lazycis
02-14 05:17 PM
Another prove of government misconduct is violation of regulations
In addition to the aspirational 180-day deadline in 8 U.S.C. � 1571(b), the 8 C.F.R. � 103.2(b)(18) sets forth a detailed timetable for “withholding adjudication of a visa petition or other application if . . . an investigation has been undertaken involving a matter relating to eligibility or the exercise of discretion . . . .”
I doubt these regulations were followed in thousands of delayed I-485s.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=223449&postcount=3
We have also over a hundred WOM rulings were court acknowledged that the USCIS "unreasonably delayed" adjudication of applications. Moreover, the USCIS intentionally pushed people to go to court
http://bibdaily.com/pdfs/Mocanu%201-14-08.pdf
"For reasons stated at the hearing and in this Memorandum, I have reached a tentative conclusion that Defendant USCIS, overwhelmed by these applications, has adopted a strategy of favoring delay by litigation, instead of developing an orderly and transparent administrative resolution. Although this strategy is often evident in private party damages litigation, it is improper in these cases."
In addition to the aspirational 180-day deadline in 8 U.S.C. � 1571(b), the 8 C.F.R. � 103.2(b)(18) sets forth a detailed timetable for “withholding adjudication of a visa petition or other application if . . . an investigation has been undertaken involving a matter relating to eligibility or the exercise of discretion . . . .”
I doubt these regulations were followed in thousands of delayed I-485s.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=223449&postcount=3
We have also over a hundred WOM rulings were court acknowledged that the USCIS "unreasonably delayed" adjudication of applications. Moreover, the USCIS intentionally pushed people to go to court
http://bibdaily.com/pdfs/Mocanu%201-14-08.pdf
"For reasons stated at the hearing and in this Memorandum, I have reached a tentative conclusion that Defendant USCIS, overwhelmed by these applications, has adopted a strategy of favoring delay by litigation, instead of developing an orderly and transparent administrative resolution. Although this strategy is often evident in private party damages litigation, it is improper in these cases."
wallpaper hair selena gomez short hair
rb_248
08-15 09:21 AM
All this seems like racial profiling to me. Albeit, such episodes are coming down after Obama took office......in my opinion.
BharatPremi
10-25 04:45 PM
what is definition of "canadian business".
Ans: The company originally set up in any province in canada.
- May have business interest/setup in other countries in terms of
branch/subcidiary or partnership with other compny in otehr country.
can we extrpoltae your suggestion little bit more or is it asking for
too much
1. once you have PR ask your wife to open a company A.
2. As a employee of company A you can come over to USA while maintainig your PR status. You should still be considered to be covered under candian business wanting the employee to work on international projects..
can this theory fly...all this assuming no EAD filling in near future
Ans: Keys: 1) companies MUST be set in both canada and US
2) For investing you need not to be resident. This is true for both
US and Canada.
3) For filing GC you MUST be an employee. IF you are investor
you can not file GC under your company
4) US GC is very lengthy process. How you can make sure your
employment for around 7 to 8 years? So considering this and point 3, convince your wife to set the business both in Canada nad USA.
- Since you can not become investor to achieve US GC ( Considering to apply through Employment category .. which is cheap cost option), make
your wife a boss and let her run business. You become an employee in Company A (Canada)set by her. Tell her to set company B in US. Tell her to find the project in US. Let her tell the client (USA) to go into contract with company B. Company B's owner (Your wife) will make a contract with Company A ( Here also your wife is an owner) for the position at that client. Being an employee of company A ("Canadian Business") your employer (your wife) will put a TN visa request to the consulate showing USA's client (comany B) business need. Upon approval you fly to USA (Now your wife is your family so wife will also fly with you) for starting a job. You will be considered "Physical Resident" of Canada as "Canadian Business" sent you to USA for business need. Now after some time tell Company B ( Owner: Your Wife)to file US GC application for "Future Employment". As long as you keep getting valid project work in USA, now you will be in a position to stop counting years of GC process. You will be able to maintain Canadian PR , can become Canadian citizen after 3 years and wait for US GC coolly. Ofcourse every year TN will have to be renewed.
Possible flaws in theory: 1) Double taxes (In Canada nad US) ( Will require some research and good advise from Tax expert from both in Canada and US)
2) May affect TN renewals adversely !!? ( No idea.. suggestions welcome).
