Wednesday, June 29, 2011

amanda knox trial

images In brief: Amanda Knox goes on amanda knox trial. Amanda Knox was not screaming
  • Amanda Knox was not screaming



  • gc28262
    09-26 09:41 AM
    For me Obama and Mccain are equally good candidates. I would prefer Hillary Clinton over both of them.

    McCain is a great guy, but he is with the wrong party. A party that aligns itself with anti-immigrants.

    Now that we don't have much hopes for HR-5882, we should start targeting the CIR right now. Maybe we can talk to the Hispanic and other groups which will have an influence over CIR and have our provisions taken care of.

    It will definitely be easier to tie-up with Hispanic caucus and other groups than anti-immigrants.





    wallpaper Amanda Knox was not screaming amanda knox trial. amanda knox trial
  • amanda knox trial



  • unitednations
    07-09 04:41 PM
    Ah!! I see.....I do have the same i94 number on both the I-94s


    desi is correct...



    Everytime you extend non immigrant status; you are extending the white I-94 card on your last entry.

    However; if you leave after the last extension and you re-enter then the white I-94 card you receive at the border overrides all previous white I-94 cards; extension of stays.

    This is where the problem occurs:

    H-1b for company A visa is valid until July 2009 and the h-1b approval for a is also valid until july 2009. You come into USA on white I-94 card and they gave validity until July 2009.

    Now; you file for change of employer and extend status until July 2010. The notice of action will have the same I-94 number as the date of your last entry.

    Now; you go outside USA; on your way back in the port of entry officer mistakenly gives you a white I-94 card only valid until your visa expires (july 2009). Now; if you overstay July 2009 then you would have been considered to be unlawfully present from July 2009.

    Bottom line: your last action generally overrules your stay.





    amanda knox trial. The Amanda Knox trial could be
  • The Amanda Knox trial could be



  • krishna
    02-21 12:45 PM
    Lou dobbs, Pat Buchanan and people of that kind are full of vanity. It is wise to tune out such guys and make sure that they do not affect policy decisions in congress. I dont think policy makers care for his rant on TV.





    2011 amanda knox trial amanda knox trial. killer Amanda Knox Images
  • killer Amanda Knox Images



  • njboy
    04-08 08:14 PM
    genuine firms like microsoft are unable to hire h1b people because ..guess what? all the h1 quota is over..here in new jersey, I was approached multiple times by people who said if I get anyone to file an h1 in their company, and if the h1 came through..I would get 1000 U.S.D. I asked them..what should be their qualification, they said..dont worry about qualification, they'd give a free course for QC tester and place them. So I wont be surprised if big fortune 500 companies are also behind this bill.



    more...


    amanda knox trial. Amanda Knox is facing up to 30
  • Amanda Knox is facing up to 30



  • ShantiRam
    07-11 11:18 AM
    My employer back in 2001 and 2002 did not pay me in a consistent way..I was paid once in every three months during the time I was in bench. I have the W2 returns from those two years which shows average income of only 29K. However I had valid visa status and h1b approval from my employer as well as employment verification letter from them. Now i am with a new employer since 2003 and do not have any problems with them and get paid regurarly. After reading manub's post I am also worried if my I485 will be denied whenever I apply for it... or is there somethings I can take care of before? It is not my fault that the employer did not pay me consistently - right?





    amanda knox trial. In This Photo: Amanda Knox,
  • In This Photo: Amanda Knox,



  • Macaca
    02-13 09:45 AM
    When House Changed Rules for Travel, He Lobbied for the Lobbyists (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/02/12/AR2007021201293_2.html)

    By Jeffrey H. Birnbaum
    Tuesday, February 13, 2007; Page A19

    Loopholes in laws and regulations sometimes seem to appear by magic, and often no one wants to claim to be the magician. But one man actually wants credit for a couple of big loopholes in the new ethics rules the House passed last month: John H. Graham IV.

    Graham is the president of an organization that could exist only in Washington -- the American Society of Association Executives. In other words, he is the chief lobbyist for lobbyists.

    His organization represents 22,000 association executives, from large groups such as the American Medical Association and small ones such as the Barbershop Harmony Society. When any of them are in danger of losing access to lawmakers, Graham, 57, is supposed to intervene.

