1 or EB2, I barely made it through college :D
himu73
04-02 03:35 PM
Surprising but true. This was last week aroung march 23,06
Does anyone such cases.
Does anyone such cases.
more...
9years
11-16 08:10 AM
Update. My attorney has sent a letter (interfiling process) to USCIS mentioning that my case is current now. One of my friends got 485 approved within 2 weeks after initiating interfiling process. I hope it would be the same case with me.
Thank you for sharing VayuMahesh. I hope I have to do the same. Can you please share, is there any form he has to fill while doing this or he has to write a letter.
Thank you for sharing VayuMahesh. I hope I have to do the same. Can you please share, is there any form he has to fill while doing this or he has to write a letter.
2010 Item: CHRYSLER 300 05-07 HALO
fullerene
06-03 10:25 AM
Retrogress is against the principle of laws. Think about the reason that the government wants provide a path for these undocumented people is the government wants secure the border. Before the law take effective, they need find a way to take care of these people because new law can not have retrogress. Same should apply to the legal immigrants. When the new law is being discussed, it can not terminate or replace the current law. I don’t think people interpret the words correctly. I believe introduction means the period of time before the signed new law replaces the current one.
Law execution shall favor the executed person. I don’t know how to describe it in a professional matter. I give an example,
Person A is sentenced to death and will be executed on June 15th. However, new law takes effective on June 5, and according to new law Person A shall be sentenced 20 years in prison. So Person A can appeal to change the sentence.
On the other hand, Person A is sentenced to 10 years and will be executed on June 5th. But new law will take effective which gives 20 years in prison. So will the person get a severer penalty? I don’t think so.
In addition to that, when a new law is dramatically changed, compared to the current law, an introduction period is usually applied. During this period of time dual status may apply. People may choose either law which is favorable for them. Of course, because of the uncertainty, lawyers love this dual status to get more business.
Law execution shall favor the executed person. I don’t know how to describe it in a professional matter. I give an example,
Person A is sentenced to death and will be executed on June 15th. However, new law takes effective on June 5, and according to new law Person A shall be sentenced 20 years in prison. So Person A can appeal to change the sentence.
On the other hand, Person A is sentenced to 10 years and will be executed on June 5th. But new law will take effective which gives 20 years in prison. So will the person get a severer penalty? I don’t think so.
In addition to that, when a new law is dramatically changed, compared to the current law, an introduction period is usually applied. During this period of time dual status may apply. People may choose either law which is favorable for them. Of course, because of the uncertainty, lawyers love this dual status to get more business.
more...
dingdong12
06-23 10:55 AM
well, i just made my first payment for $100 thru paypal
Receipt ID: 14F00794MF330594S
Receipt ID: 14F00794MF330594S
hair Item: CHRYSLER 300M 99-04
matreen
07-15 03:00 PM
Contributed 25 dollars via bill pay...
How do I contribute online - i would like to transfer one time payment for this tread to IV....
Please advice how do I do online transfer?
Good work guys...lets move on.
M
How do I contribute online - i would like to transfer one time payment for this tread to IV....
Please advice how do I do online transfer?
Good work guys...lets move on.
M
more...
k_usa
07-14 02:08 PM
Scheduled 10$. Confirmation # 7YB3F-3S1QX
Hello everyone,
I am starting a new campaign for IV's benefit. It is called "Give me a High Five".
The point of this campaign is to send Not $100, not $50, not even $10.
ALL you need to do is write out a $5 cheque and send it to IV on the address listed.
The address to mail the checks to is:
Immigration Voice
P O Box 1372
Arcadia, CA 91077-1372
This address can also be found at: http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=76&Itemid=65
Please make sure you send in a cheque ONLY or do a bill pay so that no paypal/google checkout fees apply and all of the $5 ACTUALLY goes to IV.
We have 30,000 members on here. If EACH of us contributes just $5 we have $150,000.
For the sake of your OWN freedom, can you donate just FIVE dollars to IV? Every single one of you. IV has done a LOT for every legal immigrant. All we ask in return right now is FIVE dollars. FIVE dollars. Not the price of one month of Cable, but the price of a SUBWAY SANDWICH.
Hello everyone,
I am starting a new campaign for IV's benefit. It is called "Give me a High Five".
The point of this campaign is to send Not $100, not $50, not even $10.
ALL you need to do is write out a $5 cheque and send it to IV on the address listed.
The address to mail the checks to is:
Immigration Voice
P O Box 1372
Arcadia, CA 91077-1372
This address can also be found at: http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=76&Itemid=65
Please make sure you send in a cheque ONLY or do a bill pay so that no paypal/google checkout fees apply and all of the $5 ACTUALLY goes to IV.
We have 30,000 members on here. If EACH of us contributes just $5 we have $150,000.