To me this way of thinking seems to be perfectly legal.. But I think we should better ask some good professinal lawyers who are experts for both Canadian and US immigration.
Ans: The company originally set up in any province in canada.
- May have business interest/setup in other countries in terms of
branch/subcidiary or partnership with other compny in otehr country.
can we extrpoltae your suggestion little bit more or is it asking for
too much
1. once you have PR ask your wife to open a company A.
2. As a employee of company A you can come over to USA while maintainig your PR status. You should still be considered to be covered under candian business wanting the employee to work on international projects..
can this theory fly...all this assuming no EAD filling in near future
Ans: Keys: 1) companies MUST be set in both canada and US
2) For investing you need not to be resident. This is true for both
US and Canada.
3) For filing GC you MUST be an employee. IF you are investor
you can not file GC under your company
4) US GC is very lengthy process. How you can make sure your
employment for around 7 to 8 years? So considering this and point 3, convince your wife to set the business both in Canada nad USA.
- Since you can not become investor to achieve US GC ( Considering to apply through Employment category .. which is cheap cost option), make
your wife a boss and let her run business. You become an employee in Company A (Canada)set by her. Tell her to set company B in US. Tell her to find the project in US. Let her tell the client (USA) to go into contract with company B. Company B's owner (Your wife) will make a contract with Company A ( Here also your wife is an owner) for the position at that client. Being an employee of company A ("Canadian Business") your employer (your wife) will put a TN visa request to the consulate showing USA's client (comany B) business need. Upon approval you fly to USA (Now your wife is your family so wife will also fly with you) for starting a job. You will be considered "Physical Resident" of Canada as "Canadian Business" sent you to USA for business need. Now after some time tell Company B ( Owner: Your Wife)to file US GC application for "Future Employment". As long as you keep getting valid project work in USA, now you will be in a position to stop counting years of GC process. You will be able to maintain Canadian PR , can become Canadian citizen after 3 years and wait for US GC coolly. Ofcourse every year TN will have to be renewed.
Possible flaws in theory: 1) Double taxes (In Canada nad US) ( Will require some research and good advise from Tax expert from both in Canada and US)
2) May affect TN renewals adversely !!? ( No idea.. suggestions welcome).
To me this way of thinking seems to be perfectly legal.. But I think we should better ask some good professinal lawyers who are experts for both Canadian and US immigration.
2011 selena gomez hair short.
shingqor
05-02 11:06 PM
Just curious.
Does it mean a uncouth rowdy person?
Is it a Tamil word, or a Singhala word?
Arava stands for over pitched language loudness..
You are issuing some FATHWA on me LOL dude...??? Grow up..
Are you there when some some one used Gujju word here...???
Does it mean a uncouth rowdy person?
Is it a Tamil word, or a Singhala word?
Arava stands for over pitched language loudness..
You are issuing some FATHWA on me LOL dude...??? Grow up..
Are you there when some some one used Gujju word here...???
more...
srikondoji
06-26 12:47 PM
Well....
the rumour is that USCIS will accept as much as their parking lot can accommodate 485 applications.
They will at best try not to spill over to the roads nearby causing traffic jams.:eek:
There is possibility that retrogression begins in August. The USCIS maail department will acept only those cases the clerk could manually enter into the system by July 31st and then send all those applications back which he could not enter manually
IV Roumor thread - lets give the 'Best roumour of the day' award to the most convincing roumor .....
:D :D :D :D
the rumour is that USCIS will accept as much as their parking lot can accommodate 485 applications.
They will at best try not to spill over to the roads nearby causing traffic jams.:eek:
There is possibility that retrogression begins in August. The USCIS maail department will acept only those cases the clerk could manually enter into the system by July 31st and then send all those applications back which he could not enter manually
IV Roumor thread - lets give the 'Best roumour of the day' award to the most convincing roumor .....
:D :D :D :D
EB2IMMIGRANT
08-20 09:07 PM
Heat on SRK was because of scanner on Bollywood shows - US - World - NEWS - The Times of India (http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/news/world/us/Heat-on-SRK-was-because-of-scanner-on-Bollywood-shows/articleshow/4916759.cms)
more...
