santa123
07-11 09:14 AM
A few lucky people from the July filers will get their green cards from this, but most may have to wait a while. They have not processed many of them.
If that is the case, why is there a big movement? I am assuming that the Jul 07 backlog has been significantly reduced and hence this big movement. Correct me if my assumption is wrong.
If that is the case, why is there a big movement? I am assuming that the Jul 07 backlog has been significantly reduced and hence this big movement. Correct me if my assumption is wrong.
wallpaper US Hwy 100 | Fellowship of the
needhelp!
09-11 04:56 PM
In a moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing to do.
The worst thing you can do is nothing.
- Theodore Roosevelt
The worst thing you can do is nothing.
- Theodore Roosevelt
chennaigc
04-01 08:00 PM
paying customers.
One word and it is golden word indeed!!!!
One word and it is golden word indeed!!!!
2011 from Flagstaff, AZ and 130
NolaIndian32
03-12 01:56 PM
Hi Vin,
TeamIV completed its goal over a 12 month span, we raised approx $3000. If you are looking to contribute now, we can still collect money from you. If you are seriously interested, please PM me right away and i get you the details of how to contribute. 100% of your donation will go towards IV's lobbying efforts.
Thanks for your interest in helping IV.
And if you need to find out who is leading an initiative, it is pretty much in the first post of the new thread. So it is easy to pinpoint that person, then you can contact him/her to contribute to their campaign (how come i didn't hear from you? :-) )
Nola
Here is my point. I spend several hours 3-4 hours at least every day looking through the forum posts hoping to find ways i can contribute to efforts. There are several ideas that are generated in the forum. But cannot find out who is leading it. All i am saying is if we can have a listing of initiatives with some names associated. So i can contribute to the ones that i can support.
I am not sure if i am asking for too much here. I am not a IT guy. I do not know what it takes to post it in the front page.
TeamIV completed its goal over a 12 month span, we raised approx $3000. If you are looking to contribute now, we can still collect money from you. If you are seriously interested, please PM me right away and i get you the details of how to contribute. 100% of your donation will go towards IV's lobbying efforts.
Thanks for your interest in helping IV.
And if you need to find out who is leading an initiative, it is pretty much in the first post of the new thread. So it is easy to pinpoint that person, then you can contact him/her to contribute to their campaign (how come i didn't hear from you? :-) )
Nola
Here is my point. I spend several hours 3-4 hours at least every day looking through the forum posts hoping to find ways i can contribute to efforts. There are several ideas that are generated in the forum. But cannot find out who is leading it. All i am saying is if we can have a listing of initiatives with some names associated. So i can contribute to the ones that i can support.
I am not sure if i am asking for too much here. I am not a IT guy. I do not know what it takes to post it in the front page.
more...
csreddy329
12-11 04:08 PM
After I-140 approval if we are allowed to file 485 that will give us big relief, Willing to contribute big time if IV can make this part of its agenda
sandy_anand
09-12 05:32 PM
I applied on Feb 27th, 2007 at Atlanta (NJ employer). Still waiting...go figure! :mad:
more...
choppy AKA (in the Army)
01-07 01:48 AM
Check this http://shusterman.com/pdf/obama907.pdf
Obama places more importance on family ties...not on EB categories.
somebody needs to remind him that just because he came thru a family tie...doesnt make it a ideal thing.
wanna be a family guy in USA...& its pitiful.
Obama places more importance on family ties...not on EB categories.
somebody needs to remind him that just because he came thru a family tie...doesnt make it a ideal thing.
wanna be a family guy in USA...& its pitiful.
2010 department Highway+100
vayumahesh
10-22 09:12 AM
My application was filed under PERM EB2 on May 12th and it got approved on Sep 2nd. Filed I-140 under premium processing yesterday. My attorney has requested earlier priority date (June 2003, EB3) while filing EB2 I-140. He said, once I-140 is approved and priority date porting is done, I-485 may be approved automatically. If not approved for a period of time (say a month or so), interfiling may be requested.
more...
pappu
08-12 10:55 AM
Senate Passage of Border Security Legislation
August 12, 2010
Today, I come to the floor to seek unanimous consent to pass a smart, tough, and effective $600 million bill that will significantly enhance the security and integrity of our nation’s southern border—which currently lacks the resources needed to fully combat the drug smugglers, gun-runners, human-traffickers, money launderers and other organized criminals that seek to do harm to innocent Americans along our border….
