rmdsouza
06-18 08:40 AM
Immigration reform will not take place unless the lack of reform costs the government. Now, we all know that H1-Bs pay Social Security Tax and Medicare Tax. Also, according to the rules, we are not eligible for the benefits. Considering the average pay of a H1-B is $60000. This unfair tax amounts to about $2300 per/year/person. Now there are about 350,000 H1-B stuck in Labor for the past 2-3 years. The total amount in unfair tax is nearly
$2.4 BILLION!!! (I am being very conservative about this figure)
Maybe they will pay attention if a lawsuite is filed to recover these taxes..
Just my two cents worth...
$2.4 BILLION!!! (I am being very conservative about this figure)
Maybe they will pay attention if a lawsuite is filed to recover these taxes..
Just my two cents worth...
wallpaper Casey Anthony sits in court
bugsbunny
03-26 08:12 PM
You are talking as if people are doing favour for others. You are here because you are stuck in immigration limbo as I am. I am not doing any favour for any one but myself. Is it very hard for you to understand. I am sure the brightest and highly educated can understand they are the losers if they are not participating.
People have various reasons for not participating ...its simple basic PR...IV as an organisation needs to frequently remind them of the good work IV has accomplished in maybe a regular newsletter...list out various needs that need attention and require volunteers for clearly defined roles...and be positive and coherent when replying to member's queries. Lashing out at members for asking simple questions is huge "no-no" for any organisation.
People have various reasons for not participating ...its simple basic PR...IV as an organisation needs to frequently remind them of the good work IV has accomplished in maybe a regular newsletter...list out various needs that need attention and require volunteers for clearly defined roles...and be positive and coherent when replying to member's queries. Lashing out at members for asking simple questions is huge "no-no" for any organisation.
Roger Binny
09-27 04:29 AM
pappu,
Is there any thing we can do to save IV forums, from all these so called smart people.
Simly these guys want to derail the whole discussion either it is EB3 push or visa capture or any kind of fruitful discussion.
I know it is difficult to stop creating and screening ids, atleast can you delete some unrelated postings and make sure that there is some healthy discussion continues and people like me wont stop visiting IV.
Is there any thing we can do to save IV forums, from all these so called smart people.
Simly these guys want to derail the whole discussion either it is EB3 push or visa capture or any kind of fruitful discussion.
I know it is difficult to stop creating and screening ids, atleast can you delete some unrelated postings and make sure that there is some healthy discussion continues and people like me wont stop visiting IV.
2011 Casey Anthony listens to the
maqsoodalam
04-10 10:48 PM
I am in the same boat. Can anyone reply to this inquiry.... please!
more...
sravani
05-16 04:35 PM
THanks for this info.Do you know how much time it takes to complete the translation ?
It depends on the service you choose, I think they have an option for expedited service and you can get the document within couple of days. They also provide you the pdf format of the document, you can print that document and submit immediately instead of waiting for the postal document.
It depends on the service you choose, I think they have an option for expedited service and you can get the document within couple of days. They also provide you the pdf format of the document, you can print that document and submit immediately instead of waiting for the postal document.
gantilk
08-04 08:32 AM
gantilk, were you able to find the TSC fax number for expediting the requests for EAD???????????
No i could not find the fax number. I only tried the one you gave, but it never went. Now that i have got my card i have not taken it up further.
No i could not find the fax number. I only tried the one you gave, but it never went. Now that i have got my card i have not taken it up further.
more...
pappu
02-23 07:49 PM
There is a 'Bookmark' button below every post. If you click on it and select Facebook, the post will be shared on facebook. Let us all spread the message wherever possible about this event and get maximum participation.
2010 Casey Anthony listens to the
gc4me
03-17 01:44 PM
OK, this distribution looks similar to this poll except 2004 data.
People with pd 2004 are not actively voting this poll.
ROW folks, please vote here.
PD %
2000 0.4
2001 3.7
2002 6.4
2003 17.9
2004 23.2
2005 20.8
2006 18.3
2007 9.3
(You can plug this into a excel bar graph to see the histogram)
People with pd 2004 are not actively voting this poll.
ROW folks, please vote here.
PD %
2000 0.4
2001 3.7
2002 6.4
2003 17.9
2004 23.2
2005 20.8
2006 18.3
2007 9.3
(You can plug this into a excel bar graph to see the histogram)
more...
pushkarw
09-03 05:58 PM
Does anyone know whether a case is assigned to an IO before or after a visa number is assigned? Or whether a visa number has got nothing to do with officer assignment?
hair Casey Anthony Trial: Bug
abhijitp
07-11 06:39 PM
Pasadena congressman Adam Schiff from CA supports legal immigration. I received an email from him recently stating the same.
