paskal
07-09 06:44 PM
trying to understand your problem?
the goal (and you may have to chew on this a while) of this campaign is not to bend rules. it is to create media attention for our problems.
this may be a catalyst to anything- 485 filing, bridging amendments...who knows?
the point is we have to keep trying. sounds like you want to slink away into your "reality". well, since we are all living in fantasy, friend, please let us enjoy it. thanks for your encouragement btw.
the goal (and you may have to chew on this a while) of this campaign is not to bend rules. it is to create media attention for our problems.
this may be a catalyst to anything- 485 filing, bridging amendments...who knows?
the point is we have to keep trying. sounds like you want to slink away into your "reality". well, since we are all living in fantasy, friend, please let us enjoy it. thanks for your encouragement btw.
wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1%
illinois_alum
09-25 02:12 PM
The only thing I can tell is most of us are trying to search "light" from this "black and dark cloud". USCIS does not seem to be agree with what you are saying. Please have this trend chart and the worksheet in this thread together and then you will realize what we all are saying.:)
Trend chart doesnt give you shit...its just an overall count
I am referring to the PDF report - which clearly mentions that the numbers are for pending Employment based 485 applications. And yet people refer to this report and ask stupid questions or over-analyze it...
Trend chart doesnt give you shit...its just an overall count
I am referring to the PDF report - which clearly mentions that the numbers are for pending Employment based 485 applications. And yet people refer to this report and ask stupid questions or over-analyze it...
vinabath
07-10 09:57 AM
Everyone makes a mistake. That does not mean they would not have any after effects. They will.
Congress have a bigger issue on their plate right now. That is Iraq. I am pretty sure Congress would take up this issue in near future. Make your voice heard to Congress. Then pray to God/Almighty.
We have congress "helping us out" by doing WHAT exactly?? So far we have exactly ONE congresswoman who made a statement. After that no one has even BOTHERED to do anything.
It may be bad publicity for the USCIS, but guess what? NO ONE GIVES A S**T. The USCIS is an INDEPENDANT body and it made a MISTAKE. Everyone makes mistakes, remember?
Congress have a bigger issue on their plate right now. That is Iraq. I am pretty sure Congress would take up this issue in near future. Make your voice heard to Congress. Then pray to God/Almighty.
We have congress "helping us out" by doing WHAT exactly?? So far we have exactly ONE congresswoman who made a statement. After that no one has even BOTHERED to do anything.
It may be bad publicity for the USCIS, but guess what? NO ONE GIVES A S**T. The USCIS is an INDEPENDANT body and it made a MISTAKE. Everyone makes mistakes, remember?
2011 %IMG_DESC_2%
kumar1
11-20 02:42 PM
Little_Willy,
Yes, it is that simple. If you just walk away from your home, bank can only touch your home and credit history. They can not go after your automobile\gold\savings\other property....anything. You are not missing anything. That is why we are seeing so many people around us just walking away from their homes. Thank God I rent but if my property's value go down 200 k in 2 years, heck I would walk away with a smile on my face. No strings attached.
Walking away would have been difficuly had you put 20% down, i.e. involving your hard earned money in the deal. In that case you would have waited to see the market and hoped that it would revive. If put 0% down and bank has given you 100% loan, then it is the bank who has taken all the risk. You have practially no risk in that deal. Just like cloth....return it to the bank. Hey....you don't have to even clean it up...like you do in the case of apartment move. ;-)
0% down, ARM, interest only.....when all these goodies were floating around, it was hard to resist.
Correct me if I am wrong. If a person has a good paying job and if he decides to foreclose, isn't he responsible for the loss incurred by the bank. It is a different case if you have no income, but just because you lost money because of a wrong decision, how could you walk away free with just a dent in your credit history. Maybe I am missing something here.
BTW, I am not judging OP in any way, just curious with how foreclosures work as they make headlines everyday now.
Yes, it is that simple. If you just walk away from your home, bank can only touch your home and credit history. They can not go after your automobile\gold\savings\other property....anything. You are not missing anything. That is why we are seeing so many people around us just walking away from their homes. Thank God I rent but if my property's value go down 200 k in 2 years, heck I would walk away with a smile on my face. No strings attached.