The best part of this border package, Mr. President, is that it is fully paid for and does not increase the deficit by a single penny. In actuality, the Congressional Budget Office has determined that this bill will yield a direct savings to taxpayers of $50 million….
The emergency border funds we are passing today are fully paid for by assessing fees on certain types of companies who hire foreign workers using certain types of visas in a way that Congress did not intend. I want to take a moment to explain exactly what we are doing in this bill a little further because I want everyone to clearly understand how these offsets are designed.
In 1990, Congress realized that the world was changing rapidly and that technological innovations like the internet were creating a high demand in the United States for high-tech workers to create new technologies and products. Consequently, Congress created the H-1B visa program to allow U.S. employers to hire foreign tech workers in special circumstances when they could not find an American citizen who was qualified for the job.
Many of the companies that use this program today are using the program in the exact way Congress intended. That is, these companies (like Microsoft, IBM, and Intel) are hiring bright foreign students educated in our American universities to work in the U.S. for 6 or 7 years to invent new product lines and technologies so that Microsoft, IBM, and Intel can sell more products to the American public. Then—at the expiration of the H-1B visa period—these companies apply for these talented workers to earn green cards and stay with the company.
When the H-1B visa program is used in this manner, it is a good program for everyone involved. It is good for the company. It is good for the worker. And it is good for the American people who benefit from the products and jobs created by the innovation of the H-1B visa holder.
Every day, companies like Oracle, Cisco, Apple and others use the H-1B visa program in the exact way I have just described—and their use of the program has greatly benefitted this country.
But recently, some companies have decided to exploit an unintended loophole in the H-1B visa program to use the program in a manner that many in Congress, including myself, do not believe is consistent with the program’s intent.
Rather than being a company that makes something, and simply needs to bring in a talented foreign worker to help innovate and create new products and technologies—these other companies are essentially creating “multinational temp agencies” that were never contemplated when the H-1B program was created.
The business model of these newer companies is not to make any new products or technologies like Microsoft or Apple does. Instead, their business model is to bring foreign tech workers into the United States who are willing to accept less pay than their American counterparts, place these workers into other companies in exchange for a “consulting fee,” and transfer these workers from company to company in order to maximize profits from placement fees. In other words, these companies are petitioning for foreign workers simply to then turn around and provide these same workers to other companies who need cheap labor for various short term projects.
Don’t take my word for it. If you look at the marketing materials of some of the companies that fall within the scope covered by today’s legislation, their materials boast about their “outsourcing expertise” and say that their advantage is their ability to conduct what they call “labor arbitrage” which is—in their own words—“transferring work functions to a lower cost environment for increased savings.”
The business model used by these companies within the United States is creating three major negative side effects. First, it is ruining the reputation of the H-1B program, which is overwhelmingly used by good actors for beneficial purposes. Second, according to the Economic Policy institute, it is lowering the wages for American tech workers already in the marketplace. Third, it is also discouraging many of our smartest students from entering the technology industry in the first place. Students can see that paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for advanced schooling is not worth the cost when the market is being flooded with foreign temporary workers willing to do tech-work for far less pay because their foreign education was much cheaper and they intend to move back home when their visa expires to a country where the cost of living is far less expensive.
This type of use of the H-1B visa program will be addressed as part of comprehensive immigration reform and will likely be dramatically restricted. We will be reforming the legal immigration system to encourage the world’s best and brightest individuals to come to the United States and create the new technologies and businesses that will employ countless American workers, but will discourage businesses from using our immigration laws as a means to obtain temporary and less-expensive foreign labor to replace capable American workers.