"In considering immigration reform, Rep. Schiff has repeatedly stated that he does not believe in amnesty for undocumented aliens, but he does believe that those who have been living in this country -- working and paying taxes -- should be given an opportunity to embark on a lengthy and hard-earned path to citizenship. However, he has made it clear that he does not support immigrants who are here illegally being rewarded for breaking our laws by jumping ahead of those who have sought to enter this country legally."
--C.
Okay, apart from Rep. Lofgren:
1. Pasadena congressman Adam Schiff from CA
2. Sen. Cantwell
3. Sen. Cornyn
Who others should we write to? Is there some IV thread that metions all these names?
Thanks!
"In considering immigration reform, Rep. Schiff has repeatedly stated that he does not believe in amnesty for undocumented aliens, but he does believe that those who have been living in this country -- working and paying taxes -- should be given an opportunity to embark on a lengthy and hard-earned path to citizenship. However, he has made it clear that he does not support immigrants who are here illegally being rewarded for breaking our laws by jumping ahead of those who have sought to enter this country legally."
--C.
Okay, apart from Rep. Lofgren:
1. Pasadena congressman Adam Schiff from CA
2. Sen. Cantwell
3. Sen. Cornyn
Who others should we write to? Is there some IV thread that metions all these names?
Thanks!
more...
lvaka
08-18 11:52 AM
This morning I spoke to one of the Second level officer to get the SR done as I hit 90 days today, but he rejected saying they can not create as I am still with in the April 16th processing timelines. He wanted me to wait till I get my Eapedited request answered.
He is saying interim EAD can requested only if the posted processing timelines exceed 30days to our Filed date. Ridiculous. I told him, how does it matter what processing timeline TSC posts!, as per the memo if I have been waiting for more than 90days am allowed to request an Interim EAD.. But he is not ready to listen.. He started saying those processing timelines are created based on the volume, so I am not allowed it seems.. BS... I wish I had told him to increase the GC quota as there is more volume.. brainless ppl.
They dont even understand what it means to loose the jobs coz of processing delays from USCIS. All the 6 years (H1 B) perid they wanted us to have jobs without any breaks and they dont care now!!
He is saying interim EAD can requested only if the posted processing timelines exceed 30days to our Filed date. Ridiculous. I told him, how does it matter what processing timeline TSC posts!, as per the memo if I have been waiting for more than 90days am allowed to request an Interim EAD.. But he is not ready to listen.. He started saying those processing timelines are created based on the volume, so I am not allowed it seems.. BS... I wish I had told him to increase the GC quota as there is more volume.. brainless ppl.
They dont even understand what it means to loose the jobs coz of processing delays from USCIS. All the 6 years (H1 B) perid they wanted us to have jobs without any breaks and they dont care now!!
hot Casey Anthony Wikipedia
hai_yeh_gc
08-15 10:20 AM
The reason I gave was financial loss. I said I'm the only bread earner in the family with a dependant wife and daughter.
I called up thrice, since the first two reps did not even open a SR. The third person was good and he transferred me to I guess a level II rep. She sent the expedite request.
..and this is just what I'm thinking that, it all happened due to the expedite request. It's very much possible that it could have happened on it's own..
Good luck..
I called up thrice, since the first two reps did not even open a SR. The third person was good and he transferred me to I guess a level II rep. She sent the expedite request.
..and this is just what I'm thinking that, it all happened due to the expedite request. It's very much possible that it could have happened on it's own..
Good luck..
more...
house Casey Anthony – borderline
amitjoey
01-18 01:06 PM
One more signed up. Need 894 members. Campaign management buddies, need help.
tattoo Jun 16, 2011 · Casey Anthony
Saralayar
04-13 11:01 PM
That's not correct. There is big difference between h1B annd GC and it is not for 10 years. it is for ever unless you don't fulfill some conditions.
GC is given for a period of 10 years and not for ever.
GC is given for a period of 10 years and not for ever.
more...
pictures Video: YouTube live streaming
GreenCard4US
09-24 08:16 PM
I read from another post that there are a total of 233k EB applications. Considering there are 140k available per year, should'nt this list be cleared in 2 years even if another 50k still apply in the next 2 years? What am I missing?
dresses Casey Anthony trial:
istrategist
04-25 08:53 AM
Update to my case (below): got a text message on 4/23 saying that VSC now sent it back to TSC (where I had sent it in the first place a month ago). Have to wait for the paper notice to see what silly reason they give for doing this, and delaying the app by another month.
my EAD app was delivered to tx on 3/29, and I got a text on 4/6 saying it was accepted and routed to VSC. A few days later, I got the notice in the mail.
my EAD app was delivered to tx on 3/29, and I got a text on 4/6 saying it was accepted and routed to VSC. A few days later, I got the notice in the mail.
more...
makeup casey anthony trial
radosav
08-14 03:40 PM
Glory to you o God,
after agonizying 67 days, I see the light at the end of the loong EAD tunnel.