Walking away would have been difficuly had you put 20% down, i.e. involving your hard earned money in the deal. In that case you would have waited to see the market and hoped that it would revive. If put 0% down and bank has given you 100% loan, then it is the bank who has taken all the risk. You have practially no risk in that deal. Just like cloth....return it to the bank. Hey....you don't have to even clean it up...like you do in the case of apartment move. ;-)
0% down, ARM, interest only.....when all these goodies were floating around, it was hard to resist.
Correct me if I am wrong. If a person has a good paying job and if he decides to foreclose, isn't he responsible for the loss incurred by the bank. It is a different case if you have no income, but just because you lost money because of a wrong decision, how could you walk away free with just a dent in your credit history. Maybe I am missing something here.
BTW, I am not judging OP in any way, just curious with how foreclosures work as they make headlines everyday now.
more...
vvicky72
02-26 09:53 PM
I appeared for an interview on Feb 11 (H1b renewal and H4b renewal case).
Was asked to wait a week for an email and was given the yellow form.
Its been 16 days and no reply yet.
Does anyone know how long the wait will be?
How can I follow this up with the Mumbai consulate?
Is there a way I can cancel my application and go back on AP?
Was asked to wait a week for an email and was given the yellow form.
Its been 16 days and no reply yet.
Does anyone know how long the wait will be?
How can I follow this up with the Mumbai consulate?
Is there a way I can cancel my application and go back on AP?
lazycis
10-18 01:29 PM
Would appreciate if anyone can reply to my question....
Credit report check is not part of the name check.
Credit report check is not part of the name check.
more...
justin150377
07-09 06:47 PM
DONT DO THAT.
Let the flowers go to USCIS and let them do whatever they want with the flowers. Kindly dont jinx this campaign by cancelling your orders and asking for refunds.
It's too late flowers have shipped. They will have to be delivered somewhere, it'll just force the fedex/dhl not to accept a forward from USCIS.
Let the flowers go to USCIS and let them do whatever they want with the flowers. Kindly dont jinx this campaign by cancelling your orders and asking for refunds.
It's too late flowers have shipped. They will have to be delivered somewhere, it'll just force the fedex/dhl not to accept a forward from USCIS.
2010 %IMG_DESC_3%
pappu
01-07 09:08 PM
The campaign has begun. Lets all unite and make it successful. There is very slim chance of any legislative relief until after the Presidential elections. This is our best shot at this time.
Letter Template #7
<<Date>>
The Honorable George W. Bush
President of the United States
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President:
I write today to urge you to fix America's broken legal employment-based immigration system. Highly skilled professionals in various high-technology fields currently facing a long wait of 6 to 12 years, find themselves trapped in a legal maze, and are unable to advance in their careers. Changing jobs, even with the same employer, means the process must be started over again.
Mr. President, you can make changes that would impart fairness and dignity to this arduously long process and improve the quality of life of these half a million hard-working professionals. Mr. President, I appeal to you to implement administrative reforms to:
Recapture administratively the unused visas for permanent residency to fulfill the congressional mandate of 140,000 green cards per year.
Revise the administrative definition of "same or similar" to allow slight additional job flexibility for legal immigrants awaiting adjudication of adjustment of status (I-485) petitions.
Allow filing of Adjustment of Status (Form I-485) when a visa number is not available.
Implement the existing interim rule to allow issuance of multi-year Employment Authorization Documents (EAD) and Advance Parole.
Allow visa revalidation in the United States.
Reinstate premium processing of Immigrant Petitions.The above fixes are urgently needed to fulfill your stated goal of attracting and retaining highly-skilled legal immigrants from around the world, eliminating bureaucratic inefficiency, and improving the lives of future Americans already living and working legally in the United States.
I thank you for your attention to this matter.
Respectfully,
Name:
Address:
Letter Template #7
<<Date>>
The Honorable George W. Bush
President of the United States
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue NW
Washington, DC 20500
Dear Mr. President:
I write today to urge you to fix America's broken legal employment-based immigration system. Highly skilled professionals in various high-technology fields currently facing a long wait of 6 to 12 years, find themselves trapped in a legal maze, and are unable to advance in their careers. Changing jobs, even with the same employer, means the process must be started over again.
