diptam
01-16 12:49 PM
My friend (Project Manager) wrote the letter in LetterHead as well as got it notarized/attested. The notarization is only for making sure who ever is the "undersignee" is the actual person. No one else is doing the signature for him.
Better to be safe. My Project Manager friend shouted at me when i asked him to do the notarization on top of the letter head - but i told him "please please....." and he did that :)
Thanks.
What is the difference between an affidavit and a letter? Affidavit is one that is not on a letter head and a letter is the one on a letter head or it depends on who is writing the letter?
Does 1 each serve the purpose?
With the initial packet, I had sent
1 letter from Company A (By the director on letterhead)
2 letters from Company B (1 from colleague on letterhead and 1 from HR on letterhead)
Better to be safe. My Project Manager friend shouted at me when i asked him to do the notarization on top of the letter head - but i told him "please please....." and he did that :)
Thanks.
What is the difference between an affidavit and a letter? Affidavit is one that is not on a letter head and a letter is the one on a letter head or it depends on who is writing the letter?
Does 1 each serve the purpose?
With the initial packet, I had sent
1 letter from Company A (By the director on letterhead)
2 letters from Company B (1 from colleague on letterhead and 1 from HR on letterhead)
wallpaper call-of-duty-modern-warfare-3-
arorasa
01-01 01:20 AM
Good thread. Encourage more people to vote !
vicky007
05-10 12:16 PM
Sorry, the link is not working anymore.
But here is the complete report of the proposed measure:
WASHINGTON - Employers would have to check Social Security numbers and the immigration status of all new hires under a tentative Senate agreement on toughening sanctions against people who provide jobs to illegal immigrants.
Those who don't and who hire an illegal immigrant would be subject to fines of $200 to $6,000 per violation.
Employers found to have actually hired illegal immigrants once an electronic system for the checks is in place could be fined up to $20,000 per unauthorized worker and even sentenced to jail for repeat offenses.
What to do with people who hire illegal immigrants has been one of the stumbling points in putting together a broad immigration bill that tightens borders, but also addresses the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Congress left it to employers to ensure they were hiring legal workers when they passed an immigration law in 1986 and provided penalties for those who didn't. But the law was not strictly enforced and the market grew for fraudulent documents.
Senate Republicans and Democrats are hoping this week to reach a compromise on more contentious parts of the immigration bill so they can vote on it before Memorial Day.
The employer sanctions were negotiated separately from other parts of the broader bill after some senators raised concerns about privacy of tax information, liability of employers and worker protections.
Employers are wary of the system Congress wants them to use and say it would be unreliable.
"What's going to happen when you have individuals legally allowed to work in the United States, but they can't confirm it?" asked Angelo Amador, director of immigration policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Critics say expanding a Web-based screening program, now used on a trial basis by about 6,200 employers, to cover everyone might create a version of the no-fly lists used for screening airline passengers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Infants and Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) of Massachusetts were among people barred from boarding a plane because names identical to their own were on a government list of suspected terrorists.
"This will be the no-work list," predicted Tim Sparapani, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Last year, employers in the trial screening program submitted names and identifying information on more than 980,000 people. Of them, about 148,000 were flagged for further investigation. Only 6,202 in that group were found to be authorized to work.
U.S. citizens could come up as possible illegal workers if, for example, they change their last names when they marry but fail to update Social Security records.
All non-citizens submitted to the system are referred to the Homeland Security Department, even if their Social Security number is valid.
A bill passed by the House would impose stiff employer sanctions, but does not couple them with a guest worker program, drawing opposition from business. The bill also would give employers six years to screen all previously hired employees still on the payroll as well as new hires — altogether, about 140 million people.
The Senate agreement proposes screening all new hires but only a limited number of people hired previously _specifically, those who have jobs important to the nation's security.
Negotiating the Senate agreement are Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana.
Their plan would give employers 18 months to start using the verification system once it is financed. It would create a process for workers to keep their jobs and be protected from discrimination while contesting a finding that they are not authorized to work.
To check compliance and fight identity theft, the legislation would allow the Homeland Security Department limited access to tax and Social Security information.
The Social Security Administration, for example, would give homeland security officials lists of employers who submit large numbers of employees who are not verified as legal workers. The Internal Revenue Service would provide those employers' tax identification numbers, names and addresses.
Social Security also would share lists of Social Security numbers repeatedly submitted to the verification system for different jobs.