    Which is what he did -- proudly -- as soon as he learned that Democratic leaders wanted to ban travel provided by lobbyists and the entities that employ them. Graham dispatched his own lobbyists and several of his most sympathetic allies to meet with House staffers. Eventually they poked two gigantic holes in the proposed prohibition.

    The first opened the way for lobbyists to pay for short trips -- one day as far as the Midwest and two days to the West Coast. The second permits colleges to provide travel to lawmakers without restriction, even though they lobby in Washington a lot. (See the next item.)

    Ethics advocates were disappointed. "The better policy is no privately financed travel," said Meredith McGehee of the Campaign Legal Center.

    But Graham was unabashed. Golf trips to Scotland should be nixed, he said, but not visits to taxpayer-funded programs or to industry-backed seminars. "We didn't want a total ban on travel," Graham said. "We were on top of it from the very beginning."

    In fact, he and his lobbyists started their campaign a year ago after then-House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) first suggested a travel ban. That effort failed partly because of Graham's enterprise.

    After the Democratic victory in last year's midterm elections, Graham's lobbyists -- Senior Vice President Jim Clarke and contract lobbyist James W. Rock -- targeted the staff of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (Calif.) and then met with aides to Democratic House leaders Steny H. Hoyer (Md.), Rahm Emanuel (Ill.) and James E. Clyburn (S.C.).

    After one such meeting, Graham learned that the ban would prevent lawmakers from taking trips to colleges to give commencement addresses. He quickly asked the Association of American Colleges and Universities and the American Association of State Colleges and Universities to join the crusade.

    Graham also recruited other groups with sterling reputations, including the American Heart Association, the YMCA of the USA and the American Cancer Society. They went as a group from office to office on Capitol Hill and made the case that brief trips could not be mistaken for boondoggles, especially when white-hat interests like themselves were footing the bill.

    The result: Graham has become Mr. Loophole, winning the exemptions and on track to getting them in the Senate as well.



    more...


    amanda knox trial. Amanda Knox: Miss Knox
  • Amanda Knox: Miss Knox



  • gc28262
    12-19 10:31 PM
    sriramkalyan,

    I find it irritating that every now and then, some tom dick and harry comes to these forms and say - "time to close down" whenever you see something that you don't like. Frankly, this shallow view and negative attitude is irritating.

    Sanju,

    Your posts are definitely interesting. Please start a blog. We all will be happy to read it there. We should not post non-immigration related stuff on IV (especially those that are controversial). As for IV, unity is more important than freedom of speech.

    So I agree with sriramkalyan, threads such as these should be closed.





    2010 The Amanda Knox trial could be amanda knox trial. In brief: Amanda Knox goes on
  • In brief: Amanda Knox goes on



  • nitkad
    04-15 02:05 PM
    I am on H1B and I485 is pending. I just bought a mid-price house and I will recommend to buy only if your I140 is approved. I waited for many years but finally bought one. Buying the house was a big decision but I am glad that I took it. I have a 3 year old daughter and she being able to run in our own backyard is worh of some financial risk. The house prices are lower (still I think a little higher than it should be) and the interest rate is good too. So, go for it and good luck.



    more...


    amanda knox trial. Amanda Knox and Raffaele
  • Amanda Knox and Raffaele



  • Dandruff
    03-25 11:58 AM
    Heres what we did, the key is to find a lot/ house that will sell ASAP:

    a) Paid a little bit premium for a quickly selling house - in our case we paid extra for a lakefront lot.

    b) Paid a little bit less on House itself (new construction - so we selected a less expensive floorplan)

    c) combined House + Lot is still in the lower end of the subdivision range.

    d) you should aim for the cheapest house in the most expensive community/ subdivision you can afford - on the other side, never buy the house which is more expensive than others around it ... u want other houses to increase ur value and not the other way around.

    e) keep good paperwork for regular pest / termite treatments etc. just like it helps in selling the car

    f) pay a bit extra for extra insulation - even upgrade insulation for garage door

    If we have to sell the house in a rush, we have atleast done everything one could ... rest is umm beyond our hands with all this unpredictability :)

    best of luck! nesting instincts need to be nurtured imho! and is very human ...





    hair killer Amanda Knox Images amanda knox trial. Amanda Knox Trial: Witness
  • Amanda Knox Trial: Witness