For the sake of your OWN freedom, can you donate just FIVE dollars to IV? Every single one of you. IV has done a LOT for every legal immigrant. All we ask in return right now is FIVE dollars. FIVE dollars. Not the price of one month of Cable, but the price of a SUBWAY SANDWICH.
hot Up for sale is lack CCFL
gc_dreamer_2010
03-19 05:12 AM
Myths About Homeownership - Freddie Mac (http://www.freddiemac.com/corporate/buyown/english/preparing/right_for_you/myths.html)
more...
house Chrysler 300 05-07 CCFL Halo
Aah_GC
07-05 06:45 PM
I think this is a valid question that is being asked and should be answered by IV core. Am always intrigued by our behind the scenes effort and the heck that is going on. I do not want to cross the line and judge the integrity on IV core, but would really like to know exactly what we are up to. At least we need to periodic conf calls and announcement of our efforts (and I understand there needs to be some secrecy with anti-immig watching us closely).
tattoo The Chrysler 300C SRT8 has
keerthisagar
05-07 12:08 PM
Guys,
I was very busy till today.
I'll call all the #s tomorrow and let them know how important is the CIR for legal immigration, and how I am not able to buy a house, or start a company, as I have no greencard inspite of waiting for 8-10 years. Not to forget I am from India and it is severely backlogged. Also we have jobs, so we're not taking away anything.
I have to be very brief. So please let me know if I'm missing any impo point.
Just follow what pappu has said on the first page. We need to stay on message.
I was very busy till today.
I'll call all the #s tomorrow and let them know how important is the CIR for legal immigration, and how I am not able to buy a house, or start a company, as I have no greencard inspite of waiting for 8-10 years. Not to forget I am from India and it is severely backlogged. Also we have jobs, so we're not taking away anything.
I have to be very brief. So please let me know if I'm missing any impo point.
Just follow what pappu has said on the first page. We need to stay on message.
more...
pictures CHRYSLER 300
leo2606
07-14 08:14 PM
Sent $21
7YBX1-XJMMQ
DCU
7YBX1-XJMMQ
DCU
dresses 05 06 07 08 09 CHRYSLER 300
satyasaich
03-08 01:34 PM
please call me
It keeps saying that the page cannot be displayed. Requesting for some expert's tips.
It keeps saying that the page cannot be displayed. Requesting for some expert's tips.
more...
makeup 300M Euro Headlights Black
Raju
08-05 09:47 AM
In continuation to my posting from the previous thread (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=20598), I have made some changes to the draft letter based on the comments received from few members. Now I have two versions of the same letters, one for TSC petitioners and other for NSC petitioners. This letter addresses the delay in processing of I-140 petitions at TSC & NSC.
Here are guidelines to mail this letter (pick the letter that corresponds the service center where your I-140 is pending):
1. Please review the corrected draft letters and post any constructive comments on this thread to make it more effective. You can do so until 08/07/2008 (August 7th 2008)
2. Based on the comments and suggestions received, I'll post the final version of the letter to be mailed on this thread on 08/08/2008 (August 8th 2008)
3. Members can then copy/paste the letter onto a word document and then along with completed DHS Form 7001, mail the documents to USCIS Ombudsman's office early next week(08/11/2008 through 08/15/2008). Please note that this form needs to get your employers signature ( or whoever is the petitioner) as we are checking on an I-140 petition.
4. You can find DHS Form 7001 at http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/programs/editorial_0497.shtm
5. Please make sure, you provide complete and correct information on this form to be mailed to Ombudsman's office. All forms with incomplete and fake names will be ignored by the Ombudsman's office. So please provide the correct information to the Ombudsman's office for them to investigate this issue.
6. Once all the forms and letters reaches the USCIS Ombudsman's office they will need atleast 4 weeks to look into this problem and send you a response. They are obligated to send you a response, since you sent them a completed Form 7001 inquiring about your case.
7. Please post the responses you receive from Ombudsman's office on this thread. Based on the responses we receive, we can compile the responses and then take the next course of action with IV core's guidance.
Please feel free to post any questions or clarifications you need before mailing this letter.
Don't we need the consent of the petitioner (employer)? Please see the line item # 15.
Here are guidelines to mail this letter (pick the letter that corresponds the service center where your I-140 is pending):
1. Please review the corrected draft letters and post any constructive comments on this thread to make it more effective. You can do so until 08/07/2008 (August 7th 2008)
2. Based on the comments and suggestions received, I'll post the final version of the letter to be mailed on this thread on 08/08/2008 (August 8th 2008)
3. Members can then copy/paste the letter onto a word document and then along with completed DHS Form 7001, mail the documents to USCIS Ombudsman's office early next week(08/11/2008 through 08/15/2008). Please note that this form needs to get your employers signature ( or whoever is the petitioner) as we are checking on an I-140 petition.
4. You can find DHS Form 7001 at http://www.dhs.gov/ximgtn/programs/editorial_0497.shtm
5. Please make sure, you provide complete and correct information on this form to be mailed to Ombudsman's office. All forms with incomplete and fake names will be ignored by the Ombudsman's office. So please provide the correct information to the Ombudsman's office for them to investigate this issue.
6. Once all the forms and letters reaches the USCIS Ombudsman's office they will need atleast 4 weeks to look into this problem and send you a response. They are obligated to send you a response, since you sent them a completed Form 7001 inquiring about your case.