The senators also want to increase the number of work site investigators to 10,000, a 50-fold increase.
President Bush asked Congress in January to provide more than $130 million to expand the trial system. That's not expected to be enough.
Once the above plan is agreed to , the senators will be able to come to a way out of the present CIR impasse.
"Report indicates that the Senate leaders have been working on contentious parts of the comprehensive immigration reform proposal as separate from the whole bill to crack the logjam. For instance, Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana formed a team to negotiate the Senate agreement on the employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens, and successfully reached an agreement".
But here is the complete report of the proposed measure:
WASHINGTON - Employers would have to check Social Security numbers and the immigration status of all new hires under a tentative Senate agreement on toughening sanctions against people who provide jobs to illegal immigrants.
Those who don't and who hire an illegal immigrant would be subject to fines of $200 to $6,000 per violation.
Employers found to have actually hired illegal immigrants once an electronic system for the checks is in place could be fined up to $20,000 per unauthorized worker and even sentenced to jail for repeat offenses.
What to do with people who hire illegal immigrants has been one of the stumbling points in putting together a broad immigration bill that tightens borders, but also addresses the estimated 12 million illegal immigrants now in the United States.
Congress left it to employers to ensure they were hiring legal workers when they passed an immigration law in 1986 and provided penalties for those who didn't. But the law was not strictly enforced and the market grew for fraudulent documents.
Senate Republicans and Democrats are hoping this week to reach a compromise on more contentious parts of the immigration bill so they can vote on it before Memorial Day.
The employer sanctions were negotiated separately from other parts of the broader bill after some senators raised concerns about privacy of tax information, liability of employers and worker protections.
Employers are wary of the system Congress wants them to use and say it would be unreliable.
"What's going to happen when you have individuals legally allowed to work in the United States, but they can't confirm it?" asked Angelo Amador, director of immigration policy at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce.
Critics say expanding a Web-based screening program, now used on a trial basis by about 6,200 employers, to cover everyone might create a version of the no-fly lists used for screening airline passengers after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. Infants and Democratic Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (news, bio, voting record) of Massachusetts were among people barred from boarding a plane because names identical to their own were on a government list of suspected terrorists.
"This will be the no-work list," predicted Tim Sparapani, attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union.
Last year, employers in the trial screening program submitted names and identifying information on more than 980,000 people. Of them, about 148,000 were flagged for further investigation. Only 6,202 in that group were found to be authorized to work.
U.S. citizens could come up as possible illegal workers if, for example, they change their last names when they marry but fail to update Social Security records.
All non-citizens submitted to the system are referred to the Homeland Security Department, even if their Social Security number is valid.
A bill passed by the House would impose stiff employer sanctions, but does not couple them with a guest worker program, drawing opposition from business. The bill also would give employers six years to screen all previously hired employees still on the payroll as well as new hires — altogether, about 140 million people.
The Senate agreement proposes screening all new hires but only a limited number of people hired previously _specifically, those who have jobs important to the nation's security.
Negotiating the Senate agreement are Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana.
Their plan would give employers 18 months to start using the verification system once it is financed. It would create a process for workers to keep their jobs and be protected from discrimination while contesting a finding that they are not authorized to work.
To check compliance and fight identity theft, the legislation would allow the Homeland Security Department limited access to tax and Social Security information.
The Social Security Administration, for example, would give homeland security officials lists of employers who submit large numbers of employees who are not verified as legal workers. The Internal Revenue Service would provide those employers' tax identification numbers, names and addresses.
Social Security also would share lists of Social Security numbers repeatedly submitted to the verification system for different jobs.
The senators also want to increase the number of work site investigators to 10,000, a 50-fold increase.
President Bush asked Congress in January to provide more than $130 million to expand the trial system. That's not expected to be enough.
Once the above plan is agreed to , the senators will be able to come to a way out of the present CIR impasse.
"Report indicates that the Senate leaders have been working on contentious parts of the comprehensive immigration reform proposal as separate from the whole bill to crack the logjam. For instance, Republican Sens. Jon Kyl of Arizona and Chuck Grassley of Iowa and Democrats Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Barack Obama of Illinois and Max Baucus of Montana formed a team to negotiate the Senate agreement on the employer sanctions for hiring illegal aliens, and successfully reached an agreement".