  • checklaw
    10-02 01:10 PM
    he for now atleast, seems slightly different then regular politicians that we know of...and considering the consequences of present financial crisis would most likely be the next President coming Nov..

    but to us, the prospective permanent immigrants, this comes with a measure of fear knowing he might listen and act only to staunch anti-legal-immigration policy advisors in his rank who seem to wield substantial influence on such matters.
    checklaw



    more...


    amanda knox trial. The appeal on Amanda#39;s murder
  • The appeal on Amanda#39;s murder



  • abracadabra102
    08-06 04:54 PM
    We are in a letter campaign mode and we can write something like this :-)

    ========Complaint====

    Atlanta, Georgia
    September 13, 1970

    Director
    Billing Department
    Shell Oil Company
    P.O. Box XXXX
    Tulsa, Oklahoma 74102

    Dear Sir:

    I have been a regular customer of the Shell Oil Company for several years now, and spend approximately $40.00 per month on Shell products. Until recently, I have been completely satisfied with the quality of Shell products and with the service of Shell employees.

    Included in my most recent statement from your department was a bill for $12.00 for a tire which I purchased at the Lowell I. Reels Shell station in McAdenville, N.C. I stopped at this station for gasoline and to have a timing malfunction corrected. The gasoline cost $5.15; eight new plugs cost $9.36; labor on the points $2.50. All well and good.

    Earlier in the day I had a flat tire, which the attendant at the Lowell I. Reels station informed me that he was unable to fix. He suggested that I purchase a tire from him in order that I have a spare for the remainder of my journey to Atlanta. I told him that I preferred to buy tires from home station in Atlanta, but he continued to stress the risk of driving without a spare. My reluctance to trade with an unknown dealer, even a Shell dealer, did not discourage him and finally, as I was leaving, he said that out of concern for my safety (my spare was not new) and because I had made a substantial expenditure at his station, he would make me a special deal. He produced a tire ("Hits a good one. Still has the tits on it. See them tits. Hits a twenty dollar tar.") which I purchased for twelve dollars and which he installed on the front left side for sixty-five cents. Fifty miles further down the highway, I had a blowout.

    Not a puncture which brought a slow, flapping flat, nor a polite ladyfinger firecracker rubberburpple rupture (pop); but a howitzer blowout, which reared the the hood of my car up into my face, a blowout, sir, which tore a flap of rubber from this "tire" large enough to make soles for both sandals of a medium sized hippie. In a twinkling, then, I was driving down Interstate 85 at sixty miles per hour on three tires and one rim with rubber clinging to it in desperate shreds and patches, an instrument with a bent, revolving, steel-then-rubber-then-steel rim, whose sound can be approximated by the simultaneous placing of a handful of gravel and a young duck into a Waring Blender.

    The word "careen" does no justice whatever to the movement that the car then performed. According to the highway patrolman's report, the driver in the adjoining lane, the left hand-- who, incidentally, was attempting to pass me at the time-- ejaculated adrenelin all over the ceiling of his car. My own passengers were fused into a featureless quiver in the key of "G" in the back seat of my car. The rim was bent; the tits were gone; and you can f--k yourself with a cream cheese dildo if you entertain for one moment the delusion that I intend to pay the twelve dollars.

    Sincerely yours,

    /s/ T.B.T.





    hot Amanda Knox is facing up to 30 amanda knox trial. Amanda Knox sits in court at
  • Amanda Knox sits in court at



  • desi3933
    07-11 10:33 AM
    Hi UN,
    First of all my sincere gratitude to you for your patience and the time you put in to give a detailed reply to all cases.

    Here's my situation(I think a case of status violation)

    I did an L1 to H1 transfer in 2005. My L1 was valid till APRIL 2006. So my intention was to work with L1 employer till April 2006 and then switch to H1 employer.

    H1 employer also applied for a change of status, which I was not aware of that time. I asked the H1 company's lawyer whether I could continue with my L1 employer after getting the H1 and she said it's fine.

    So I got the H1B approval in Oct 2005, but still continued with L1 employer till APRIL 2006, then switched to H1.

    Your last action dictates the status you are in. As the last I-94 has H1 Status, you have 30 days to start working with new employer (or apply for CoS to stay on L1). It is usually a good idea to file H1 without Change of Status if you don't know the start date. In that case you have to re-enter US on that visa to get into that status.