BharatPremi
12-14 04:01 PM
To summarize the discussions on this thread:
Yes, it is 7 % for all countries.
Now it is manifestly obvious that the 7 % figure is arbitrary, and not fair. That much we can all agree on.
The real question, as raised in the first post of the thread by soljabhai is:
(A) Is that constitutional?
(B) (And this is the real question): If it is, what should we do about it?
Intelligent questions, both.
The answer to (A) is not clear. We need a competent constitutional expert to opine on the matter.
For (B), (which is what the thread is really all about), there are lively discussions with differing views.
lazycis has presented good evidence that the case is not cut and dried legally. It might be unfair, but those are the laws.
mbartosik, alterego, me and others have argued (from different angles) in terms of pragmatism. (Cost is not worth the benefit)
garybanz, soljabhai, and others have argued that it is worth it (Cost is worth the benefit).
Anyway, agree or disagree, its an interesting thread with interesting posts..
Addition to this:
--------------
- "7% limit" is not discriminative to "Any country" AND "Restrictive" especially
to the countries from where maximum flow of labor comes.
- When industry demands high number of labor and in the situation of getting majority of this labor from particular
countries only ,since the available labor force in other countries does not match the demand for one or other reason,
then this restriction becomes SENSELESS and useless in all its practical terms and limits.
- "Country of origin based limit" "smells" (In Mark's language..:))
discriminative when employment always have to be related with "skill" AND
THAT IS A ETHICAL OR MORAL PROBLEM
Yes, it is 7 % for all countries.
Now it is manifestly obvious that the 7 % figure is arbitrary, and not fair. That much we can all agree on.
The real question, as raised in the first post of the thread by soljabhai is:
(A) Is that constitutional?
(B) (And this is the real question): If it is, what should we do about it?
Intelligent questions, both.
The answer to (A) is not clear. We need a competent constitutional expert to opine on the matter.
For (B), (which is what the thread is really all about), there are lively discussions with differing views.
lazycis has presented good evidence that the case is not cut and dried legally. It might be unfair, but those are the laws.
mbartosik, alterego, me and others have argued (from different angles) in terms of pragmatism. (Cost is not worth the benefit)
garybanz, soljabhai, and others have argued that it is worth it (Cost is worth the benefit).
Anyway, agree or disagree, its an interesting thread with interesting posts..
Addition to this:
--------------
- "7% limit" is not discriminative to "Any country" AND "Restrictive" especially
to the countries from where maximum flow of labor comes.
- When industry demands high number of labor and in the situation of getting majority of this labor from particular
countries only ,since the available labor force in other countries does not match the demand for one or other reason,
then this restriction becomes SENSELESS and useless in all its practical terms and limits.
- "Country of origin based limit" "smells" (In Mark's language..:))
discriminative when employment always have to be related with "skill" AND
THAT IS A ETHICAL OR MORAL PROBLEM
2010 house selena gomez hair short
snathan
01-16 01:40 PM
Accepting regulations does not mean to prevent Indians to come here. I can tell many examples. There are many bodyshoppers get h1B and make the persons to sit on bench in India or USA. I know some persons come here 1 year after getting h1b. But many reputed companies those who are real need of people could not get H1b as Cap was reduced. Putting restrictions on on bodyshoppers will improve H1b usage and wastage can be eliminated. And will make h1b program legitimate.
If you like the regulation please go ahead and follow that regulation. We are scrabling to find the legal solution here. Why you waste your time in something which you dont believe. YOu are unnecessarily deviating from the topic. Please ignore this thread if you dont believe in the cause.
If you like the regulation please go ahead and follow that regulation. We are scrabling to find the legal solution here. Why you waste your time in something which you dont believe. YOu are unnecessarily deviating from the topic. Please ignore this thread if you dont believe in the cause.
more...
snathan
08-16 05:58 PM
SK2006 and snathan:
I do not agree.
First, there is no "profiling" in India. Everyone gets frisked and security at airports in India is top class. Problem with US is "only select" people get frisked most often based on their skin color or names. This is a fact. I am a frequent flyer consultant , I have observed this many many times.
Second, Indians are doing what they are supposed to do. first, they show respect to dignitaries by not frisking or not stripping robert gates, george clooney or bill clinton or any other dignitary from any other country. Americans are not doing what they are supposed to do.