2011 Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3
sreenivas11
06-15 04:04 PM
USCIS Proc Times Update 06/15/09
NSC I-485 Sept 1st 2007
TSC I-485 Aug 17th 2007
NSC I-485 Sept 1st 2007
TSC I-485 Aug 17th 2007
more...
goel_ar
11-19 08:28 AM
Hi ,
What number I can call at? When I call them- they told me I have to come in person to get status as they can't give it over phone for non-US citizens.
Thanks,
AG
What number I can call at? When I call them- they told me I have to come in person to get status as they can't give it over phone for non-US citizens.
Thanks,
AG
Bpositive
02-22 05:17 PM
Talk to a good lawyer...you should be able to sort it out..Congrats on getting into the Phd program at MIT. No mean task...
more...
FinalGC
04-28 09:00 AM
That is encouraging news, after heari ng all bad news of people getting stopped and being sent back........
2010 Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3
shreekhand
12-08 10:53 PM
Good info Bpositive...
LPR coz you didn't present the card. Henceforth... when you re-enter using your physical GC, they will write ARC on the immigration stamp, that is, Alien Resident Card.
LPR coz you didn't present the card. Henceforth... when you re-enter using your physical GC, they will write ARC on the immigration stamp, that is, Alien Resident Card.
more...
cpolisetti
03-31 03:56 PM
She was also available for Q&A earlier today on Washington Post. I am quoting one question and answer in particular. Probably she can help in more visibilty of our voice?
Here is the link for todays Q&A:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/03/30/DI2006033001345.html
Question from Washington, D.C.: Thank you for your informative article on a topic that needs more attention.
I'm trying to get an sense of the scope of the problem from the perspective of an H-1B visa holder. Just how long does it typically take professionals from India and China/Taiwan to get a green card through their employer these days? What disinsentives are there for employers, other than the risk that the green card may not be approved and their employee will have to return to their home country?
Answer from S. Mitra Kalita: Absent from much of this debate are the voices of H-1B holders themselves and I thank you for your question. I talked to someone who wouldn't allow himself to be quoted by name (so I did not use him in today's story) but this particular individual's story is one I hear often: He has been here for nine years, first on a student visa, then an H-1B. His employer applied for his green card in 2002 and he has been waiting four years because it is tied up in the backlog for labor certification. He said he is giving it six more months and if it doesn't come through, he's heading back to India. This stage is the one that a lot of observers agree where a worker risks being exploited. They are beholden to the employer because of the green card sponsorship (an H-1B visa can travel with a worker from one company to another, however) and cannot get promoted because that is technically a change in job classification -- and would require a new application. On the other hand, a lot of companies say that they know once someone gets a green card, they are out the door because suddenly they can start a company, go work for someone else, get promoted... Anyway, I could go on and on with background on this but instead I will post a story I did last summer on the green card backlog. Hang on.
Todays article:
Most See Visa Program as Severely Flawed
By S. Mitra Kalita
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, March 31, 2006; D01
Somewhere in the debate over immigration and the future of illegal workers, another, less-publicized fight is being waged over those who toil in air-conditioned offices, earn up to six-figure salaries and spend their days programming and punching code.
They are foreign workers who arrive on H-1B visas, mostly young men from India and China tapped for skilled jobs such as software engineers and systems analysts. Unlike seasonal guest workers who stay for about 10 months, H-1B workers stay as long as six years. By then, they must obtain a green card or go back home.
Yesterday, the House Judiciary Committee heard testimony for and against expanding the H-1B program. This week, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved legislation that would increase the H-1B cap to 115,000 from 65,000 and allow some foreign students to bypass the program altogether and immediately get sponsored for green cards, which allow immigrants to be permanent residents, free to live and work in the United States.
But underlying the arguments is a belief, even among the workers themselves, that the current H-1B program is severely flawed.
Opponents say the highly skilled foreign workers compete with and depress the wages of native-born Americans.
Supporters say foreign workers stimulate the economy, create more opportunities for their U.S. counterparts and prevent jobs from being outsourced overseas. The problem, they say, is the cumbersome process: Immigrants often spend six years as guest workers and then wait for green card sponsorship and approval.
At the House committee hearing yesterday, Stuart Anderson, executive director of the National Foundation for American Policy, a nonprofit research group, spoke in favor of raising the cap. Still, he said in an interview, the H-1B visa is far from ideal. "What you want to have is a system where people can get hired directly on green cards in 30 to 60 days," he said.