7. Please post the responses you receive from Ombudsman's office on this thread. Based on the responses we receive, we can compile the responses and then take the next course of action with IV core's guidance.
Please feel free to post any questions or clarifications you need before mailing this letter.
Don't we need the consent of the petitioner (employer)? Please see the line item # 15.
girlfriend Item: Chrysler 300C 05-07 CCFL
digital2k
08-08 09:43 PM
*
hairstyles Chrysler 300M 99-04 Halo
ssnd03
04-01 05:00 PM
First of all why do U wanna ask that? Its an employment based visa that ur GC is based on. So, ur employer shud ask that. Why are u asking IVans to do something which is not in their control??? I keep getting red and dont mind if I'm banned. But excuse me...u r misleading IVans. My point is this. We can protest, rally based on the delay. Thats pretty much we can do. Inquiring into a Government agency's internal affairs is none of ur business. And I repeat u dont have any rights to do that as u have NO direct link to USCIS. U have applied thru ur employer and ur employer shud speak for u. Do u even get it? Ur statements and arguments have no logic whatsoever and misleading.
Dard-E-Disco I have read your comments on this thread.. Frankly you are retarded and ignorant.
I485 is an individual application. It has nothing to do with the employer even in the EB cases. The basis for I485 can be an EB I140. USCIS is answerable to the employer for I140 and answerable to the immigrant for I485. However, I don't think you have the mental capability to understand this obvious law.
Immigrants don't get to vote and may not have other rights such a welfare, social securicty etc. But USA as the greatest democracy on earth provides almost all of the rights to citizens and foreigners alike. In fact you can complain to your local, state & federal lawmakers and they will help you in your problems.
And yes a foreigner has the right to complain about any govt. organization including USCIS if their processes are adversely effecting him or her. These are the basic principles of the US democracy.
Even though relatively US has one of the best functional govt.. sometimes it still takes lot of effort and time for the wheels to turn. Thats what IV is trying to achieve.
Having said that I doubt any of this will penetrate your thick skull. Dard-e-disco you are basically a retard!
Dard-E-Disco I have read your comments on this thread.. Frankly you are retarded and ignorant.
I485 is an individual application. It has nothing to do with the employer even in the EB cases. The basis for I485 can be an EB I140. USCIS is answerable to the employer for I140 and answerable to the immigrant for I485. However, I don't think you have the mental capability to understand this obvious law.
Immigrants don't get to vote and may not have other rights such a welfare, social securicty etc. But USA as the greatest democracy on earth provides almost all of the rights to citizens and foreigners alike. In fact you can complain to your local, state & federal lawmakers and they will help you in your problems.
And yes a foreigner has the right to complain about any govt. organization including USCIS if their processes are adversely effecting him or her. These are the basic principles of the US democracy.
Even though relatively US has one of the best functional govt.. sometimes it still takes lot of effort and time for the wheels to turn. Thats what IV is trying to achieve.
Having said that I doubt any of this will penetrate your thick skull. Dard-e-disco you are basically a retard!
RNGC
06-25 11:46 AM
well said...to put in a nutshell "Desire and Inovation is flushed by immigration wait ...."
This is what I think America loses due to delay in green card process. I can say this from my own experience. People with advanced degrees in Science and Technology have to keep doing same job to maintain status for 8 - 10 years since changing job / company reset's their GC process. When a guy comes to US for education the average age is around 23 - 24 years. MS completed by 25. Most guys at that time have burning desire to do something new and innovative (either in job or starting own business). But the most fortune 100 companies do not sponsor H1B or GC (Example Raytheon, Toyota, Lexmark .... based on my personal experience as electrical engineer) so you end up compromising with career to maintain status and work for companies that sponsor H1B ( future career prospects take a backseat). Then after 8 - 10 years when you get GC you already are married and possibly kids to look after you are already burnt out and want to keep working in the same desk/ clerical job that you have been doing for so many years. So its a lose lose situation to all neither government gains from the GC (by which they hope to make US a more innovative place) nor the immigrants since by then all they can think is a full time job, home and 401K.
This is what I think America loses due to delay in green card process. I can say this from my own experience. People with advanced degrees in Science and Technology have to keep doing same job to maintain status for 8 - 10 years since changing job / company reset's their GC process. When a guy comes to US for education the average age is around 23 - 24 years. MS completed by 25. Most guys at that time have burning desire to do something new and innovative (either in job or starting own business). But the most fortune 100 companies do not sponsor H1B or GC (Example Raytheon, Toyota, Lexmark .... based on my personal experience as electrical engineer) so you end up compromising with career to maintain status and work for companies that sponsor H1B ( future career prospects take a backseat). Then after 8 - 10 years when you get GC you already are married and possibly kids to look after you are already burnt out and want to keep working in the same desk/ clerical job that you have been doing for so many years. So its a lose lose situation to all neither government gains from the GC (by which they hope to make US a more innovative place) nor the immigrants since by then all they can think is a full time job, home and 401K.
kshitijnt
04-30 05:09 PM
atleast there was bipartisan frustration on part of congressmen on both sides except for the king guy
No comments:
Post a Comment