    Recently I came to know that this could be an issue. When I was filling the G-325A form, I wondered if I specify that I worked with the L1 employer till APRIL 2006, would they catch this?? Even if they catch , how big an issue would this be??

    If I put the dates to reflect the dates to show that I quit my L1 employer in Oct 2005 itself, would this be an issue?? I guess in this case, if by any chance they ask for any further evidence like pay stubs or W2 in that period of time, I would be in trouble.

    I would always suggest the real dates on any form. Section 245(k) covers out-of-status issues. Why lie and caught for fraud when we have protection under law.

    If caught for fraud, it can cause some very serious issues. I-485 can be denied just on this basis.


    [COLOR="Red"]
    From what I have read from the forum, A lawful re-entry should clear the violation in my case right?? I haven't filed the I-485 yet. My I-140 is pending.
    Do they catch this during I-140 stage??
    ALSO CAN THEY DENY H1B DUE TO PREVIOUS VIOLATION OF STATUS, WHILE I RE-ENTER?? This is my biggest fear now!!!
    Can I go to Canada/Mexico for stamping? where would I get an appointment at the earliest??



    1. Re-entry erases out-of-status and puts one in valid status. As per section 245(k), one is required to be instatus (or out of status < 180 days) since last entry into US.
    2. You were out-of-status, not unlawful presence (i.e. staying past due I-94 date). So visa can not denied on the basis of out-of-status.
    3. Not sure about getting visa from Canada. Is it your first time for getting H1 visa stamp?


    ________________________
    Not a legal advice.



    more...


    house Amanda Knox #39;pressured into amanda knox trial. I didn#39;t follow Amanda#39;s
  • I didn#39;t follow Amanda#39;s



  • Gravitation
    03-25 04:27 PM
    Nobody said it is easy mate. If you are paranoid and want to be safe and prepare for the worst case (like getting fired or your 485 getting rejected) then don’t buy a house. It is a long haul and no one knows when his/her PD would become current. By the time one gets GC, the kids would have grown up and missed their childhood. Read my previous 3 posts. My suggestion was for the person who started this thread and for his situation only. I know each and every person’s situation is different. Like I said if I was in CA, probably I would be renting too.
    You're absolutely correct. It depends a lot on one's personal risk profile. I believe in taking calculated risks. So I find myself shaking heads when I read the posts that only consider worst-case scenarios and describe a house as golden-trap. Again, they probably have a valid PoV; just a very very different risk profile from me.





    tattoo In This Photo: Amanda Knox, amanda knox trial. Amanda Knox found guilty,
  • Amanda Knox found guilty,



  • alisa
    01-01 10:46 AM
    Alisa,

    Look, the Pakistani military/Govt. is not capable of dealing with these 'non-state' actors. Your logic that it is going to take several years to neutralize and India has to wait for that period to pass is simply dumb.

    Do you think Indian strikes on Pakistan, or a war between India and Pakistan, is going to weaken these guys, or strengthen them?
    What would be dumb now?


    Would you allow a thief to rob your own home over and over again? Depending on your logic, it looks like you wait for several thefts to pass before taking action against the thief.


    Suppose there are theives from Bihar that come and rob you in West Bengal.
    You can either send your West Bengal police into Bihar, and turn it into a rivalry between two police departments. And a rivalry between two provinces.
    Or you have the two police departments work together to reduce crime rate in the future.



    more...


    pictures Amanda Knox: Miss Knox amanda knox trial. Amanda Knox Trial
  • Amanda Knox Trial



  • pani_6
    07-14 11:45 PM
    Pappu,

    Could you please outline what you would you say about helping EB-3 out when you meet with DOL/USCIS officials next time IV meets them...also I want you to write a full letter that address the issue faced by Eb-3 and post it for us to mail it out...I understand that letter is not perfect..but it brings the dire picture of EB-3-I..

    From what I have seen in the Fourm posts nobody clearly knows how these Visa numbers are clearly allocated and everybody has thier own theory..and you know well legislation will not come this year and we do not know the composition of new congress next year..we may have a congress that even more anti-immigrant with the slowing economy.. and EB-3 I is badly hurting..

    We cant convert to Eb-2 now its too late..LC PERM are getting Audited (Taking 8-9 months ) and no PP for I-140..even if we apply for Eb-2 now...by the time it comes ..we dont know whether Eb-3 would have moved to say 2003 making all the PERM and I-140($$) efforts go waste...