Economists seem divided on whether highly skilled immigrants depress wages for U.S. workers. In 2003, a study for the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta found no effect on salaries, with an average income for both H-1B and American computer programmers of $55,000.
Still, the study by Madeline Zavodny, now an economics professor at Agnes Scott College in Decatur, Ga., concluded "that unemployment was higher as a result of these H-1B workers."
In a working paper released this week, Harvard University economist George J. Borjas studied the wages of foreigners and native-born Americans with doctorates, concluding that the foreigners lowered the wages of competing workers by 3 to 4 percent. He said he suspected that his conclusion also measured the effects of H-1B visas.
"If there is a demand for engineers and no foreigners to take those jobs, salaries would shoot through the roof and make that very attractive for Americans," Borjas said.
The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers-USA says H-1B salaries are lower. "Those who are here on H-1B visas are being worked as indentured servants. They are being paid $13,000 less in the engineering and science worlds," said Ralph W. Wyndrum Jr., president of the advocacy group for technical professionals, which favors green-card-based immigration, but only for exceptional candidates.
Wyndrum said the current system allows foreign skilled workers to "take jobs away from equally good American engineers and scientists." He based his statements about salary disparities on a December report by John Miano, a software engineer, who favors tighter immigration controls. Miano spoke at the House hearing and cited figures from the Occupational Employment Statistics program that show U.S. computer programmers earn an average $65,000 a year, compared with $52,000 for H-1B programmers.
"Is it really a guest-worker program since most people want to stay here? Miano said in an interview. "There is direct displacement of American workers."
Those who recruit and hire retort that a global economy mandates finding the best employees in the world, not just the United States. And because green-card caps are allocated equally among countries (India and China are backlogged, for example), the H-1B becomes the easiest way to hire foreigners.
It is not always easy. Last year, Razorsight Corp., a technology company with offices in Fairfax and Bangalore, India, tried to sponsor more H-1B visas -- but they already were exhausted for the year. Currently, the company has 12 H-1B workers on a U.S. staff of 100, earning $80,000 to $120,000 a year.
Charlie Thomas, Razorsight's chief executive, said the cap should be based on market demand. "It's absolutely essential for us to have access to a global talent," he said. "If your product isn't the best it can be with the best cost structure and development, then someone else will do it. And that someone else may not be a U.S.-based company."
Because H-1B holders can switch employers to sponsor their visas, some workers said they demand salary increases along the way. But once a company sponsors their green cards, workers say they don't expect to be promoted or given a raise.
Now some H-1B holders are watching to see how Congress treats the millions of immigrants who crossed the borders through stealthier means.
Sameer Chandra, 30, who lives in Fairfax and works as a systems analyst on an H-1B visa, said he is concerned that Congress might make it easier for immigrants who entered the U.S. illegally to get a green card than people like him. "What is the point of staying here legally?" he said.
His Houston-based company has sponsored his green card, and Chandra said he hopes it is processed quickly. If it is not, he said, he will return to India. "There's a lot of opportunities there in my country."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/03/30/DI2006033001345.html
Here is the link for todays Q&A:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/03/30/DI2006033001345.html
Question from Washington, D.C.: Thank you for your informative article on a topic that needs more attention.
I'm trying to get an sense of the scope of the problem from the perspective of an H-1B visa holder. Just how long does it typically take professionals from India and China/Taiwan to get a green card through their employer these days? What disinsentives are there for employers, other than the risk that the green card may not be approved and their employee will have to return to their home country?
Answer from S. Mitra Kalita: Absent from much of this debate are the voices of H-1B holders themselves and I thank you for your question. I talked to someone who wouldn't allow himself to be quoted by name (so I did not use him in today's story) but this particular individual's story is one I hear often: He has been here for nine years, first on a student visa, then an H-1B. His employer applied for his green card in 2002 and he has been waiting four years because it is tied up in the backlog for labor certification. He said he is giving it six more months and if it doesn't come through, he's heading back to India. This stage is the one that a lot of observers agree where a worker risks being exploited. They are beholden to the employer because of the green card sponsorship (an H-1B visa can travel with a worker from one company to another, however) and cannot get promoted because that is technically a change in job classification -- and would require a new application. On the other hand, a lot of companies say that they know once someone gets a green card, they are out the door because suddenly they can start a company, go work for someone else, get promoted... Anyway, I could go on and on with background on this but instead I will post a story I did last summer on the green card backlog. Hang on.