Mr. President, you can make changes that would impart fairness and dignity to this arduously long process and improve the quality of life of these half a million hard-working professionals. Mr. President, I appeal to you to implement administrative reforms to:
Recapture administratively the unused visas for permanent residency to fulfill the congressional mandate of 140,000 green cards per year.
Revise the administrative definition of "same or similar" to allow slight additional job flexibility for legal immigrants awaiting adjudication of adjustment of status (I-485) petitions.
Allow filing of Adjustment of Status (Form I-485) when a visa number is not available.
Implement the existing interim rule to allow issuance of multi-year Employment Authorization Documents (EAD) and Advance Parole.
Allow visa revalidation in the United States.
Reinstate premium processing of Immigrant Petitions.The above fixes are urgently needed to fulfill your stated goal of attracting and retaining highly-skilled legal immigrants from around the world, eliminating bureaucratic inefficiency, and improving the lives of future Americans already living and working legally in the United States.
I thank you for your attention to this matter.
Respectfully,
Name:
Address:
more...
addsf345
01-08 06:40 PM
I found this forum after my I 485 denied as I applied for AOS under AC21 at texas center on 12/31/2008. The first thing I did after joining IV is sent the four letters.
I know its a stressful time. Please follow this thread carefully, read it completely and contact ombudsman with correct form. It would be easier for all of us if CIS can see number of genuine cases which are denied wrongfully. This way, CIS may would act faster to again put your case on file and in future will not do this again.
I know its a stressful time. Please follow this thread carefully, read it completely and contact ombudsman with correct form. It would be easier for all of us if CIS can see number of genuine cases which are denied wrongfully. This way, CIS may would act faster to again put your case on file and in future will not do this again.
hair %IMG_DESC_4%
pani_6
08-21 10:17 PM
Dear..you seem to have gotten your GC..why the heck to you care..besides I applied ones in 00 and due to screw up attorney..had to apply again..also look in track it and immigration.com..there are people stuck from 99..please dont waste people's time by asking silly questions...
Thanks for the clarification.
If your PD is 2003, then you are waiting for 5 years, not for decade. Just FYI, saying decade (instead of 5 years) is material misrepresentation.
Good Luck.
Thanks for the clarification.
If your PD is 2003, then you are waiting for 5 years, not for decade. Just FYI, saying decade (instead of 5 years) is material misrepresentation.
Good Luck.
more...
abqguy
09-09 04:13 PM
Called the below Reps. I learnt that Rep. Anthony D Weiner and Rep. Hank Johnson are supporting this bill.
Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) 202- 225-2906
Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) 202-225-4695
Rick Boucher (D-Va.) 202-225-3861
Chris Cannon (R-Utah)202- 225-7751
Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) 202-225-2216
Howard Coble (R-N.C.) 202-225-3065
Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.)202- 225-3265
John Conyers (D-Mich.), Chairman 202-225-5126
William D. Delahunt (D-Mass.)202- 225-3111
Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) 202-225-4755
Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) 202-225-2706
J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.)202- 225-6365
Trent Franks (R-Ariz.)202- 225-4576
Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.)202- 225-5811
Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) 202-225-3035
Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)202- 225-5431
Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.)202- 225-8203
Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)202- 225-3906
Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas)202- 225-3816
Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) 202-225-1605
Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) 202-225-2676