My prayers are answered!
:D:D:D
E-filed EAD renewal @ TSC for self and spouse 06/08
FP done 07/08
soft LUD on both: 07/24; 07/25; 07/27
hard LUD on both: 08/14 Card production ordered
10 minutes ago got CPO e-mail as well
EB-3 ROW PD Nov/2005
after agonizying 67 days, I see the light at the end of the loong EAD tunnel.
My prayers are answered!
:D:D:D
E-filed EAD renewal @ TSC for self and spouse 06/08
FP done 07/08
soft LUD on both: 07/24; 07/25; 07/27
hard LUD on both: 08/14 Card production ordered
10 minutes ago got CPO e-mail as well
EB-3 ROW PD Nov/2005
girlfriend casey-anthony-trial-may-26
tammman
05-19 10:15 AM
I just called all the offices mentioned.
Almost all of them seemed to know what I'm talking about and I left voice msgs for couple of the offices and some of them took the msg and mentioned will pass them on...
Thanks to IV & all the members doing this !!
Almost all of them seemed to know what I'm talking about and I left voice msgs for couple of the offices and some of them took the msg and mentioned will pass them on...
Thanks to IV & all the members doing this !!
hairstyles Casey Anthony update: Casey
carpediem
04-09 08:59 PM
I honestly feel there is no good way to get traction on this issue with the American government. The common masses are against immigration reform and even more so than usual right now because of the recession.
One possible solution is to really prove to the them that we have a choice. I don't know if there is a way to petition our companies to create offices in Canada. Say 1000 people at Microsoft in Seattle or Intel in Portland move to Vancouver. Canadians would love our income, sales and property taxes. And companies would truly like to save money on health benefits, while keeping employees happy and in the same timezone. Employees get green cards quickly. The only downside for the company is that employees are less tied down to their jobs.
Does this make sense?
One possible solution is to really prove to the them that we have a choice. I don't know if there is a way to petition our companies to create offices in Canada. Say 1000 people at Microsoft in Seattle or Intel in Portland move to Vancouver. Canadians would love our income, sales and property taxes. And companies would truly like to save money on health benefits, while keeping employees happy and in the same timezone. Employees get green cards quickly. The only downside for the company is that employees are less tied down to their jobs.
Does this make sense?
jonty_11
06-14 02:06 PM
There are no 2 ways to this.. it is injustice and screwed up process of DOL and USCIS.....but the situation (DOL) is no different than 1 day ago. it should not warrant you to start this thread.
nyte_crawler
06-08 06:15 PM
Now that the House and Senate have adopted different versions of immigration legislation, textbook explanations of lawmaking suggest the bill's fate rests in the hands of a conference committee. Congress uses these temporary bicameral panels � which some call the "Third House" of Congress � to resolve differences in competing versions of legislation.
But lawmakers often find exceptions to textbook explanations and immigration reform provides a case in point. True, most predict contentious House-Senate negotiations on the issue. But "where" and "when" are key questions. Creation of a conference committee will be more an indication that a deal is done than a forum to find one. In other words, lawmakers may not even officially create a bicameral negotiating panel until they have found a clear path toward a workable compromise � a process that may take weeks of private, informal discussions before conferees ever formally meet.
Conference committees are not mandatory. They offer one way to resolve differences between chambers, but there is no requirement that lawmakers even use this procedure. According to Walter Oleszek at the CongressionalResearch Service, only 15 to 25 percent of all laws passed by Congress ever reach the conference-committee stage. Lawmakers normally resolve differences either by one house adopting the other's version or by "ping-ponging" measures back and forth until substantive disagreements are ironed out. Conference committees are never formed in either of those cases.
However, Mr. Oleszek also notes that most controversial bills that become law do go through the House-Senate conference process. Immigration definitely clears the divisiveness threshold. But sending a politically charged bill to a formal conference immediately and hoping differences get resolved there is not a tactic preferred by the GOP leadership.
When lawmakers do decide to form a formal conference committee, its procedures are exercised in congressional discretion with only a few set rules and precedents. The House and Senate each choose members drawn heavily from the committees that authored the legislation. In the Senate, the presiding officer appoints from a list developed by the chair and ranking member of the committee that passed the bill. In the House, the speaker appoints all conferees and sometimes draws in members of the leadership. Each house has one vote on issues under consideration in the conference; therefore there is a "House position" and a "Senate position" on any provision in disagreement. Each chamber develops positions based on a majority vote of conferees from that body.
Neither chamber is under any obligation to respond to a request for a conference. And sometimes the bulk of negotiations occur in a pre-conference informal setting. House leaders are averse to sending major legislation to a formal conference with the prospects of long, drawn-out deliberations. For one thing, after a bill goes to conference and there is no resolution in 20 calendar and 10 legislative days, any member of the House can offer non-binding motions on a daily basis, which often subjects the body to tedious, sometimes politically embarrassing votes that eat up valuable time.