Todays article:
Most See Visa Program as Severely Flawed
By S. Mitra Kalita
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, March 31, 2006; D01
Somewhere in the debate over immigration and the future of illegal workers, another, less-publicized fight is being waged over those who toil in air-conditioned offices, earn up to six-figure salaries and spend their days programming and punching code.
They are foreign workers who arrive on H-1B visas, mostly young men from India and China tapped for skilled jobs such as software engineers and systems analysts. Unlike seasonal guest workers who stay for about 10 months, H-1B workers stay as long as six years. By then, they must obtain a green card or go back home.
Yesterday, the House Judiciary Committee heard testimony for and against expanding the H-1B program. This week, the Senate Judiciary Committee approved legislation that would increase the H-1B cap to 115,000 from 65,000 and allow some foreign students to bypass the program altogether and immediately get sponsored for green cards, which allow immigrants to be permanent residents, free to live and work in the United States.
But underlying the arguments is a belief, even among the workers themselves, that the current H-1B program is severely flawed.
Opponents say the highly skilled foreign workers compete with and depress the wages of native-born Americans.
Supporters say foreign workers stimulate the economy, create more opportunities for their U.S. counterparts and prevent jobs from being outsourced overseas. The problem, they say, is the cumbersome process: Immigrants often spend six years as guest workers and then wait for green card sponsorship and approval.
At the House committee hearing yesterday, Stuart Anderson, executive director of the National Foundation for American Policy, a nonprofit research group, spoke in favor of raising the cap. Still, he said in an interview, the H-1B visa is far from ideal. "What you want to have is a system where people can get hired directly on green cards in 30 to 60 days," he said.
Economists seem divided on whether highly skilled immigrants depress wages for U.S. workers. In 2003, a study for the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta found no effect on salaries, with an average income for both H-1B and American computer programmers of $55,000.
Still, the study by Madeline Zavodny, now an economics professor at Agnes Scott College in Decatur, Ga., concluded "that unemployment was higher as a result of these H-1B workers."
In a working paper released this week, Harvard University economist George J. Borjas studied the wages of foreigners and native-born Americans with doctorates, concluding that the foreigners lowered the wages of competing workers by 3 to 4 percent. He said he suspected that his conclusion also measured the effects of H-1B visas.
"If there is a demand for engineers and no foreigners to take those jobs, salaries would shoot through the roof and make that very attractive for Americans," Borjas said.
The Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers-USA says H-1B salaries are lower. "Those who are here on H-1B visas are being worked as indentured servants. They are being paid $13,000 less in the engineering and science worlds," said Ralph W. Wyndrum Jr., president of the advocacy group for technical professionals, which favors green-card-based immigration, but only for exceptional candidates.
Wyndrum said the current system allows foreign skilled workers to "take jobs away from equally good American engineers and scientists." He based his statements about salary disparities on a December report by John Miano, a software engineer, who favors tighter immigration controls. Miano spoke at the House hearing and cited figures from the Occupational Employment Statistics program that show U.S. computer programmers earn an average $65,000 a year, compared with $52,000 for H-1B programmers.
"Is it really a guest-worker program since most people want to stay here? Miano said in an interview. "There is direct displacement of American workers."
Those who recruit and hire retort that a global economy mandates finding the best employees in the world, not just the United States. And because green-card caps are allocated equally among countries (India and China are backlogged, for example), the H-1B becomes the easiest way to hire foreigners.
It is not always easy. Last year, Razorsight Corp., a technology company with offices in Fairfax and Bangalore, India, tried to sponsor more H-1B visas -- but they already were exhausted for the year. Currently, the company has 12 H-1B workers on a U.S. staff of 100, earning $80,000 to $120,000 a year.
Charlie Thomas, Razorsight's chief executive, said the cap should be based on market demand. "It's absolutely essential for us to have access to a global talent," he said. "If your product isn't the best it can be with the best cost structure and development, then someone else will do it. And that someone else may not be a U.S.-based company."
Because H-1B holders can switch employers to sponsor their visas, some workers said they demand salary increases along the way. But once a company sponsors their green cards, workers say they don't expect to be promoted or given a raise.
Now some H-1B holders are watching to see how Congress treats the millions of immigrants who crossed the borders through stealthier means.