Ric Keller (R-Fla.)202- 225-2176
Steve King (R-Iowa)202- 225-4426
Dan Lungren (R-Calif.)202- 225-5716
Mike Pence (R-Ind.) 202-225-3021
Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.)202- 225-4176
Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) 202-225-4176
Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) 202-225-5911
Lamar S. Smith (R-Texas), Ranking Member 202- 225-4236
Betty Sutton (D-Ohio) 202-225-3401
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) 202-225-7931
Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) 202-225-2201
Anthony D. Weiner (D-N.Y.) 202-225-6616
Robert Wexler (D-Fla.) 202-225-3001
Co-sponsors : (did not call)
Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.)202- 225-3072
Artur Davis (D-Ala.) 202-225-2665
Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) 202-225-5635
Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) 202-225-6676
Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) 202-225-5101
Melvin L. Watt (D-N.C.)202- 225-1510
Tammy Baldwin (D-Wis.) 202- 225-2906
Howard L. Berman (D-Calif.) 202-225-4695
Rick Boucher (D-Va.) 202-225-3861
Chris Cannon (R-Utah)202- 225-7751
Steve Chabot (R-Ohio) 202-225-2216
Howard Coble (R-N.C.) 202-225-3065
Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.)202- 225-3265
John Conyers (D-Mich.), Chairman 202-225-5126
William D. Delahunt (D-Mass.)202- 225-3111
Keith Ellison (D-Minn.) 202-225-4755
Tom Feeney (R-Fla.) 202-225-2706
J. Randy Forbes (R-Va.)202- 225-6365
Trent Franks (R-Ariz.)202- 225-4576
Elton Gallegly (R-Calif.)202- 225-5811
Louie Gohmert (R-Texas) 202-225-3035
Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.)202- 225-5431
Luis Gutierrez (D-Ill.)202- 225-8203
Darrell Issa (R-Calif.)202- 225-3906
Sheila Jackson-Lee (D-Texas)202- 225-3816
Hank Johnson (D-Ga.) 202-225-1605
Jim Jordan (R-Ohio) 202-225-2676
Ric Keller (R-Fla.)202- 225-2176
Steve King (R-Iowa)202- 225-4426
Dan Lungren (R-Calif.)202- 225-5716
Mike Pence (R-Ind.) 202-225-3021
Adam B. Schiff (D-Calif.)202- 225-4176
Robert C. Scott (D-Va.) 202-225-4176
Brad Sherman (D-Calif.) 202-225-5911
Lamar S. Smith (R-Texas), Ranking Member 202- 225-4236
Betty Sutton (D-Ohio) 202-225-3401
Debbie Wasserman Schultz (D-Fla.) 202-225-7931
Maxine Waters (D-Calif.) 202-225-2201
Anthony D. Weiner (D-N.Y.) 202-225-6616
Robert Wexler (D-Fla.) 202-225-3001
Co-sponsors : (did not call)
Zoe Lofgren (D-Calif.)202- 225-3072
Artur Davis (D-Ala.) 202-225-2665
Jerrold Nadler (D-N.Y.) 202-225-5635
Linda Sanchez (D-Calif.) 202-225-6676
Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wis.) 202-225-5101
Melvin L. Watt (D-N.C.)202- 225-1510
hot %IMG_DESC_5%
conchshell
01-05 10:01 AM
Please post these ideas on change.gov from IV and see if we can get a response from President Elect's team.
more...
house %IMG_DESC_17%
glus
05-24 01:06 PM
I have a question regarding the I-693 Medical exam. it was mentioned that you will need to take a vaccine for MMR, Varicella, Tetanus and Hapatitis B. it was also mentioned that they will do a tb test and a blood test for HIV and syphilis. are these all the vaccinations and blood tests required or are there aother blood test required in addition to these??
please advise. Thanks
All you said is correct, except for you don't need Hepatitis B if you are over 16. No, there are no more tests involved, unless your tb is positive. If you tb is positive you need to do chestX-ray. I know that because I was just doing the tests for myself. Varicella must be taken twice 30 days apart. Same applies to MMR.
I hope this helps. If you go to a good doctor, he will give you a complete list of things that you need to do before coming on the medical exam.
G
please advise. Thanks
All you said is correct, except for you don't need Hepatitis B if you are over 16. No, there are no more tests involved, unless your tb is positive. If you tb is positive you need to do chestX-ray. I know that because I was just doing the tests for myself. Varicella must be taken twice 30 days apart. Same applies to MMR.
I hope this helps. If you go to a good doctor, he will give you a complete list of things that you need to do before coming on the medical exam.
