paskal
03-16 02:01 PM
dont "warn" me..........you think i give a damn about your "warning"??
the right to speak is MINE. all YOU can do from your high horse is ban me from the forum.
i really dont care, i still think interfilers and substituters should get what they derserve. every single bit of it. may they really, truly, go to hell, and stay there indefinitely.
and NO, dont preach to me about trying to "fix" the system. the agenda here is mostly EB3, and mostly Indian, at best. the multitudes of diploma holders get pissed when i call them out for what they are...........why are THEY so sensitive and ashamed???
i have a RIGHT to be in the proper EB queue, which i EARNED, and did not employ cheap desi-employer tricks and other games to get into........if that does not answer your doubts my friend, then as i said earlier, ban me..........i dont really care either way.
i dont advertise what i have done or can do for IV. somehow, that is a little demeaning. sort of like going to a temple and offering some money and then coming out and proclaiming to one and all how generous a give you are....
so i will try one last time.
your issues are whatever they are, i did not ask you to change your mind on them, neither did i choose to debate you on them. we all acknowledge that this is a bad system, and we all we can do is try fix it. of course like you we could simply vent, curse and blame everyone as well. not that will change a thing.
now the issue with your posts is your language and your tenor. kindly fix that.
yes i can ban you, i choose not to at this time. and yes take it as another warning. if you are contributing to iv action that is wonderful. language like this will however not be tolerated on this forum. please read the posting guidelines if you have doubts. i have posted the link and a snippet for your reference below. now chill out a bit and don't have a "coronary". we are all frustrated. what you are doing is not helping.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/announcement.php?f=90
"Posts that denigrate members, potential members or even anti-immigrant groups not welcome - such posts are against Immigration Voice principles. Immigration Voice reserves the right to take action against such posts and posters. You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this Forum to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, disrespectful, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise in violation of any law."
the right to speak is MINE. all YOU can do from your high horse is ban me from the forum.
i really dont care, i still think interfilers and substituters should get what they derserve. every single bit of it. may they really, truly, go to hell, and stay there indefinitely.
and NO, dont preach to me about trying to "fix" the system. the agenda here is mostly EB3, and mostly Indian, at best. the multitudes of diploma holders get pissed when i call them out for what they are...........why are THEY so sensitive and ashamed???
i have a RIGHT to be in the proper EB queue, which i EARNED, and did not employ cheap desi-employer tricks and other games to get into........if that does not answer your doubts my friend, then as i said earlier, ban me..........i dont really care either way.
i dont advertise what i have done or can do for IV. somehow, that is a little demeaning. sort of like going to a temple and offering some money and then coming out and proclaiming to one and all how generous a give you are....
so i will try one last time.
your issues are whatever they are, i did not ask you to change your mind on them, neither did i choose to debate you on them. we all acknowledge that this is a bad system, and we all we can do is try fix it. of course like you we could simply vent, curse and blame everyone as well. not that will change a thing.
now the issue with your posts is your language and your tenor. kindly fix that.
yes i can ban you, i choose not to at this time. and yes take it as another warning. if you are contributing to iv action that is wonderful. language like this will however not be tolerated on this forum. please read the posting guidelines if you have doubts. i have posted the link and a snippet for your reference below. now chill out a bit and don't have a "coronary". we are all frustrated. what you are doing is not helping.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/announcement.php?f=90
"Posts that denigrate members, potential members or even anti-immigrant groups not welcome - such posts are against Immigration Voice principles. Immigration Voice reserves the right to take action against such posts and posters. You agree, through your use of this service, that you will not use this Forum to post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, disrespectful, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise in violation of any law."
wallpaper Adam amp; Eve#39;s Kayden Kross LITE
chmur
09-11 12:41 AM
The problem with your analysis is not every one in the backlog has equal access to excess of 35-40K visas available each year. Most of the excess comes from EB4,5,1 and 2ROW and all goes to EB2 I/C. EB3 ROW gets ~30K every year (42K- 4*2.8K).
Even if we are to assume that post 2007 the demand for EB2 I/C and EB3 is low then also it is ~ 15K for EB2 I/C and ~ 10K for EB3 ROW. But the way INA law is framed EB3 I (most backlogged with ~ 60K) will only get 2800 visa till either of EB2 I/C or EB3 row becomes current. And by current I mean real current, not July 2007. Using these numbers it will still take 4-5 for both EB2 I/C and EB3 Row to become current.