Sameer Chandra, 30, who lives in Fairfax and works as a systems analyst on an H-1B visa, said he is concerned that Congress might make it easier for immigrants who entered the U.S. illegally to get a green card than people like him. "What is the point of staying here legally?" he said.
His Houston-based company has sponsored his green card, and Chandra said he hopes it is processed quickly. If it is not, he said, he will return to India. "There's a lot of opportunities there in my country."
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/discussion/2006/03/30/DI2006033001345.html
hair Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3
desi3933
08-13 11:55 AM
If you were born in the USA, there is no way to reject US Citizenship. Even after you take up Indian passport and citizenship, you can come anytime to the USA flash your birth certificate and then get a US Passport.
Incorrect.
Please refer to this link -- Renunciation of U.S. Citizenship (http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_776.html)
another link Loss of nationality by native-born or naturalized citizen (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/1481.html)
Incorrect.
Please refer to this link -- Renunciation of U.S. Citizenship (http://travel.state.gov/law/citizenship/citizenship_776.html)
another link Loss of nationality by native-born or naturalized citizen (http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/8/1481.html)
more...
GAFAAAAA
10-29 06:21 AM
Is this an inside joke? I'm missing the part where anybody said anything about using tables on buttons.
Someone had a sigature that said something like, "you don't use tables to make houses so why make websites out of them" and it kicked off from there. but they have changed it now.
Someone had a sigature that said something like, "you don't use tables to make houses so why make websites out of them" and it kicked off from there. but they have changed it now.
hot Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3
amoljak
03-24 03:32 PM
Here is an example of how they twist the facts.
http://www.numbersusa.com/overpopulation/ourlostfuture.html
A 4th grader (not from the US) can point out that this graph is not to the scale and incorrect.
We should collect their responses to questions and may be setup a site called falsenumbersusa.com to post them and point out the fallacies
http://www.numbersusa.com/overpopulation/ourlostfuture.html
A 4th grader (not from the US) can point out that this graph is not to the scale and incorrect.
We should collect their responses to questions and may be setup a site called falsenumbersusa.com to post them and point out the fallacies
more...
house Call of Duty-Modern Warfare
logiclife
02-05 05:04 PM
This article has an overall competitiveness argument saying that the American Competitiveness is not under a threat.
The PACE act is to protect that IN ADVANCE from happening...ie. having the american competitiveness under a threat from India and China.
I am going to discredit one argument in his article:
He says: We do an outstanding job of education for people ages 18 to 65. I beg to differ. If that is his argument to claim that there is no shortage of talent, then he ought to read a survey report funded by Pew Charitable research. The tools used was the same used by National Assessment of Adult Literacy, the government's examination of English literacy among adults.
More than 50% of students at four-year schools and more than 75% at two-year colleges lacked the skills to perform complex literacy tasks.
That means they could not interpret a table about exercise and blood pressure, understand the arguments of newspaper editorials, compare credit card offers with different interest rates and annual fees or summarize results of a survey about parental involvement in school.
The survey examined college and university students nearing the end of their degree programs. The students did the worst on matters involving math, according to the study.
Almost 20% of students pursuing four-year degrees had only basic quantitative skills. For example, the students could not estimate if their car had enough gas to get to the service station. About 30% of two-year students had only basic math skills.
The full article was published recently on all major media outlets including CNN, MSNBC and USA today.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/EDUCATION/01/20/literacy.college.students.ap/
http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2006-01-19-college-tasks_x.htm
The PACE act is to protect that IN ADVANCE from happening...ie. having the american competitiveness under a threat from India and China.
I am going to discredit one argument in his article:
He says: We do an outstanding job of education for people ages 18 to 65. I beg to differ. If that is his argument to claim that there is no shortage of talent, then he ought to read a survey report funded by Pew Charitable research. The tools used was the same used by National Assessment of Adult Literacy, the government's examination of English literacy among adults.
More than 50% of students at four-year schools and more than 75% at two-year colleges lacked the skills to perform complex literacy tasks.
That means they could not interpret a table about exercise and blood pressure, understand the arguments of newspaper editorials, compare credit card offers with different interest rates and annual fees or summarize results of a survey about parental involvement in school.
The survey examined college and university students nearing the end of their degree programs. The students did the worst on matters involving math, according to the study.
Almost 20% of students pursuing four-year degrees had only basic quantitative skills. For example, the students could not estimate if their car had enough gas to get to the service station. About 30% of two-year students had only basic math skills.