    We want to know what is in store for EB-3...some folks write that only 5 families per state are going to get thier GC in EB-3.. at the current rate 2001 Eb-3 have to wait another 5 years to get thier numbers....

    Could you in your next meeting with DOL/USCIS/DOS please bring up the issues with EB-3 now that EB-2 has some relief..and give us whether we need to convert to EB-2 or in the near future will the numbers in EB-3 move..

    Frankly I have no enegery left ...

    Pappu..you are doing a great job..I commend your efforts..please show some direction for EB-3 ..some news from DOS/USCIS would be helpful...





    I have my disagreements with the letter content and have let it known in my posts on the thread.

    Pani you are an old IV member with IV experience and I trust that you would give second thoughts based on my comments.





    dresses Amanda Knox sits in court at amanda knox trial. Amanda Knox attends the
  • Amanda Knox attends the



  • akela_topchi
    01-09 06:20 PM
    Unfortunately, Islamic fundamentalists are pushing the world so hard that it is impossible not to react forcefully. India is really trying hard to restrain, but how long a country would allow it's civilian population to be killed by mercenaries? It's just a shame that Islamo-fascists celebrate when their forces (be it hamas or any other terror group) kill civilians around the world... and they seek sympathy when their fighters face the retaliation.

    When hundreds of innocents were massacred in Mumbai in the name of Islamic jihad were there any protests in Arab countries? Similarly when Al-Qaeda attacked WTC and killed innocents, thousands of Arabs were in fact celebrating in streets. When hamas was launching rockets on Israel were there any protests in Islamic world?

    This time Israel will teach a good lesson to it's adversary and it will buy a few years of peace. US safeguarded itself and then attacked 9/11 suspects (terrorists and countries) and since then it was not attacked.

    India has never been tough on terror so it has been and it would continue to be a victim. Thousands of Indians died because our government failed to provide internal security and fitting response to those who are staging attacks on India.

    Today so many countries are under threat from jihadi elements. These elements are mushrooming around the world, and they are hiding and plotting to kill civilians for jihad and revenge.

    Many in civilized world think that terrorists would understand language of peace. But unfortunately the terrorists understand just one language - that of force... Their ultimate aim is to die fighting for jihad, so until this ideology and its followers are wiped out they will continue to attack us.

    See when India was doing Peace talks with Pakistanis, they were training fighters to massacre Indians:

    http://www.mid-day.com/news/2008/dec/101208-Mumbai-Terror-attack-Mohd-Amir-Qasab-Taj-Mahal-Hotel-Trident-Hotel-Cst-station.htm



    more...


    makeup Amanda Knox and Raffaele amanda knox trial. Amanda Knox #39;pressured into
  • Amanda Knox #39;pressured into



  • Macaca
    02-12 02:39 PM
    Lou Dobbs rants about the pardon every day. A CNN special contradicts Lou Dobbs.

    Commentary: Anti-immigrant mob creates false heroes (http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/02/12/navarrette/index.html)

    By Ruben Navarrette Jr.
    Special to CNN

    SAN DIEGO, California (CNN) -- The world is upside down. A posse of Republican lawmakers who, when opposing amnesty for illegal immigrants, like to talk about how rules must be followed and how we shouldn't reward lawbreakers. They're now demanding that a pair of convicted felons be rewarded with a presidential pardon.

    Ex-Border Patrol agents Jose Compean and Ignacio Ramos were sentenced to 11 years and 12 years in prison, respectively, after a jury convicted them of shooting an unarmed suspect and then covering it up.

    It happened on February 17, 2005. That's when Compean and Ramos encountered a suspicious van along the Texas-Mexico border.

    The driver, Osvaldo Aldrete-Davila, abandoned the vehicle and tried to run into Mexico. Aldrete-Davila was smuggling drugs, and the van was loaded with more than 700 pounds of marijuana.

    Compean fired at least 14 rounds and Ramos fired once, hitting Aldrete-Davila. The agents then collected the shell casings, failed to report the shooting, and filed reports that made no mention of the incident.

    None of this is heroic, except to the anti-immigrant mob, which has been making excuses for Compean and Ramos while accusing U.S. Attorney Johnny Sutton, whose office prosecuted the case, of being an agent of the Mexican government.