Nevertheless, I do wish to clarify a previous mischaracterization of these firms, where I labeled them as “chop shops.” That statement was incorrect, and I wish to acknowledge that. In the tech industry, these firms are sometimes known as “body shops” and that’s what I should have said.
While I strongly oppose the manner in which these firms are using the H-1B visa to accomplish objectives that Congress never intended, it would be unfortunate if anyone concluded from my remarks that these firms are engaging in illegal behavior.
But I also want to make clear that the purpose of this fee is not to target businesses from any particular country. Many news articles have reported that the only companies that will be affected by this fee are companies based in India and that, ipso facto, the purpose of this legislation must be to target Indian IT companies.
Well, it is simply untrue that the purpose of this legislation is to target Indian companies. We are simply raising fees for businesses who use the H-1B visa to do things that are contrary to the program’s original intent.
Visa fees will only increase for companies with more than 50 workers who continue to employ more than 50 percent of their employees through the H-1B program. Congress does not want the H-1B visa program to be a vehicle for creating multinational temp agencies where workers do not know what projects they will be working on—or what cities they will be working in—when they enter the country.
The fee is based solely upon the business model of the company, not the location of the company.
If you are using the H-1B visa to innovate new products and technologies for your own company to sell, that is a good thing regardless of whether the company was originally founded in India, Ireland, or Indiana.
But if you are using the H-1B visa to run a glorified international temp agency for tech workers in contravention of the spirit of the program, I and my colleagues believe that you should have to pay a higher fee to ensure that American workers are not losing their jobs because of unintended uses of the visa program that were never contemplated when the program was created.
This belief is consistent regardless of whether the company using these staffing practices was founded in Bangalore, Beijing, or Boston.
Raising the fees for companies hiring more than 50 percent of their workforce through foreign visas will accomplish two important goals. First, it will provide the necessary funds to secure our border without raising taxes or adding to the deficit. Second, it will level the playing field for American workers so that they do not lose out on good jobs here in America because it is cheaper to bring in a foreign worker rather than hire an American worker.
Let me tell you what objective folks around the world are saying about the impact of this fee increase. In an August 6, 2010, Wall Street Journal article, Avinash Vashistha—the CEO of a Bangalore based off-shoring advisory consulting firm—told the Journal that the new fee in this bill “would accelerate Indian firms’ plans to hire more American-born workers in the U.S.” What’s wrong with that? In an August 7, 2010 Economic Times Article, Jeya Kumar, a CEO of a top IT company, said that this bill would “erode cost arbitrage and cause a change in the operational model of Indian offshore providers.”
The leaders of this business model are agreeing that our bill will make it more expensive to bring in foreign tech workers to compete with American tech workers for jobs here in America. That means these companies are going to start having to hire U.S. tech workers again.
So Mr. President, this bill is not only a responsible border security bill, it has the dual advantage of creating more high-paying American jobs.
Finally, Mr. President, I want to be clear about one other thing. Even though passing this bill will secure our border, I again say that the only way to fully restore the rule of law to our entire immigration system is by passing comprehensive immigration reform….
The urgency for immigration reform cannot be overstated because it is so overdue. The time for excuses is now over, it is now time to get to work.
August 12, 2010
Today, I come to the floor to seek unanimous consent to pass a smart, tough, and effective $600 million bill that will significantly enhance the security and integrity of our nation’s southern border—which currently lacks the resources needed to fully combat the drug smugglers, gun-runners, human-traffickers, money launderers and other organized criminals that seek to do harm to innocent Americans along our border….
The best part of this border package, Mr. President, is that it is fully paid for and does not increase the deficit by a single penny. In actuality, the Congressional Budget Office has determined that this bill will yield a direct savings to taxpayers of $50 million….
The emergency border funds we are passing today are fully paid for by assessing fees on certain types of companies who hire foreign workers using certain types of visas in a way that Congress did not intend. I want to take a moment to explain exactly what we are doing in this bill a little further because I want everyone to clearly understand how these offsets are designed.