The full article was published recently on all major media outlets including CNN, MSNBC and USA today.
http://www.cnn.com/2006/EDUCATION/01/20/literacy.college.students.ap/
http://www.usatoday.com/news/education/2006-01-19-college-tasks_x.htm
tattoo Call of Duty Modern Warfare 3
jlander
January 7th, 2005, 02:59 PM
I take macro photographs of gems and jewelry to be sold on the Internet. Currently, I use a coolpix 5000 and get some pretty good photos from it. I use a light box and different light sources (fluorescent & incandescent) to capture color and color-changes in the gems.
I just bought a d70 and now need a good macro lens for it. I tried the promaster 100mm macro (I think it is the vivitar lens) and it didn't work to well for me. My 1:1 macro images are all under exposed and not as clear as I have seen. They are actually blurry when blown up 100% on my monitor. I use a good tripod and stopped down to f22 to increase depth of field. If I pull back a bit, the images get better, but then I don't have the magnification I need.
I take the photos on extra white laser printer paper and most of the time, use indirect 5000K fluorescent lighting in a light box. I don't understand why my 1:1 photos seem to be underexposed. The white paper looks gray and the gem is dark and dull. Photos taken with my coolpix 5000 look great. The background is white, and the gems are lively.
After my disappointment with the cheap promaster lens, I made the decision to purchase the Nikon 105 Micro, but when I called to order it (from expresscamera.com), they asked me why I was purchasing a 35mm lens for my digital camera. They suggested the Sigma 105mm EX DG lens and wanted to sell it to me for $650. They said that this sigma lens was better than the Nikon for digital cameras and that the Nikon would also take underexposed photos. This could be that they just didn�t want to sell me the Nikon lens for $500 and wanted to sell me a $400 sigma lens for $650.:mad:
I need a lens that will allow me to blow the photos up to 100% on my monitor and they will be clear and the gem needs to look like a gem and not a dark crystal.
I just bought a d70 and now need a good macro lens for it. I tried the promaster 100mm macro (I think it is the vivitar lens) and it didn't work to well for me. My 1:1 macro images are all under exposed and not as clear as I have seen. They are actually blurry when blown up 100% on my monitor. I use a good tripod and stopped down to f22 to increase depth of field. If I pull back a bit, the images get better, but then I don't have the magnification I need.
I take the photos on extra white laser printer paper and most of the time, use indirect 5000K fluorescent lighting in a light box. I don't understand why my 1:1 photos seem to be underexposed. The white paper looks gray and the gem is dark and dull. Photos taken with my coolpix 5000 look great. The background is white, and the gems are lively.
After my disappointment with the cheap promaster lens, I made the decision to purchase the Nikon 105 Micro, but when I called to order it (from expresscamera.com), they asked me why I was purchasing a 35mm lens for my digital camera. They suggested the Sigma 105mm EX DG lens and wanted to sell it to me for $650. They said that this sigma lens was better than the Nikon for digital cameras and that the Nikon would also take underexposed photos. This could be that they just didn�t want to sell me the Nikon lens for $500 and wanted to sell me a $400 sigma lens for $650.:mad:
I need a lens that will allow me to blow the photos up to 100% on my monitor and they will be clear and the gem needs to look like a gem and not a dark crystal.
more...
pictures Call Of Duty Modern Warfare 3
ravi2patel
07-23 11:19 PM
Hi,
My situation is as follows:
1) approved RIR labor 2002
2) approved perm labor 2005
3) approved i-140 2006 (PD 2005)
4) ALL of above for company-A. 2006 company-B took over.
My lawyer said i cannot file and have to start again with new labor as merger/acquistion was 'asset only' type.
I want to self-file i-485 giving the company "name change" letter as the only proof along with the rest of regular documents. Company-B employer is in 100% support of my application.
SHOULD I just waste $$$$ money or take a chance ? PLEASE HELP...TIRED OF WAITING FOR LAST 5 years :(
Regards,
-Ravi
My situation is as follows:
1) approved RIR labor 2002
2) approved perm labor 2005
3) approved i-140 2006 (PD 2005)
4) ALL of above for company-A. 2006 company-B took over.
My lawyer said i cannot file and have to start again with new labor as merger/acquistion was 'asset only' type.
I want to self-file i-485 giving the company "name change" letter as the only proof along with the rest of regular documents. Company-B employer is in 100% support of my application.