G
tattoo %IMG_DESC_6%
veni001
04-05 09:57 AM
I strongly doubt your argument. For the past six months , Demand data before Jan1st,2006 stayed zero for EB2 I/C. If USCIS thinks one of those pre 2006 cases are approvable then we would see this reflect in DOS demand data.
At the end of the day, whatever data that is listed in Demand data is all that matters. Since it is the only determining factor for setting VB dates and nothing else
"EB2 I demand from the inventory btwn May - Dec 06 = 12K
But Demand data says EB2-I demand is 13,200
Diff : 13,200 - 12K = 1200 ( This number has to be porting)"
Krish,
Same applies to your porting calculations! DOS will go by the inventory data provided by USCIS and have no clue on who is getting approved, regular or ported.
If you would like we can interpret it differently....
The demand data published by DOS for October 2010 show 13,125 prior to 2007 and for April 2011 it is 13,200 which means increase of 75 only + approved cases( since PD did not move)
Assuming all cases approved from Oct-2010 till March 2011 are porting, means 233*6=1,398.
In this case total porting is only 1,398+75 = 1,473
In reality we don't really know how many of the approved cases(1,398) are ported.
Just for year 2005 October 2010 inventory show 756 cases pending and January 2011 inventory show only 573! which means 183 cases are either approved or denied in addition to ported cases for the same period.
If you look at EB3 Inventory for FY 2005 went up from 8,262 to 8,529 during the same period:confused:
At the end of the day, whatever data that is listed in Demand data is all that matters. Since it is the only determining factor for setting VB dates and nothing else
"EB2 I demand from the inventory btwn May - Dec 06 = 12K
But Demand data says EB2-I demand is 13,200
Diff : 13,200 - 12K = 1200 ( This number has to be porting)"
Krish,
Same applies to your porting calculations! DOS will go by the inventory data provided by USCIS and have no clue on who is getting approved, regular or ported.
If you would like we can interpret it differently....
The demand data published by DOS for October 2010 show 13,125 prior to 2007 and for April 2011 it is 13,200 which means increase of 75 only + approved cases( since PD did not move)
Assuming all cases approved from Oct-2010 till March 2011 are porting, means 233*6=1,398.
In this case total porting is only 1,398+75 = 1,473
In reality we don't really know how many of the approved cases(1,398) are ported.
Just for year 2005 October 2010 inventory show 756 cases pending and January 2011 inventory show only 573! which means 183 cases are either approved or denied in addition to ported cases for the same period.
If you look at EB3 Inventory for FY 2005 went up from 8,262 to 8,529 during the same period:confused:
more...
pictures %IMG_DESC_7%
waitnwatch
08-21 01:06 PM
I think it would be fair to split the leftover numbers the same way they split whole year quota.
50% of leftover should be given to EB2 (based on PD) and 50% of leftover should be given to EB3. Does it sound fair?
I'm wondering why you ask this question. It's not your or my perception of "fair" that will drive the DOS or USCIS but the letter of law. The law is not easy to change but the interpretation of the law which shows up in the US Code (USC) can be changed. Therefore the DOS changed their interpretation to match the INA better and my or your perception of "fair" will not change anything. On the other hand it will only lead to heartbreak and destructive discussions that lead nowhere.
50% of leftover should be given to EB2 (based on PD) and 50% of leftover should be given to EB3. Does it sound fair?
I'm wondering why you ask this question. It's not your or my perception of "fair" that will drive the DOS or USCIS but the letter of law. The law is not easy to change but the interpretation of the law which shows up in the US Code (USC) can be changed. Therefore the DOS changed their interpretation to match the INA better and my or your perception of "fair" will not change anything. On the other hand it will only lead to heartbreak and destructive discussions that lead nowhere.
dresses %IMG_DESC_12%
BharatPremi
03-25 04:41 PM
The employer will come up with many excuses to not interview a candidate or hire. If the law doesn't allow you to discriminate when hiring based on national origin or EAD or whatever, rejecting candidates even for an interview doesn't make sense.
Interview is part of the hiring and recruiting processes. Would you say employers putting a job ad saying we will only interview someone from a particular nationality is allowed?