This is assuming low demand in all EB categories continue.
It will be only after 2014-15 that EB3I will get ~ 50K SOFAD(35K SOFAD which EB2 I/C was getting plus about 15K from EB3 ROW category). So in 2015 EB3 I will see a jump of ~ 4 yrs (2003-2007). So EB3I folks with PD after 2007 will have a relative wait time of ~ 8 yrs but folks from 2003-4 are looking at a 12-13 year wait unless reform like Recapture/STEM Degree holders & Dependents excluded from cap is passed.
I understand how overflow gets distributed and Eb3-I is last in line. However , if net reduction is 35-40K each year starting 2010(i.e oct 2009 to oct 2010) and the backlog is 200 K at the beginning of 2010 (Inventory report) , we should work through all the backlog in 5 (40 *5) years.
That means in 2-3 years overflow should get to EB3 I because rest of the category will be current by then .
I agree people who applied in 2003 -2004 are looking at 10 year wait as against someone applying for EB3-I - today . Infact someone applying today will get GC in 5 years from now.
Even if we are to assume that post 2007 the demand for EB2 I/C and EB3 is low then also it is ~ 15K for EB2 I/C and ~ 10K for EB3 ROW. But the way INA law is framed EB3 I (most backlogged with ~ 60K) will only get 2800 visa till either of EB2 I/C or EB3 row becomes current. And by current I mean real current, not July 2007. Using these numbers it will still take 4-5 for both EB2 I/C and EB3 Row to become current.
This is assuming low demand in all EB categories continue.
It will be only after 2014-15 that EB3I will get ~ 50K SOFAD(35K SOFAD which EB2 I/C was getting plus about 15K from EB3 ROW category). So in 2015 EB3 I will see a jump of ~ 4 yrs (2003-2007). So EB3I folks with PD after 2007 will have a relative wait time of ~ 8 yrs but folks from 2003-4 are looking at a 12-13 year wait unless reform like Recapture/STEM Degree holders & Dependents excluded from cap is passed.
I understand how overflow gets distributed and Eb3-I is last in line. However , if net reduction is 35-40K each year starting 2010(i.e oct 2009 to oct 2010) and the backlog is 200 K at the beginning of 2010 (Inventory report) , we should work through all the backlog in 5 (40 *5) years.
That means in 2-3 years overflow should get to EB3 I because rest of the category will be current by then .
I agree people who applied in 2003 -2004 are looking at 10 year wait as against someone applying for EB3-I - today . Infact someone applying today will get GC in 5 years from now.
HV000
02-14 12:51 PM
That is not true.. Let me explain.. I want to give you an example to illustrate what the issue is: Think of a grocery check out line and let us assume for a moment that there are seperate counters for Indians, Chinese, Phill, MEX, ROW. So there are 5 counters. What is happening right now is that the queque for Indians and chinese and other retrogressed countries is long and snakes thru the aisles and they have to wait hours before they can check out, whereas ROW applicants can check out in minutes.
So it is not like Indians, or other retrogressed countries will consume all EB visas, If there were no country quotas. it is just that the waiting time to get one will be equal for everyone, irrespective of country of birth. That is how it should be, since it is an employment based visa..
The logic of employment based visas is that it was created to give visas (GC) to the applicants that were most needed by the US Employers at any given time. If the most qualified applicants that US employers prefer happen to be phillipinoes or chinese or Indians, that would mean there are more of those nationals.
Using your analogy, the more Indians, Chinese, Mexicans, Filipinos stand in the checkout, the lesser the chance for ROW people to get through the checkout. So, how can you say the waiting time will be EQUAL for everyone?
So it is not like Indians, or other retrogressed countries will consume all EB visas, If there were no country quotas. it is just that the waiting time to get one will be equal for everyone, irrespective of country of birth. That is how it should be, since it is an employment based visa..
The logic of employment based visas is that it was created to give visas (GC) to the applicants that were most needed by the US Employers at any given time. If the most qualified applicants that US employers prefer happen to be phillipinoes or chinese or Indians, that would mean there are more of those nationals.
Using your analogy, the more Indians, Chinese, Mexicans, Filipinos stand in the checkout, the lesser the chance for ROW people to get through the checkout. So, how can you say the waiting time will be EQUAL for everyone?