SHOULD I just waste $$$$ money or take a chance ? PLEASE HELP...TIRED OF WAITING FOR LAST 5 years :(
Regards,
-Ravi
dresses Call Of Duty Modern Warfare 3
arnet
10-31 04:05 PM
my lawyer said that if anyone uses EAD to work or planning to use EAD soon (not H1B) then it is better to apply for EAD renewal before 6 months of current one expires. If you are in H1B not planning to use EAD even in future then you can renew it 3-4 months before expiry.
more...
makeup Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3
geesee
07-13 09:38 AM
These should be called "Payed Services". What do you think ?
I highly oppose calling those "Payed Services", but I am ok with "Paid Services" ;)
I highly oppose calling those "Payed Services", but I am ok with "Paid Services" ;)
girlfriend Call of Duty Modern Warfare
yabadaba
06-18 11:50 AM
Hi Guys:
Had some questions with regards to my actual 485 form.
situation:
2000-2003 -F1 (never out of status/ visa stamped in 2000 in bombay)
2003-2004 - OPT
2004-2007 - 1st H1 (never got it stamped)
2007-2010 - 2nd H1 (stamped last month in canada)
PART 3
Place of Last Entry Into the United States (City/State)
What should i put over here? I did not get an arrival stamp when i came back from canada last month after stamping. all the immigration officer did was tear the bottom portion of the h1b approval and staple it to the passport. he said that was my I-94
Had some questions with regards to my actual 485 form.
situation:
2000-2003 -F1 (never out of status/ visa stamped in 2000 in bombay)
2003-2004 - OPT
2004-2007 - 1st H1 (never got it stamped)
2007-2010 - 2nd H1 (stamped last month in canada)
PART 3
Place of Last Entry Into the United States (City/State)
What should i put over here? I did not get an arrival stamp when i came back from canada last month after stamping. all the immigration officer did was tear the bottom portion of the h1b approval and staple it to the passport. he said that was my I-94
hairstyles Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 3
conchshell
04-24 10:01 AM
I think this is the opportunity that we should not miss ... lets start a letter or flower campaign to reach the member of the sub-committee. I am sure IV must be participating in this hearing.
On a slightly different note: Its not important that who reported it first. We are not playing a TRP rating game between immigration-law and IV. As long as our goals are same, and we all fight for a common cause, its just irrelevent who reported the news first.
On a slightly different note: Its not important that who reported it first. We are not playing a TRP rating game between immigration-law and IV. As long as our goals are same, and we all fight for a common cause, its just irrelevent who reported the news first.
chem2
08-17 07:07 AM
The employer cannot ask you to pay H1 filing fees. You may be responsible for attorney fees, but legally the employer is not allowed to charge you for any filing fees they pay the USCIS (the ~1400 $ you mentioned earlier). I have been in the same situation for many years, my employer requires me to pay attorney fees, but they take care of the H1 filing fees.
I'm no legal expert, but the extra 1000$ tagged on for attorney consultation sounds bogus to me. Attorney fees should include any and all required consultations.
Since you have no plans to join this employer, you may want to investigate what legal options you have, for example, complaining to DOL, USCIS, etc.
good luck. i hope everything works out for you.
I'm no legal expert, but the extra 1000$ tagged on for attorney consultation sounds bogus to me. Attorney fees should include any and all required consultations.
Since you have no plans to join this employer, you may want to investigate what legal options you have, for example, complaining to DOL, USCIS, etc.
good luck. i hope everything works out for you.
reddy77
01-12 10:33 PM
Hello Immi Gurus,
Our Division is in very bad situation and we are expecting some lay off's in next few weeks. I am working on h1b now but my 485 is pending for more than 180 days and have Valid EAD which I didn't use so far. following are my question:
1) If I get laid off and my employer cancels the h1b, Am i out of status?
2) Can they cancel my approved i 140?
3) I am planning to use EAD for my next job, How much time do I have to find a new job to be in Status?
Thanks so much for all your help, Thanks ...
Our Division is in very bad situation and we are expecting some lay off's in next few weeks. I am working on h1b now but my 485 is pending for more than 180 days and have Valid EAD which I didn't use so far. following are my question:
1) If I get laid off and my employer cancels the h1b, Am i out of status?
2) Can they cancel my approved i 140?
3) I am planning to use EAD for my next job, How much time do I have to find a new job to be in Status?
Thanks so much for all your help, Thanks ...
No comments:
Post a Comment