    Recently, Department of Homeland Security Inspector General Richard L. Skinner admitted that officials in his office "misinformed" Republican members of Congress when they claimed to have proof that Compean and Ramos confessed their guilt and said that they "wanted to shoot some Mexicans" before the incident.

    But what does all this have to do with the price of whiskey in West Texas? Not a thing. It was the U.S. attorney's office, and not the Homeland Security Department, that brought this case. So, unless federal prosecutors lied to the court or defense attorneys, there is no reason for a pardon.

    I've spoken to Sutton twice in the last couple of weeks, and he didn't strike me as some wild-eyed prosecutor. He insists that a lot of what is out there is "overheated rhetoric" from the ill-informed.

    Much of that rhetoric belongs to Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-California, (or as he is aptly described in this case, Dana "off-his-rocker"). The congressman has said that President Bush could be impeached if either Ramos or Compean meets his demise in prison.

    As his name gets dragged through the mud, you'd think that Sutton might hold a grudge. Not so.

    "I have a lot of sympathy for some of the folks who are worked up because the narrative that they read is so different from the reality of what the jury heard," Sutton told me.

    But what about those unsympathetic Republican hacks, Minutemen vigilantes and conservative bloggers who are using this case to further their own agendas? For Sutton, it's a reminder that there is no substitute for the American justice system. While not perfect, that system is designed to dole out justice based on facts and law, not politics.

    "It's why we litigate these things in a courtroom and not on cable television or the Internet," he said.

    Be glad that's so.





    girlfriend Amanda Knox found guilty, amanda knox trial. Appeal Trial Of Amanda Knox
  • Appeal Trial Of Amanda Knox



  • unitednations
    03-24 06:44 PM
    Thanks UnitedNations for this discussion.

    In the booming years of 99-00 you could see all these consulting companies having a ball. Personally I have seen people with no relevant skill set getting h1's approved in a totally unrelated job profile. I even have come across staffing companies who have hired recruiters as "business analyst's", now its highly unlikely that these companies could not find recruiters here. But the system was getting misused rampantly.
    I have had experience with companies who with collusion of someone inside a company
    "snagged" portion of revenue from a contract. It wasnt common for 3-4 companies to
    act as middleman's ("layers") the final employee who actually worked getting literally
    peanuts share of the contract amount. I think this still happens today from what I have heard from my friends.

    USCIS had to respond in someway or the other. I am happy that they did but on the other hand I feel sorry for their employees who are probably innocent "collateral damage" victims

    It makes me very uneasy as who knows what USCIS will come up with next. The longer our wait is there is a potential for more scrutiny and who knows what pitfall awaits us lurking somewhere where we least expect. Just because people misused the system we are all going to face the consequences.

    When I first started to get to know consulatants and staffing companies; I thought that this whole bribe system; creating positions at end clients; how consultants got selected, etc., was a big racket.

    However; when I did introspection of how things worked in my industry; I pretty much concluded that it was done in same way but at much, much higher levels.

    USCIS is just keeping it pretty simple these days; show us that there is a job with an end client that requires a degree. They pretty much know that it is impossible. Even if you can get one; they pick on it pretty good and still deny it.

    The system was actually designed for staffing companies when you think about it. When h-1b was first created; no one would have used it if it wasn't for staffing companies. Typical US companies wouldn't have the network to get foreign employees unless they were already here. To get them from a foreign country then the only companies who can really do so are the staffing companies.

    The main reason that I can't get behind lifting of the country quota is exactly this reason. You have a lot of companies run by the same nationality who will only recruit their own people. The staffing companies don't advertise in Indonesia, Germany, Brazil, etc. They only go after their own people. The whole monopolization of visas was used to prevent this type of behaviour.

    I always thought that there are people from around the world who want to come here but can't because they are not part of the "system". You can see this in the greencard lottery. Almost 9 million people apploy to get here through this. If they had their own country people looking to get them here then there would be a more equal distribution of visas.