However, the more important point is we are fighting to get multi-year EAD in IV among other things. The law doesn't allow discrimination based on EAD for hiring. Let the govt lawyers and employers figure it out if not even interviewing candidates because of EAD comes under the purview of hiring or not and if it is legal or not.
yes, that is our line of logic and understanding. But seeing the number of experiences what we are having in real world, this does not seem to be applying. You are rightaway asked about your work status and they insist till you give them "specific" word - either "GC" or "Citizenship" or "EAD"... If this would have been the real way ( I and all of us wishes that) the these recruiting guys may not dare to insist till you spit the speific word out and that is before interviewing. In my experience, I always had verbal conversation. I have never been sent an email or letter by any company yet regarding their refusal not to even interview me based on EAD. Verbally 5 companies have starightaway told me "they are not considering me as I do not have green card yet - EAD is not enough". My thinking is that they do this because somehow some law may be covering them, we do not know that but they know that, perhaps..:confused:
Interview is part of the hiring and recruiting processes. Would you say employers putting a job ad saying we will only interview someone from a particular nationality is allowed?
However, the more important point is we are fighting to get multi-year EAD in IV among other things. The law doesn't allow discrimination based on EAD for hiring. Let the govt lawyers and employers figure it out if not even interviewing candidates because of EAD comes under the purview of hiring or not and if it is legal or not.
yes, that is our line of logic and understanding. But seeing the number of experiences what we are having in real world, this does not seem to be applying. You are rightaway asked about your work status and they insist till you give them "specific" word - either "GC" or "Citizenship" or "EAD"... If this would have been the real way ( I and all of us wishes that) the these recruiting guys may not dare to insist till you spit the speific word out and that is before interviewing. In my experience, I always had verbal conversation. I have never been sent an email or letter by any company yet regarding their refusal not to even interview me based on EAD. Verbally 5 companies have starightaway told me "they are not considering me as I do not have green card yet - EAD is not enough". My thinking is that they do this because somehow some law may be covering them, we do not know that but they know that, perhaps..:confused:
more...
makeup %IMG_DESC_9%
illusions
07-10 09:56 PM
I really don't care that the reporter made a mistake. The fact of the matter is we got the word out, and Kudos to all the nationalities / creed/ background etc. The only way i can see he got it mixed up is cos of, Ghadhiji, an honest mistake by the reporter.
By the way I'm from Sri Lanka, and just as all of you, i have been waiting for a while now.... the flowers campaign is great and i think i will go ahead and make a second order and send it over.
Keep up the good work guys
By the way I'm from Sri Lanka, and just as all of you, i have been waiting for a while now.... the flowers campaign is great and i think i will go ahead and make a second order and send it over.
Keep up the good work guys
girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14%
485Mbe4001
09-26 06:17 PM
Good discussion. I am not a fox fan, but i read NYT and Drudgereport, listen to Rachel Maddaw as well as Handel. In fact i read any political and economics related blog i can lay my hands on. I understand your points.
My point is that people say he will do so many things, the problem is that the congress is not changing. The congress has to approve something so that he can sign it. Secondly no matter what you say companies will do whatever is right for the bottomline and share price. if he starts taxing companies they relocate, he has proposed increasing the social security taxes across all categories. Says he will not increase taxes for middle class americans but gives little indication of how he will finance the trillion dollar spending program. If his universal health program passes then you will see more deducted out of your paycheck. How will he create tons of jobs, how will he subsidize education. The fact of the matter is that he will be under exterme pressure if he is elected to office with such high expectations. He will be screwed if he increases taxes and screwed if he doesnt fund the programs he is promising all over the place.
As for long term, the country has to increase interest rates to support the current account deficit. IF you increase interest rates the economy will further go in the tank. The country has to increase taxes to fund SS or Medicare. If not they need to overhaul the SS and MC system and any pandering politican will never be able to make that change.
The fact of the matter is that both are career politicians and will do anyting to win. i just want to present an opposing view when one is painted as the saviour and the other a @$#@ in a total crapfest where no one is pure.