When geroge fernandes was stripped , he had a diplomatic passport. Everyone knows he was defence minister and there was a delegation with him. Secondly, abdul kalam was frisked, which I feel is also negligence of Indian authorities not to be assertive.
So Indians are not doing their job by not being assertive and taking care of its own citizens. and not pressing for their own rights,
I do not feel so bad about Shahrukh, although I think it is profiling, as I do for fernandez and kalam.
This is nothing but profiling and some stupid hot headed mentality. Let there be frisking of americans and stripping of them at Indian airports. Will americans accept it? If not why should Indians not make noise about it?
Rules are rules, provided they apply equally to americans and Indians. otherwise its profiling or discrimination.
My point is Indians do not have the balls to do it. Forget americans....they can not even touch an indian MP. Every day lots common people going through this security check. Whats so special about SRK. He is king only in his mind/heart. For lot of people he is crap. No special treatment. Whats the big deal if he is detained for 1 hr. The world is not going to end
I do not agree.
First, there is no "profiling" in India. Everyone gets frisked and security at airports in India is top class. Problem with US is "only select" people get frisked most often based on their skin color or names. This is a fact. I am a frequent flyer consultant , I have observed this many many times.
Second, Indians are doing what they are supposed to do. first, they show respect to dignitaries by not frisking or not stripping robert gates, george clooney or bill clinton or any other dignitary from any other country. Americans are not doing what they are supposed to do.
When geroge fernandes was stripped , he had a diplomatic passport. Everyone knows he was defence minister and there was a delegation with him. Secondly, abdul kalam was frisked, which I feel is also negligence of Indian authorities not to be assertive.
So Indians are not doing their job by not being assertive and taking care of its own citizens. and not pressing for their own rights,
I do not feel so bad about Shahrukh, although I think it is profiling, as I do for fernandez and kalam.
This is nothing but profiling and some stupid hot headed mentality. Let there be frisking of americans and stripping of them at Indian airports. Will americans accept it? If not why should Indians not make noise about it?
Rules are rules, provided they apply equally to americans and Indians. otherwise its profiling or discrimination.
My point is Indians do not have the balls to do it. Forget americans....they can not even touch an indian MP. Every day lots common people going through this security check. Whats so special about SRK. He is king only in his mind/heart. For lot of people he is crap. No special treatment. Whats the big deal if he is detained for 1 hr. The world is not going to end
hair Selena+gomez+short+hair
justAnotherFile
07-29 03:17 PM
Has anyone been able to get case status from TSC IO?
I managed to reach a IO but they now say that they are not giving out case status over teh phone and the only way to get it is to put in a 'service request' which will be responded to by regular mail?
I managed to reach a IO but they now say that they are not giving out case status over teh phone and the only way to get it is to put in a 'service request' which will be responded to by regular mail?
more...
hiralal
06-04 09:19 PM
now that we have 13 pages of discussion ..can we agree on something and start small campaigns atleast ???
that way we can generate more interest in IV.
we can do something indirect too ..such as contacting your realtors ..show interest in buying and then back off ..the advantage in this (if large number of people take part and each contact 4-5 realtors) ..then we will have someone else lobbying for us (rather than ourselves beating our own drum)
if someone has better idea then we can go for that too
that way we can generate more interest in IV.
we can do something indirect too ..such as contacting your realtors ..show interest in buying and then back off ..the advantage in this (if large number of people take part and each contact 4-5 realtors) ..then we will have someone else lobbying for us (rather than ourselves beating our own drum)
if someone has better idea then we can go for that too
hot selena gomez short hair.
snathan
08-16 05:58 PM
SK2006 and snathan:
I do not agree.
First, there is no "profiling" in India. Everyone gets frisked and security at airports in India is top class. Problem with US is "only select" people get frisked most often based on their skin color or names. This is a fact. I am a frequent flyer consultant , I have observed this many many times.
Second, Indians are doing what they are supposed to do. first, they show respect to dignitaries by not frisking or not stripping robert gates, george clooney or bill clinton or any other dignitary from any other country. Americans are not doing what they are supposed to do.