    I think people need to step back and think that this is one of the reasons why they have country quotas. No matter what people think that they re being hired for their skills and that employers don't care about their nationality; people need to understand that a "system" has been designed that is benefitting a few nationalities. Once you can get here then you can find your way. However, if you can't get here then you can't find your way.





    hairstyles The appeal on Amanda#39;s murder amanda knox trial. How Amanda Knox has captivated
  • How Amanda Knox has captivated



  • aadimanav
    07-14 05:43 PM
    Please participate in this non-controversial (EB1 vs. 2 vs. 3 and Row vs. Non-Row Compatible) campaign.

    http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=20190

    Thanks,





    Gravitation
    03-25 01:25 PM
    Good Points. I like discussing real-estate; I'm deeply interested in it. So in that spirit of having a good conversation, here's my response:

    I completely agree that buying a house is a long term move. But I disagree with some of the points:

    1. Does rent always go up? No, my rent did not go up at all during the real estate boom as the number of ppl renting was low. Recently my rent has gone up only $75 pm. (love rent control!!!) So in 5 years, my monthly rent has gone up a total of $125 per month

    Real Estate market is always local. Unlike the market for -let's say- rice, which can be transported from one place where it's abundant to where it's scarce easily. Real Estate remains where it is. It's also subjected to a lot of local laws, municipal regulations etc. So, any discussion we have here will NOT apply to every single location. You have to research your own local regulations/market etc.

    If you have rent control, it significantly changes the picture. It usually doesn't make sense to buy if you have rent control.


    2. I hear about tax rebate for homeowners. But what about property tax?

    Yep, you pay it when you own a house. And yes, you pay it when you rent (it's rolled into your rent). The difference is that when you own, it's tax-deductible; if you pay it as part of your rent, it's not.


    3. What about mortgage insurance payments?

    You don't pay PMI, if you put down 20%. Not a bad idea to save that much. It forces one to learn financial planning and forward thinking.


    It is a misconception that 5-10 years is the cycle for real estate.

    Here's how in a sane real estate market the cycle should work:

    No population influx in your area or there is no exodus from your area:
    Your real estate ownership should be 25 years because that's when the next generation is ready to buy houses.

    However, in places like SF Bay Area/new York/Boston where there is continuous influx of young working ppl this cycle can be reduced to 15-20 years.

    Over the last few years, nobody thought of longevity required to make money in RE. Now that it is tanking ppl are talking about 5-10 years. Unless you are buying in a booming place, your ownership has to be 15+ years to turn a real profit.


    Profit/Loss is not what the primary residence is for.


    This is purely the financial aspect of ownership. If you have a family I think its really nice to have a house but you don't have to really take on the liability. You can rent the same house for much less. But if you are clear in your mind that no matter what I am going to live in XYZ town/city for the next 20 years, go for it.


    You can rent for less, now, but how about later? You're assuming rents don't go up, but they do. One of my neighbors pays $250 per month in loan payment for a house he bought 20 years ago (property tax and insurance adds $550 more). It was a big payment then. Now it's almost live living for free. If he rented this he'd by paying $2500 at least. Again, if you don't plan to settle down, don't buy. But owning your primary residence is the first step towards prosperity.


    As a sidenote for Indians. We all have either aging or soon to start aging parents. The way I see it, caring for aging parents is a social debt that we must pay back. This will need me to go back to India. Therefore, if you feel you need to care for your parents, don't commit to a house.
    Yes, if you're planning to go back... don't buy.





    alisa
    04-07 01:23 PM
    Can there be a differentiation between extensions/renewals/company changes and new H1bs?

    In some sense there already is, since the former are not subject to cap, while the latter are.

    So, why not extend the same argument to other situations?
    Get an LCA and impose all kinds of restrictions on new H-1Bs, but don't apply these on existing H-1Bs, especially if they have had their labors filed.

    That way, they don't get rid of existing H1B employees.
    They only make it harder for new people to get H1bs. Which, it is my understanding, is not our fight.

    You hit the nail in the head.

    Instead of getting rid of all H1B employees in one full swoop, this lobby wants to put law in place where new H1s will be mostly rejected due the "Consulting clause" and existing H1 employees will be hit in the head with a 2 X 4 when renewing H1, since the scrutiny and paperwork is the same for new H1, H1 extensions and H1 transfers. Same LCA filing, same I-129 forms.

    So instead of immediate purge, this is like getting rid of 5 to 10 thousand each month by making extensions and renewals and transfer impossible for those doing the consulting.

    Like the admin said, this is the slow bleed of H1B program where death is slow but not obvious and easily detectable.