My point is that people say he will do so many things, the problem is that the congress is not changing. The congress has to approve something so that he can sign it. Secondly no matter what you say companies will do whatever is right for the bottomline and share price. if he starts taxing companies they relocate, he has proposed increasing the social security taxes across all categories. Says he will not increase taxes for middle class americans but gives little indication of how he will finance the trillion dollar spending program. If his universal health program passes then you will see more deducted out of your paycheck. How will he create tons of jobs, how will he subsidize education. The fact of the matter is that he will be under exterme pressure if he is elected to office with such high expectations. He will be screwed if he increases taxes and screwed if he doesnt fund the programs he is promising all over the place.
As for long term, the country has to increase interest rates to support the current account deficit. IF you increase interest rates the economy will further go in the tank. The country has to increase taxes to fund SS or Medicare. If not they need to overhaul the SS and MC system and any pandering politican will never be able to make that change.
The fact of the matter is that both are career politicians and will do anyting to win. i just want to present an opposing view when one is painted as the saviour and the other a @$#@ in a total crapfest where no one is pure.
hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11%
walking_dude
10-29 11:18 AM
Yes, we must all understand that AC21 is not a law.
The correct way of stating it is AC21 Act of 2000, signed by Pres. Clinton is law of the land. But, that law doesn't come into effect until and unless the concerned Government department (in this case USCIS) publishes the regulations in the Federal Register. This hasn't happened so far with AC21 law, though we are approaching a decade of it's passage.
An unfortunate example I can give to illustrate the point is the U & T visas created by US Congress some years back to help victims of sexual-trafficking and domestic violence to remain in the country and adjust status to LPRs. Unfortunately for these hapless victims, they couldn't get the benefit of these visas as USCIS did not make the regulations for years. ( I'm not sure of the status now).
There is a saying that 'what the legislature gave in the law, the department took away in regulations'. Department can deny the benefits in two ways. Delaying/not framing the regulations or framing them in such a way as to take away the benefits of the law.
The correct way of stating it is AC21 Act of 2000, signed by Pres. Clinton is law of the land. But, that law doesn't come into effect until and unless the concerned Government department (in this case USCIS) publishes the regulations in the Federal Register. This hasn't happened so far with AC21 law, though we are approaching a decade of it's passage.
An unfortunate example I can give to illustrate the point is the U & T visas created by US Congress some years back to help victims of sexual-trafficking and domestic violence to remain in the country and adjust status to LPRs. Unfortunately for these hapless victims, they couldn't get the benefit of these visas as USCIS did not make the regulations for years. ( I'm not sure of the status now).
There is a saying that 'what the legislature gave in the law, the department took away in regulations'. Department can deny the benefits in two ways. Delaying/not framing the regulations or framing them in such a way as to take away the benefits of the law.
xyz2009
08-19 10:49 PM
Its a no brainer (enter on AP) and you definitely have to talk to attorney
Krithi: Can you please let me know how to go to Adv Parole side. Although we have had them but have never used them before. So I need to guide my wife towards this AP area.
So in order to show or use AP my wife has to go and line up in the visa queue OR she has to go to Permanent Resident/Citizens side and from there they will route to this AP check/processing area. Please advise.
Sorry with my fundamental questions but I have never used my APs till now.
Krithi kindly reply or anybody else who can help with my questions/clarification mentioned above kindly help me.
Thanks a lot
Best Regards,
Krithi: Can you please let me know how to go to Adv Parole side. Although we have had them but have never used them before. So I need to guide my wife towards this AP area.
So in order to show or use AP my wife has to go and line up in the visa queue OR she has to go to Permanent Resident/Citizens side and from there they will route to this AP check/processing area. Please advise.
Sorry with my fundamental questions but I have never used my APs till now.
Krithi kindly reply or anybody else who can help with my questions/clarification mentioned above kindly help me.
Thanks a lot
Best Regards,
bkn96
11-14 08:00 PM
My I140 is approved and I am a July07 filer of 485. In July08 I moved to self-employment after consulting a good lawyer. Now my previous employer withdrawn I 140 and today I got 485 denial notice. I didnot filed AC21 as lawyer told it is optional.. :mad:
No comments:
Post a Comment