Democrat obstructionism in the Senate may also stall efforts to convene a conference. Since losing the majority after the 2002 election, Democrats have made the historically routine process of going to conference (which is normally done through unanimous consent) a procedural jungle. On the immigration measure, Democrats insisted on the unusual step of a pre-agreed ratio of conferees (26 senators total � 14 Republicans and 12 Democrats) before entering into a unanimous consent agreement to finish the bill. Also, because the Senate bill contains a revenue provision, it is subject to a so-called "blue slip," which means it could be automatically rejected by the House. (The Origination Clause of the Constitution requires all revenue measures to begin in the House. A Senate bill containing revenue provisions is sent back with a resolution printed on blue paper, hence the name.) Democrats then objected earlier this week to efforts to attach the Senate immigration bill to a House-passed revenue bill, which would have fixed the problem.
And when it comes to national issues like immigration, the White House also becomes a big investor in this legislative real estate. Thus, the real "conference committee" on immigration reform will take place informally between the White House and a handful of congressional leaders. If these lawmakers see a compromise that can garner strong support among Republicans in the House and Senate, a formal conference will be appointed.
If this path can't be found, it's unlikely lawmakers will ever formally set foot into a conference committee to orchestrate a compromise � in public or private.
But lawmakers often find exceptions to textbook explanations and immigration reform provides a case in point. True, most predict contentious House-Senate negotiations on the issue. But "where" and "when" are key questions. Creation of a conference committee will be more an indication that a deal is done than a forum to find one. In other words, lawmakers may not even officially create a bicameral negotiating panel until they have found a clear path toward a workable compromise � a process that may take weeks of private, informal discussions before conferees ever formally meet.
Conference committees are not mandatory. They offer one way to resolve differences between chambers, but there is no requirement that lawmakers even use this procedure. According to Walter Oleszek at the CongressionalResearch Service, only 15 to 25 percent of all laws passed by Congress ever reach the conference-committee stage. Lawmakers normally resolve differences either by one house adopting the other's version or by "ping-ponging" measures back and forth until substantive disagreements are ironed out. Conference committees are never formed in either of those cases.
However, Mr. Oleszek also notes that most controversial bills that become law do go through the House-Senate conference process. Immigration definitely clears the divisiveness threshold. But sending a politically charged bill to a formal conference immediately and hoping differences get resolved there is not a tactic preferred by the GOP leadership.
When lawmakers do decide to form a formal conference committee, its procedures are exercised in congressional discretion with only a few set rules and precedents. The House and Senate each choose members drawn heavily from the committees that authored the legislation. In the Senate, the presiding officer appoints from a list developed by the chair and ranking member of the committee that passed the bill. In the House, the speaker appoints all conferees and sometimes draws in members of the leadership. Each house has one vote on issues under consideration in the conference; therefore there is a "House position" and a "Senate position" on any provision in disagreement. Each chamber develops positions based on a majority vote of conferees from that body.
Neither chamber is under any obligation to respond to a request for a conference. And sometimes the bulk of negotiations occur in a pre-conference informal setting. House leaders are averse to sending major legislation to a formal conference with the prospects of long, drawn-out deliberations. For one thing, after a bill goes to conference and there is no resolution in 20 calendar and 10 legislative days, any member of the House can offer non-binding motions on a daily basis, which often subjects the body to tedious, sometimes politically embarrassing votes that eat up valuable time.
Democrat obstructionism in the Senate may also stall efforts to convene a conference. Since losing the majority after the 2002 election, Democrats have made the historically routine process of going to conference (which is normally done through unanimous consent) a procedural jungle. On the immigration measure, Democrats insisted on the unusual step of a pre-agreed ratio of conferees (26 senators total � 14 Republicans and 12 Democrats) before entering into a unanimous consent agreement to finish the bill. Also, because the Senate bill contains a revenue provision, it is subject to a so-called "blue slip," which means it could be automatically rejected by the House. (The Origination Clause of the Constitution requires all revenue measures to begin in the House. A Senate bill containing revenue provisions is sent back with a resolution printed on blue paper, hence the name.) Democrats then objected earlier this week to efforts to attach the Senate immigration bill to a House-passed revenue bill, which would have fixed the problem.
And when it comes to national issues like immigration, the White House also becomes a big investor in this legislative real estate. Thus, the real "conference committee" on immigration reform will take place informally between the White House and a handful of congressional leaders. If these lawmakers see a compromise that can garner strong support among Republicans in the House and Senate, a formal conference will be appointed.
If this path can't be found, it's unlikely lawmakers will ever formally set foot into a conference committee to orchestrate a compromise � in public or private.
0 comments:
Post a Comment