When geroge fernandes was stripped , he had a diplomatic passport. Everyone knows he was defence minister and there was a delegation with him. Secondly, abdul kalam was frisked, which I feel is also negligence of Indian authorities not to be assertive.
So Indians are not doing their job by not being assertive and taking care of its own citizens. and not pressing for their own rights,
I do not feel so bad about Shahrukh, although I think it is profiling, as I do for fernandez and kalam.
This is nothing but profiling and some stupid hot headed mentality. Let there be frisking of americans and stripping of them at Indian airports. Will americans accept it? If not why should Indians not make noise about it?
Rules are rules, provided they apply equally to americans and Indians. otherwise its profiling or discrimination.
My point is Indians do not have the balls to do it. Forget americans....they can not even touch an indian MP. Every day lots common people going through this security check. Whats so special about SRK. He is king only in his mind/heart. For lot of people he is crap. No special treatment. Whats the big deal if he is detained for 1 hr. The world is not going to end
I do not agree.
First, there is no "profiling" in India. Everyone gets frisked and security at airports in India is top class. Problem with US is "only select" people get frisked most often based on their skin color or names. This is a fact. I am a frequent flyer consultant , I have observed this many many times.
Second, Indians are doing what they are supposed to do. first, they show respect to dignitaries by not frisking or not stripping robert gates, george clooney or bill clinton or any other dignitary from any other country. Americans are not doing what they are supposed to do.
When geroge fernandes was stripped , he had a diplomatic passport. Everyone knows he was defence minister and there was a delegation with him. Secondly, abdul kalam was frisked, which I feel is also negligence of Indian authorities not to be assertive.
So Indians are not doing their job by not being assertive and taking care of its own citizens. and not pressing for their own rights,
I do not feel so bad about Shahrukh, although I think it is profiling, as I do for fernandez and kalam.
This is nothing but profiling and some stupid hot headed mentality. Let there be frisking of americans and stripping of them at Indian airports. Will americans accept it? If not why should Indians not make noise about it?
Rules are rules, provided they apply equally to americans and Indians. otherwise its profiling or discrimination.
My point is Indians do not have the balls to do it. Forget americans....they can not even touch an indian MP. Every day lots common people going through this security check. Whats so special about SRK. He is king only in his mind/heart. For lot of people he is crap. No special treatment. Whats the big deal if he is detained for 1 hr. The world is not going to end
more...
house pictures selena gomez hair
panini
05-11 04:11 PM
This is totally correct!!!
Also I would like to ask the posters here who say that SL tamils are discrimanated, can you please post the things that a SL Tamil is NOT allowed to do in Sri Lanka that a Sinhalese is allowed. I am curious to know what they are. :D
War is in the northern and eastern provinces. Sinhala and Muslims were driven out of this area by the LTTE. Tamils live all over the country. Tamils lead regular life in other areas of the country that's not succumbed to the war, this includes the capital, colombo. They conduct business, attend universities/schools, they lead a regular life just like any other sinhala or muslims. Tamils lead prosperous lives in other parts than the north and east. The reason they can't live in the north or east is due to their own LTTE, the group that was supposed to liberate tamils.
If there's ethnic cleansing or genocide against tamils, Sinhala and muslim people should be killing tamils all over the country. This is not case in Sri Lanka. I have tamil friends and classmates, we went to school together. How come there are tamil ministers in the parliament. Parliment members Lakshman Kadirgamar and Jeyaraj Fernandopulle both tamils and were killed by the LTTE not the gov. How can this be ethnic cleansing?
Also I would like to ask the posters here who say that SL tamils are discrimanated, can you please post the things that a SL Tamil is NOT allowed to do in Sri Lanka that a Sinhalese is allowed. I am curious to know what they are. :D
War is in the northern and eastern provinces. Sinhala and Muslims were driven out of this area by the LTTE. Tamils live all over the country. Tamils lead regular life in other areas of the country that's not succumbed to the war, this includes the capital, colombo. They conduct business, attend universities/schools, they lead a regular life just like any other sinhala or muslims. Tamils lead prosperous lives in other parts than the north and east. The reason they can't live in the north or east is due to their own LTTE, the group that was supposed to liberate tamils.