2011 Kayden Kross
trueguy
04-06 05:55 PM
Do you know the POE?
more...
alex99
10-25 11:19 AM
Please participate in EB3 Poll
gc28262
03-10 10:29 PM
Welcome to Capitalism!
...and yes it is the equivalent of bribes taken by our political people in India. As with most things Americans do it diplomatically by calling it "party funds" :-)
Paying commission in India is considered corruption.
In US it is legal.
Reliance, Bajaj or other major companies influencing politicians in India is considered corruption.
In US it is called lobbying.
Yes. welcome to America !
...and yes it is the equivalent of bribes taken by our political people in India. As with most things Americans do it diplomatically by calling it "party funds" :-)
Paying commission in India is considered corruption.
In US it is legal.
Reliance, Bajaj or other major companies influencing politicians in India is considered corruption.
In US it is called lobbying.
Yes. welcome to America !
more...
ajay
01-16 08:56 PM
See buddy, there are some people who will cry whatever scenario they are in, and some people who will laugh and be happy in whatever scenario they are in. The key to optimism and happy life is to find someone who has it worse, and realize how fortunate you are. At least you are not having to live in the slums of India. At least you are not having your daughter breathe the polluted air of an Indian metro. At least you have a healthy family and no medical emergencies to worry about. Enjoy what you have got, not crib about what you've got.
This is what I always thank my elders and God for what I have been given in my day to day life.
This is what I always thank my elders and God for what I have been given in my day to day life.
2010 Kayden kross images
Hassan11
07-02 11:15 AM
This is a sad sad news
UPDATE ON JULY VISA AVAILABILITY
The sudden backlog reduction efforts by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices during the past month have resulted in the use of almost 60,000 Employment numbers. As a result of this unexpected action it has been necessary to make immediate adjustments to several previously announced cut-off dates. All Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices have been notified of the following:
Effective Monday July 2, 2007 there will be no further authorizations inresponse to requests for Employment-based preference cases. All numbers available to these categories under the FY-2007 annual numerical limitation
have been made available. Employment preference numbers will once again be available to these chargeability areas beginning October 1, 2007, under the FY-2008 annual numerical limitation.
Department of State Publication 9514
CA/VO: July 2, 2007
UPDATE ON JULY VISA AVAILABILITY
The sudden backlog reduction efforts by Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices during the past month have resulted in the use of almost 60,000 Employment numbers. As a result of this unexpected action it has been necessary to make immediate adjustments to several previously announced cut-off dates. All Citizenship and Immigration Services Offices have been notified of the following:
Effective Monday July 2, 2007 there will be no further authorizations inresponse to requests for Employment-based preference cases. All numbers available to these categories under the FY-2007 annual numerical limitation
have been made available. Employment preference numbers will once again be available to these chargeability areas beginning October 1, 2007, under the FY-2008 annual numerical limitation.
Department of State Publication 9514
CA/VO: July 2, 2007
more...
indianindian2006
07-14 06:06 PM
Can new company file amendmend to existing I-140...
The company who filed my greencard got acquired within 6 months of I485 filing for me, They amend my H1 within 6 months window and now they are in process of amending the I140..
My question to gurus is-Will he be ok if his new company amend the I140.
Your case is a case of Successor in interest, his case is a case of different employer so according to me the answer is no.
The company who filed my greencard got acquired within 6 months of I485 filing for me, They amend my H1 within 6 months window and now they are in process of amending the I140..
My question to gurus is-Will he be ok if his new company amend the I140.
Your case is a case of Successor in interest, his case is a case of different employer so according to me the answer is no.
hair kayden kross wallpaper.
sri1309
09-12 08:25 PM
Guys,
Good to know the weather will be good, but even it is not, the spirit shouldnt die. I wish all realize this. I hope the weather is horrible and we all still make it to make the voice heard louder.,
Sri..
Good to know the weather will be good, but even it is not, the spirit shouldnt die. I wish all realize this. I hope the weather is horrible and we all still make it to make the voice heard louder.,
Sri..
more...
svr_76
06-10 02:04 PM
exactly..and our best approach would be to also reach other lobbying/groups that represents the employers impact by this to determine a directed/specific approach.
hot kayden kross wallpaper. to
Legal
07-05 12:07 PM
No need to conduct this poll. What's your point? go by the
majority if they say no?
Make it 20$ per month and be done with it. Those who couldn't do this
are unlikely to be helpful anyway.
majority if they say no?