In 1990, Congress realized that the world was changing rapidly and that technological innovations like the internet were creating a high demand in the United States for high-tech workers to create new technologies and products. Consequently, Congress created the H-1B visa program to allow U.S. employers to hire foreign tech workers in special circumstances when they could not find an American citizen who was qualified for the job.
Many of the companies that use this program today are using the program in the exact way Congress intended. That is, these companies (like Microsoft, IBM, and Intel) are hiring bright foreign students educated in our American universities to work in the U.S. for 6 or 7 years to invent new product lines and technologies so that Microsoft, IBM, and Intel can sell more products to the American public. Then—at the expiration of the H-1B visa period—these companies apply for these talented workers to earn green cards and stay with the company.
When the H-1B visa program is used in this manner, it is a good program for everyone involved. It is good for the company. It is good for the worker. And it is good for the American people who benefit from the products and jobs created by the innovation of the H-1B visa holder.
Every day, companies like Oracle, Cisco, Apple and others use the H-1B visa program in the exact way I have just described—and their use of the program has greatly benefitted this country.
But recently, some companies have decided to exploit an unintended loophole in the H-1B visa program to use the program in a manner that many in Congress, including myself, do not believe is consistent with the program’s intent.
Rather than being a company that makes something, and simply needs to bring in a talented foreign worker to help innovate and create new products and technologies—these other companies are essentially creating “multinational temp agencies” that were never contemplated when the H-1B program was created.
The business model of these newer companies is not to make any new products or technologies like Microsoft or Apple does. Instead, their business model is to bring foreign tech workers into the United States who are willing to accept less pay than their American counterparts, place these workers into other companies in exchange for a “consulting fee,” and transfer these workers from company to company in order to maximize profits from placement fees. In other words, these companies are petitioning for foreign workers simply to then turn around and provide these same workers to other companies who need cheap labor for various short term projects.
Don’t take my word for it. If you look at the marketing materials of some of the companies that fall within the scope covered by today’s legislation, their materials boast about their “outsourcing expertise” and say that their advantage is their ability to conduct what they call “labor arbitrage” which is—in their own words—“transferring work functions to a lower cost environment for increased savings.”
The business model used by these companies within the United States is creating three major negative side effects. First, it is ruining the reputation of the H-1B program, which is overwhelmingly used by good actors for beneficial purposes. Second, according to the Economic Policy institute, it is lowering the wages for American tech workers already in the marketplace. Third, it is also discouraging many of our smartest students from entering the technology industry in the first place. Students can see that paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for advanced schooling is not worth the cost when the market is being flooded with foreign temporary workers willing to do tech-work for far less pay because their foreign education was much cheaper and they intend to move back home when their visa expires to a country where the cost of living is far less expensive.
This type of use of the H-1B visa program will be addressed as part of comprehensive immigration reform and will likely be dramatically restricted. We will be reforming the legal immigration system to encourage the world’s best and brightest individuals to come to the United States and create the new technologies and businesses that will employ countless American workers, but will discourage businesses from using our immigration laws as a means to obtain temporary and less-expensive foreign labor to replace capable American workers.
Nevertheless, I do wish to clarify a previous mischaracterization of these firms, where I labeled them as “chop shops.” That statement was incorrect, and I wish to acknowledge that. In the tech industry, these firms are sometimes known as “body shops” and that’s what I should have said.
While I strongly oppose the manner in which these firms are using the H-1B visa to accomplish objectives that Congress never intended, it would be unfortunate if anyone concluded from my remarks that these firms are engaging in illegal behavior.
But I also want to make clear that the purpose of this fee is not to target businesses from any particular country. Many news articles have reported that the only companies that will be affected by this fee are companies based in India and that, ipso facto, the purpose of this legislation must be to target Indian IT companies.
Well, it is simply untrue that the purpose of this legislation is to target Indian companies. We are simply raising fees for businesses who use the H-1B visa to do things that are contrary to the program’s original intent.
Visa fees will only increase for companies with more than 50 workers who continue to employ more than 50 percent of their employees through the H-1B program. Congress does not want the H-1B visa program to be a vehicle for creating multinational temp agencies where workers do not know what projects they will be working on—or what cities they will be working in—when they enter the country.