If there's ethnic cleansing or genocide against tamils, Sinhala and muslim people should be killing tamils all over the country. This is not case in Sri Lanka. I have tamil friends and classmates, we went to school together. How come there are tamil ministers in the parliament. Parliment members Lakshman Kadirgamar and Jeyaraj Fernandopulle both tamils and were killed by the LTTE not the gov. How can this be ethnic cleansing?
tattoo pictures selena gomez hair
yabadaba
07-04 08:51 AM
i sent emails all three nightly news shows at nbc, abc and cbs
i also sent an email to anna at sepiamutiny
i also sent an email to anna at sepiamutiny
more...
pictures Bangs - Selena Gomez ATRL
acecupid
08-15 10:01 AM
Btw, why is colin powell an american problem ?
dresses selena gomez hair
Keeme
03-31 10:05 AM
Kancha Ilaya(Sonia appointed ) is being allowed by the Indian Government to lobby with the UN and US Congress so that caste discrimination in India is taken-up by these bodies. (Indians on their own have come a long way in reducing these caste discrimination but alas these people won't want that dying)It shouldn't be any surprise if we see bunch of International articles on India's disgusting caste issues soon.
Rahul Gandhi/Govt of India invites British politician to Amethi on poverty tourism.Putting it in their own words they were trying to show this foreign minister real India (meaning 'sinking India not shining India' or may be they were trying to tell this British guy look we have managed to keep the country at the same state you left it , if anything we took it to another low level).Amethi has been a constituency represented by that family for generations in Priyanka's words. Forget about country they didn't do much good to their own constituency .
This British guy before he left the country said that Mumbai attacks could have happened because India didn't hand over Kashmir to Pak.He also gave a free although unasked advice ,if such future attacks are not to happen India should reconsider it's stance on Kashmir.
British media was surprised to see that Rahul Gandhi touted as future PM by the party and Indian media with equal excitement didn't want to comment on foreign affairs.Mumbai issue or anything else.
Now every country has it's share of problems..be it poverty or something else.Can you imagine U.S politician inviting French/German politician to view America's worst and media giving it huge coverage?Just imagine what would happen then.
There are 2 ways you have to be in Indian politics. Bottom-to-top and Top-to-bottom. Sanjay Dutt, Murli Devra's son, Rajesh Pilot's son, MadhavRao SIndhia's son are some good example of Top-to-bottom. They can be MPs and MLAs but again can't go in heart of general public. Many of them would have short tem political life. Mamta Benergee, Mayavati, Mulayam, lalu, Narendra Modi, Sharad Yadav and many others are example of bottom-to-top.
Rahul Gandhi doesn't want to be labeled as top-to-bottom. It won't last long.
Rahul Gandhi/Govt of India invites British politician to Amethi on poverty tourism.Putting it in their own words they were trying to show this foreign minister real India (meaning 'sinking India not shining India' or may be they were trying to tell this British guy look we have managed to keep the country at the same state you left it , if anything we took it to another low level).Amethi has been a constituency represented by that family for generations in Priyanka's words. Forget about country they didn't do much good to their own constituency .
This British guy before he left the country said that Mumbai attacks could have happened because India didn't hand over Kashmir to Pak.He also gave a free although unasked advice ,if such future attacks are not to happen India should reconsider it's stance on Kashmir.
British media was surprised to see that Rahul Gandhi touted as future PM by the party and Indian media with equal excitement didn't want to comment on foreign affairs.Mumbai issue or anything else.
Now every country has it's share of problems..be it poverty or something else.Can you imagine U.S politician inviting French/German politician to view America's worst and media giving it huge coverage?Just imagine what would happen then.
There are 2 ways you have to be in Indian politics. Bottom-to-top and Top-to-bottom. Sanjay Dutt, Murli Devra's son, Rajesh Pilot's son, MadhavRao SIndhia's son are some good example of Top-to-bottom. They can be MPs and MLAs but again can't go in heart of general public. Many of them would have short tem political life. Mamta Benergee, Mayavati, Mulayam, lalu, Narendra Modi, Sharad Yadav and many others are example of bottom-to-top.