Make it 20$ per month and be done with it. Those who couldn't do this
are unlikely to be helpful anyway.
more...
house Kayden Kross Big Bra
diptam
07-05 12:42 PM
Lets stop this thread and core decide about this ( who are running IV )
This is creating lots of discussions and nothing will come out apart from
wastage of our time... I mean we get attracted to a spicy thread like this automatically and the end result is 0
I agree with you 100%. We are so much divided community, lets not create another factor to divide this community further in paid and non-paid members.
Core, if you see this thread is not part of yor agenda, please close this immediately. This is just dividing us further. Plzzzzzzzz.
This is creating lots of discussions and nothing will come out apart from
wastage of our time... I mean we get attracted to a spicy thread like this automatically and the end result is 0
I agree with you 100%. We are so much divided community, lets not create another factor to divide this community further in paid and non-paid members.
Core, if you see this thread is not part of yor agenda, please close this immediately. This is just dividing us further. Plzzzzzzzz.
tattoo Kayden Kross - Hot, Kayden
NKR
07-28 01:10 PM
I consider myself liberal as in live and let live. This depiction pushes envelope big time. Along with rights comes the responsibilites.
Well said, people should exercise restraint while following freedom of speech since it can hurt sentiments.
When someone drew nu** pictures of Hindu Gods and Goddesses, all these so called pseudosecularists cite some 16th century sculpture and say that it has always been like that. Someone sculpted something which was wrong and now some people allow another wrong citing the previous wrong. 2 wrongs won�t make a right.
The post previous to yours asks people who are complaining to take their complaints to RSS and BJP. Why?. So that they can call them fundamentalists later?. This is heights of hypocrisy.
Well said, people should exercise restraint while following freedom of speech since it can hurt sentiments.
When someone drew nu** pictures of Hindu Gods and Goddesses, all these so called pseudosecularists cite some 16th century sculpture and say that it has always been like that. Someone sculpted something which was wrong and now some people allow another wrong citing the previous wrong. 2 wrongs won�t make a right.
The post previous to yours asks people who are complaining to take their complaints to RSS and BJP. Why?. So that they can call them fundamentalists later?. This is heights of hypocrisy.
more...
pictures Kayden Kross
rimzhim
04-04 04:04 PM
[From here (http://www.ieeeusa.org/policy/issues/).
Enacting legislation to facilitate the admission of foreign professionals with advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering and managerial fields as legal permanent residents.
[/LIST]
great to hear that!
also johnifax98: if middlepersons are exploiting the system, it will help to eliminate their role. i agree that is also abuse.
Enacting legislation to facilitate the admission of foreign professionals with advanced degrees in science, technology, engineering and managerial fields as legal permanent residents.
[/LIST]
great to hear that!
also johnifax98: if middlepersons are exploiting the system, it will help to eliminate their role. i agree that is also abuse.
dresses Wallpapers Charm Kayden Kross
Legal_In_A_Limbo
03-07 11:27 AM
In my husband's case we dont have that much time.
Here what our plan is:-
1. Self file G-28.
2. Follow up with an infopass appt. with in a month.
Rest god willing. What ever is going to happen will happen. No one can stop it from happening.
Here what our plan is:-
1. Self file G-28.
2. Follow up with an infopass appt. with in a month.
Rest god willing. What ever is going to happen will happen. No one can stop it from happening.
more...
makeup kayden kross wallpapers.
McLuvin
03-12 01:55 PM
finally the bulletin has been posted in the DOS website...
Visa Bulletin for April 2010 (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4747.html)
They have given a brief description about "BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS"
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, a significant amount of demand is received each month for applicants who have priority dates which are significantly earlier than the applicable cut-off dates. In addition, fluctuations in demand can cause cut-off date movement to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed. Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however.
Applicability of Section 202(a)(5): INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act, removed the per-country limit on Employment-based immigrants in any calendar quarter in which applicant demand for numbers in one or more Employment-based preferences is less than the total of such numbers available. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5) has allowed countries such as China � mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused. Such numbers are provided strictly in priority date order without regard to the foreign state chargeability, and the same cut-off date applies to any country benefiting from this provision.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by documentarily qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation, that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may require the establishment of an earlier cut-off date than that which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, �2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.� The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state�s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.