The fee is based solely upon the business model of the company, not the location of the company.
If you are using the H-1B visa to innovate new products and technologies for your own company to sell, that is a good thing regardless of whether the company was originally founded in India, Ireland, or Indiana.
But if you are using the H-1B visa to run a glorified international temp agency for tech workers in contravention of the spirit of the program, I and my colleagues believe that you should have to pay a higher fee to ensure that American workers are not losing their jobs because of unintended uses of the visa program that were never contemplated when the program was created.
This belief is consistent regardless of whether the company using these staffing practices was founded in Bangalore, Beijing, or Boston.
Raising the fees for companies hiring more than 50 percent of their workforce through foreign visas will accomplish two important goals. First, it will provide the necessary funds to secure our border without raising taxes or adding to the deficit. Second, it will level the playing field for American workers so that they do not lose out on good jobs here in America because it is cheaper to bring in a foreign worker rather than hire an American worker.
Let me tell you what objective folks around the world are saying about the impact of this fee increase. In an August 6, 2010, Wall Street Journal article, Avinash Vashistha—the CEO of a Bangalore based off-shoring advisory consulting firm—told the Journal that the new fee in this bill “would accelerate Indian firms’ plans to hire more American-born workers in the U.S.” What’s wrong with that? In an August 7, 2010 Economic Times Article, Jeya Kumar, a CEO of a top IT company, said that this bill would “erode cost arbitrage and cause a change in the operational model of Indian offshore providers.”
The leaders of this business model are agreeing that our bill will make it more expensive to bring in foreign tech workers to compete with American tech workers for jobs here in America. That means these companies are going to start having to hire U.S. tech workers again.
So Mr. President, this bill is not only a responsible border security bill, it has the dual advantage of creating more high-paying American jobs.
Finally, Mr. President, I want to be clear about one other thing. Even though passing this bill will secure our border, I again say that the only way to fully restore the rule of law to our entire immigration system is by passing comprehensive immigration reform….
The urgency for immigration reform cannot be overstated because it is so overdue. The time for excuses is now over, it is now time to get to work.
hair sd tn, Highway+100
immm
07-18 06:00 PM
I have not received the physical receipt notice yet. But the online case status says "On July 11, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION" even though it was physically delivered and signed at Nebraska Service center on June, 15th. I will post once I get the physical copy of receipt notice to update every one.
May be some others that have already received the physical copy of receipt notices can clarify the difference between the receipt date on the notice vs. the online status that says ""On July 11, 2007, we received..."
UPDATE: shreekhand's post above from moments ago seems to have answered this question.
What does it say on your I485 receipt notice?
For example.. my app was mailed on 5/31 and RD on receipt notice is 6/4 and Notice date is 6/6 and Online case status says received on 6/5. I assume 6/5 is when USCIS created an entry for my case and 6/6 (my checks were also cashed on 6/6) is when receipt notice is actually generated. Some one correct me if I am wrong.
My application was sent on June, 14th and delivered on June 15th (I have the FedEx tracking info and signature page confirming 6/15).
The case status online based on receipt number (obtained by calling them a few times until I got lucky) says:
"On July 11, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case."
Not sure if the online status is referring to the receipt date or the notice date when it says "On July 11, 2007, we received" when, in fact, they received it on June 15th!!
May be some others that have already received the physical copy of receipt notices can clarify the difference between the receipt date on the notice vs. the online status that says ""On July 11, 2007, we received..."
UPDATE: shreekhand's post above from moments ago seems to have answered this question.
What does it say on your I485 receipt notice?
For example.. my app was mailed on 5/31 and RD on receipt notice is 6/4 and Notice date is 6/6 and Online case status says received on 6/5. I assume 6/5 is when USCIS created an entry for my case and 6/6 (my checks were also cashed on 6/6) is when receipt notice is actually generated. Some one correct me if I am wrong.
My application was sent on June, 14th and delivered on June 15th (I have the FedEx tracking info and signature page confirming 6/15).