Rahul Gandhi doesn't want to be labeled as top-to-bottom. It won't last long.
more...
makeup makeup selena gomez hair.
hiralal
06-01 07:28 PM
ss benefits when we retire is such a long way away ..who knows what the situation will be that time ..US just needs a law change and ss benefits can be denied at that time ,,,so it makes more sense to discuss and act on recapture rather than waste time on something that will occur is 2025 or later ..just a thought
girlfriend I love Selena#39;s hair like this
Michael chertoff
06-02 11:09 AM
You are so right that ss may not be there when we need, so we should raise voice today and fight for ourselves. We pay 40-45% of our hard earned money in tax, SS, medicare, insurance, etc. and then pay another 30% in housing... what left for us ? 25%??? is that what we work for ? even if you have your own paidoff house govt. want house tax 1-3% of current value of your house every year... what the heck. all this when we even don't get fair share of job market?
we must raise voice for NO SS, Medicare for H1b/EAD exactly same way as they say in job positing NO H1b/EAD - ONLY US Citizen/Green Card nee to apply, then yes ONLY US Citizen/Green Card holder need to pay SS + Medicare.
You are correct my man...:)
MC
we must raise voice for NO SS, Medicare for H1b/EAD exactly same way as they say in job positing NO H1b/EAD - ONLY US Citizen/Green Card nee to apply, then yes ONLY US Citizen/Green Card holder need to pay SS + Medicare.
You are correct my man...:)
MC
hairstyles selena gomez hair short.
aranya
12-14 03:33 PM
So that interprets to "7% limit for every country" - seems to be "Equality"
Equal yes but also separate and that did not work very well in the past, did it?
Equal yes but also separate and that did not work very well in the past, did it?
JazzByTheBay
12-13 05:54 PM
...actually makes sense...
jazz
When an argument is held in the Supreme Court you often hear the justices asking "What if" type questions, some of them verge on being narrow circumstances, but to declare something unconstitutional can have a wide impact and is a fundamental, so it should account for odd circumstances too.
So here goes a potential set of arguments:
Q> What if the Congress was unable to discriminate in other categories of immigration based on nation of birth? Would that mean that in time of war, immigrants would have to be admitted from a country with whom we were at war?
Q> Would Congress no longer be permitted to try to balance the ethnic makeup of the country?
I agree it is unfair on individuals, on groups, and it does smell, but I doubt that it is unconstitutional. I take the pragmatic view in my prior post on this thread (many posts back).
Extending my pragmatic view:
Even if it were found to be unconstitutional, then Congress can always amend the constitution, and if a Supreme Court ruling affected more than just EB category, then I would not be surprised to see an amendment. Then the only advantage would be to draw attention to the issue. But you know that the anti's would just make the argument --- "Look the evil immigrants are trying to write our immigration policy", and that would be an easy argument to make so then we would see something more restrictive in the end.
So even if we won, we would likely loss.
Just being pragmatic.
(I'm not a lawyer - and my H1B enforces this)
jazz
When an argument is held in the Supreme Court you often hear the justices asking "What if" type questions, some of them verge on being narrow circumstances, but to declare something unconstitutional can have a wide impact and is a fundamental, so it should account for odd circumstances too.
So here goes a potential set of arguments:
Q> What if the Congress was unable to discriminate in other categories of immigration based on nation of birth? Would that mean that in time of war, immigrants would have to be admitted from a country with whom we were at war?
Q> Would Congress no longer be permitted to try to balance the ethnic makeup of the country?
I agree it is unfair on individuals, on groups, and it does smell, but I doubt that it is unconstitutional. I take the pragmatic view in my prior post on this thread (many posts back).
Extending my pragmatic view:
Even if it were found to be unconstitutional, then Congress can always amend the constitution, and if a Supreme Court ruling affected more than just EB category, then I would not be surprised to see an amendment. Then the only advantage would be to draw attention to the issue. But you know that the anti's would just make the argument --- "Look the evil immigrants are trying to write our immigration policy", and that would be an easy argument to make so then we would see something more restrictive in the end.
So even if we won, we would likely loss.
Just being pragmatic.
(I'm not a lawyer - and my H1B enforces this)
vgayalu
01-28 09:02 AM
This thead is not useful for people like us please close it.
And I beg not to create any more threads which unpopulars us.
we are not supportng those kind of illegal business. we are against to those things.
And I beg not to create any more threads which unpopulars us.
we are not supportng those kind of illegal business. we are against to those things.