Visa Bulletin for April 2010 (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4747.html)
They have given a brief description about "BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS"
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, a significant amount of demand is received each month for applicants who have priority dates which are significantly earlier than the applicable cut-off dates. In addition, fluctuations in demand can cause cut-off date movement to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed. Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however.
Applicability of Section 202(a)(5): INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act, removed the per-country limit on Employment-based immigrants in any calendar quarter in which applicant demand for numbers in one or more Employment-based preferences is less than the total of such numbers available. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5) has allowed countries such as China � mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused. Such numbers are provided strictly in priority date order without regard to the foreign state chargeability, and the same cut-off date applies to any country benefiting from this provision.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by documentarily qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation, that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may require the establishment of an earlier cut-off date than that which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, �2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.� The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state�s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.
girlfriend kayden kross wallpapers.
sdudeja
10-25 12:58 PM
My PD is May 21, 2007
hairstyles kayden kross rolling around in
Macaca
01-28 12:06 PM
In the new year, I have not seen any posts expalining how IV is "working" on resolving our issues. All that is posted now is requests for money. I know more money is needed and would be glad to contribute, if only the senior members show that some serious efforts are being made in the background. Yes IV did do very good work last year, but that is history now; but what work is going on now, nobody knows. Don't need details, but even broad details will help. Is something being done for appropriation bills, no one knows or tells.
For example, after the elections no attempts virtually no attempts have been done to do webfax campaign tragetted towards pro-immigration inclined politicians. No lists have been made of such politicians. Just by waking up few days before the bills are discussed is not going to help.
Once again, like many other posts that pop up at the rate of 1/day, very reasonable remarks. For a change they are civil. I have thought about all of them.
The only difference is that I have some more time these days to think of the big picture. I concluded that the absence of these issues (and numerous others) is really not effecting any progress, and I can ignore these issues and contribute to progress.
As a concrete example, I have thought of webfaxes/lobbying. Based on my analysis (which is completely independent of IV) of the current state of our bill, nothing significant is happening about it right now and it not posible to gauge the future. Thus, it is not an effective point for webfaxes/lobbying. With this conclusion, there is nothing to say.
Everyone is entitled to his/her opinion as long as we move ahead.
For example, after the elections no attempts virtually no attempts have been done to do webfax campaign tragetted towards pro-immigration inclined politicians. No lists have been made of such politicians. Just by waking up few days before the bills are discussed is not going to help.
Once again, like many other posts that pop up at the rate of 1/day, very reasonable remarks. For a change they are civil. I have thought about all of them.
The only difference is that I have some more time these days to think of the big picture. I concluded that the absence of these issues (and numerous others) is really not effecting any progress, and I can ignore these issues and contribute to progress.
As a concrete example, I have thought of webfaxes/lobbying. Based on my analysis (which is completely independent of IV) of the current state of our bill, nothing significant is happening about it right now and it not posible to gauge the future. Thus, it is not an effective point for webfaxes/lobbying. With this conclusion, there is nothing to say.
Everyone is entitled to his/her opinion as long as we move ahead.
virtual55
07-02 07:35 PM
I strongly believe that Immigration Voice website should be paid website.
People should be willing to spend $20 per month for the information the website provides(foreg: It was useful for self filers to file I485 and saved atleast $2000 each person), I think $20 per month, should be enough for maintaining 99% reliable website and for its lobbying efforts and law suit etc.
Guys please share your thoughts.
even if 3000 members join paid website that will be 3000*20 = $60000 per month and $720000 per year which is substantial amount to perform lobbying, law suit, maintain website etc
People should be willing to spend $20 per month for the information the website provides(foreg: It was useful for self filers to file I485 and saved atleast $2000 each person), I think $20 per month, should be enough for maintaining 99% reliable website and for its lobbying efforts and law suit etc.
Guys please share your thoughts.
even if 3000 members join paid website that will be 3000*20 = $60000 per month and $720000 per year which is substantial amount to perform lobbying, law suit, maintain website etc
jamesbond007
09-10 11:16 AM
Is that 30 dots or 30 points?
It should be possible to have 30 points without 20 dots. I'm not clear on that, please let me know if I'm wrong.
This is taken from the chat page:
To access this area you must have: a.) Over 50 posts b.) Over 30 reputation points
It should be possible to have 30 points without 20 dots. I'm not clear on that, please let me know if I'm wrong.
This is taken from the chat page:
To access this area you must have: a.) Over 50 posts b.) Over 30 reputation points
No comments:
Post a Comment