The case status online based on receipt number (obtained by calling them a few times until I got lucky) says:
"On July 11, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case."
Not sure if the online status is referring to the receipt date or the notice date when it says "On July 11, 2007, we received" when, in fact, they received it on June 15th!!
more...
Milind123
09-12 12:13 AM
This is specifically for those people who have never contributed but feel like contributing but for some reason hesitate to pull the trigger. For all such people who start a monthly contribution of $50 and promise (not to me or anyone else but themselves) to keep contributing for at least the next 6 months, I am going to make a one-time contribution of $50 for every such person. I have a modest upper limit, which I will disclose after the first 10 new contributors.
So people, Sept 18th is approaching fast and IV needs your contribution. Now is the time.
The only requirement is that the member has never contributed before and starts a $50 dollar recurring contribution. For every two new contributors I will make a $100 one-time contribution. Moderators may verify my contribution.
Note: The following was added at 9:06 EST on 09/12/2007
OR
For every $100 one time contribution by first time contributors I will match $25.00
So people, Sept 18th is approaching fast and IV needs your contribution. Now is the time.
The only requirement is that the member has never contributed before and starts a $50 dollar recurring contribution. For every two new contributors I will make a $100 one-time contribution. Moderators may verify my contribution.
Note: The following was added at 9:06 EST on 09/12/2007
OR
For every $100 one time contribution by first time contributors I will match $25.00
hot Leaving Flagstaff we
mw_immi
01-07 07:26 PM
I closed on dec 27. Underwriter asked me about green card. I just sent EAD copy front and back as well as AP and explained to him that EAD is like learners driving permit that is issued when your GC is under process. :D
Did you close with BOA?
Did you close with BOA?
more...
house In Flagstaff, US 180 is
pvhemanth
09-15 12:29 AM
For every $100 one time contribution by first time contributors I will match $25.00
First time contributor, here are my order details from PAYPAL.
Payment Details
Transaction ID: 2UJ24640TV032825U
Item Price: $100.00 USD
Total: $100.00 USD
Order Description: Contributions
First time contributor, here are my order details from PAYPAL.
Payment Details
Transaction ID: 2UJ24640TV032825U
Item Price: $100.00 USD
Total: $100.00 USD
Order Description: Contributions
tattoo of Flagstaff, Arizona.
mango_man
06-11 08:28 PM
Who is this guy selling mangoes ?
Admin, can we have any control on such posts.
Not selling my dear friend. Just asking everybody to enjoy the taste of delicious Indian mangoes.
Admin, can we have any control on such posts.
Not selling my dear friend. Just asking everybody to enjoy the taste of delicious Indian mangoes.
more...
pictures highway 100 flagstaff az,
GCInThisLife
07-18 03:38 PM
What does it say on your I485 receipt notice?
For example.. my app was mailed on 5/31 and RD on receipt notice is 6/4 and Notice date is 6/6 and Online case status says received on 6/5. I assume 6/5 is when USCIS created an entry for my case and 6/6 (my checks were also cashed on 6/6) is when receipt notice is actually generated. Some one correct me if I am wrong.
My application was sent on June, 14th and delivered on June 15th (I have the FedEx tracking info and signature page confirming 6/15).
The case status online based on receipt number (obtained by calling them a few times until I got lucky) says:
"On July 11, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case."
Not sure if the online status is referring to the receipt date or the notice date when it says "On July 11, 2007, we received" when, in fact, they received it on June 15th!!
.
For example.. my app was mailed on 5/31 and RD on receipt notice is 6/4 and Notice date is 6/6 and Online case status says received on 6/5. I assume 6/5 is when USCIS created an entry for my case and 6/6 (my checks were also cashed on 6/6) is when receipt notice is actually generated. Some one correct me if I am wrong.
My application was sent on June, 14th and delivered on June 15th (I have the FedEx tracking info and signature page confirming 6/15).
The case status online based on receipt number (obtained by calling them a few times until I got lucky) says:
"On July 11, 2007, we received this I485 APPLICATION TO REGISTER PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR TO ADJUST STATUS, and mailed you a notice describing how we will process your case."
Not sure if the online status is referring to the receipt date or the notice date when it says "On July 11, 2007, we received" when, in fact, they received it on June 15th!!
.
dresses The Arizona Department of
Libra
09-13 08:39 PM
Milind you rock......thanks for efforts.
more...
makeup Car Accident, U.S 66,
sj2273
08-04 04:40 PM
How about if we frame a well thought out letter..and present facts and start mass mailing - maybe once a month - every month. That we they will hear from us every month - in bulk.
How about if we dont use words like bonded etc and just repeatedly request the system to be repaired. Use of words like bonded etc can send a wrong signal.
We can also add our stories in there to give that emotional/human touch - eg. I can say that I have been in this country since 1999 and still waiting. If I look at my W-2s from 2001 (when I started working), I must have consistently paid about 10k in taxes to the Federal Govt and another 3k to the State every year. that makes my tax contribution to about 90k-100k in 8years..I think thats huge and I am still waiting, for being a tax paying and law abiding citizen just because the Immigration system is broken. I am a recruiter and I recruit US Citizens in large numbers for large govt projects, offering them really high salaries - while I am helping them "indirectly" realize their American Dream - my dreams are nowhere in the horizon. My wife works in the Child Welfare System and she helps broken families get back on their feet - while she is putting together their broken families - our family is still stranded in the system with no sign of moving forward.
Just a passing thought! I thought I should run this by you all. Thanks for reading.
How about if we dont use words like bonded etc and just repeatedly request the system to be repaired. Use of words like bonded etc can send a wrong signal.
We can also add our stories in there to give that emotional/human touch - eg. I can say that I have been in this country since 1999 and still waiting. If I look at my W-2s from 2001 (when I started working), I must have consistently paid about 10k in taxes to the Federal Govt and another 3k to the State every year. that makes my tax contribution to about 90k-100k in 8years..I think thats huge and I am still waiting, for being a tax paying and law abiding citizen just because the Immigration system is broken. I am a recruiter and I recruit US Citizens in large numbers for large govt projects, offering them really high salaries - while I am helping them "indirectly" realize their American Dream - my dreams are nowhere in the horizon. My wife works in the Child Welfare System and she helps broken families get back on their feet - while she is putting together their broken families - our family is still stranded in the system with no sign of moving forward.
Just a passing thought! I thought I should run this by you all. Thanks for reading.
girlfriend We needed to be in Flagstaff
vayumahesh
01-10 11:36 AM
Finally a happy ending to my green card journey. Received our cards on Saturday. Thank You IV and I wish all the best for everyone.
hairstyles an accident forced us to
Winner
06-10 09:32 AM
IF you've not called already, the visa bulletin is probably a very good reason for you to call :
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=19387
-V
Predicting and hoping that things will get better is not going to help. Lets take action. Please call the lawmakers if you have not done it already.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=19387
-V
Predicting and hoping that things will get better is not going to help. Lets take action. Please call the lawmakers if you have not done it already.
bala50
09-13 09:03 PM
Here is my shot. Thank you ALL
Order Details - Sep 13, 2007 9:23 PM EDT
100$ Google Order #247249006321709
No thank you Libra for encouraging people to contribute. My new contribution is in my signature.
Now please welcome bala, our special guest, who will take the last shot of this round.
Order Details - Sep 13, 2007 9:23 PM EDT
100$ Google Order #247249006321709
Order Details - Sep 13, 2007 9:23 PM EDT
100$ Google Order #247249006321709
No thank you Libra for encouraging people to contribute. My new contribution is in my signature.
Now please welcome bala, our special guest, who will take the last shot of this round.
Order Details - Sep 13, 2007 9:23 PM EDT
100$ Google Order #247249006321709
leo2606
08-12 12:59 PM
I don't think so, all centers which handle 485s will look at the application delivered date as the the RD.
I was asking this because some agencies consider the post marked date as the date the appllication was filed. But thanks for the response
I was asking this because some agencies consider the post marked date as the date the appllication was filed. But thanks for the response
No comments:
Post a Comment