clockwork
07-11 06:49 AM
1. to keep a log
2. To report the number of cases worked upon
3. To keep track of the applicants as when its refiled, it should have yes for "Did you ever apply adjustment of status before". If its "No", its a lie and its rejected again.
If they have to log this information then they may encash the cheque for this work. :eek: :eek:
2. To report the number of cases worked upon
3. To keep track of the applicants as when its refiled, it should have yes for "Did you ever apply adjustment of status before". If its "No", its a lie and its rejected again.
If they have to log this information then they may encash the cheque for this work. :eek: :eek:
wallpaper Guide To Six-Pack Abs
sanju
09-24 12:08 AM
so let me understand it, you are saying that you don't agree with something that's why it has got to be wrong. Its not wrong because it is wrong, but its wrong because you don't support it. Is that right? And because you don't support it, it has got to be unfair and that's why its wrong. Isn't that what you just said?
I made the post there. Since you are making some funny comments along with clarification, not sure if you are really looking for the information. But here goes
1) Removal of per-country quota: Claimed to be fair for everyone. Not really. It only helps Indians and Chinese. ROW will see a serious degradation in the time they will get their GCs. I am sure there will be lots of bashing based on this, but the fact of the matter is that such action is not suitable for non I/C applicants.
2) The Rich guy comment is based on the latest (supposedly supported by the CORE no less) action which is to ask for legislative changes if you have money to throw in to buy a house with 20% down.
So yes, I do stand by my statement that IV is devolving into less than general purpose immigration group.
I am EB3-India, yet I dont support the removal of per country limits, as there is a reason for the diversity rule, Indians and Chinese are currently on the wrong side of the equation so it seems "fair" to remove the quota.
I made the post there. Since you are making some funny comments along with clarification, not sure if you are really looking for the information. But here goes
1) Removal of per-country quota: Claimed to be fair for everyone. Not really. It only helps Indians and Chinese. ROW will see a serious degradation in the time they will get their GCs. I am sure there will be lots of bashing based on this, but the fact of the matter is that such action is not suitable for non I/C applicants.
2) The Rich guy comment is based on the latest (supposedly supported by the CORE no less) action which is to ask for legislative changes if you have money to throw in to buy a house with 20% down.
So yes, I do stand by my statement that IV is devolving into less than general purpose immigration group.
I am EB3-India, yet I dont support the removal of per country limits, as there is a reason for the diversity rule, Indians and Chinese are currently on the wrong side of the equation so it seems "fair" to remove the quota.
chantu
09-17 01:29 PM
are you sure?
If today its approved in the house..we are done..it goes the Prez for signing and we all add another card to our wallets:o
If today its approved in the house..we are done..it goes the Prez for signing and we all add another card to our wallets:o
2011 justin bieber six pack abs.
sodh
01-29 11:27 PM
What Took Them So Long.
more...
kc_p21
12-12 10:54 AM
After sending their stories?
amitjoey
10-06 07:29 PM
Guys,
I know this is immigration forum , so People who are not interested in this thread please ignore.
Considering the State of Markets and Global economy.
Do you guys think it make sense to buy a Flat/Single family house in India , I am going to india in Mid october. Should i take the lunge and buy some proerty there...This would be the first home..so no Home equity Loan..It will be on 12% interest Rae from some indian bank.
Please throw some ideas..
Yes! It is a good idea!. You would have some equity built over the years.
I know this is immigration forum , so People who are not interested in this thread please ignore.
Considering the State of Markets and Global economy.
Do you guys think it make sense to buy a Flat/Single family house in India , I am going to india in Mid october. Should i take the lunge and buy some proerty there...This would be the first home..so no Home equity Loan..It will be on 12% interest Rae from some indian bank.
Please throw some ideas..
Yes! It is a good idea!. You would have some equity built over the years.
more...
jgh_res
03-03 03:51 PM
I bought Patriot America by img global for my parents. We had to take my mother to ER. The total claim was close to 10k and to my surprise imgglobal did pay exactly as whatever it said. It is not a pre existing condition. Based on my research, nobody covers a pre existing condition.
The advantage of using the american, comprehensive policy is, the hospital took the insurance card, no questions asked. Send me a PM if you want more details as it was really painful in the first place to go to ER, let alone worry about insurance.
I think your question should be "Could members who had to use this insurance for ER visits post their experience?"
It�s good until you file a claim, but you should look for what happens after that.
The advantage of using the american, comprehensive policy is, the hospital took the insurance card, no questions asked. Send me a PM if you want more details as it was really painful in the first place to go to ER, let alone worry about insurance.
I think your question should be "Could members who had to use this insurance for ER visits post their experience?"
It�s good until you file a claim, but you should look for what happens after that.
2010 justin bieber six pack abs.
Lollerskater
09-17 02:36 PM
did he just say HR5882? lol wut
http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/1382/facepalm2ly3.jpg
http://img214.imageshack.us/img214/1382/facepalm2ly3.jpg
more...
Macaca
11-27 01:21 PM
From The amero conspiracy Behind closed doors, a secret cabal is planning the end of the United States as we know it. Inside a paranoid vision for our time By Drake Bennett | Boston Globe, November 25, 2007: 1 (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=198390&postcount=479) 2 (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=198390&postcount=480)
Corsi's warning cry and gift for detail have given the theory traction in circles where anxieties about immigration and corporate oligarchy intersect. Lou Dobbs, whose CNN show portrays both free trade and increased immigration as sops to multinational corporations and body blows to the middle class, has devoted investigative segments to the NAU, the amero, and the NAFTA Superhighway.
From How Trade Breakthrough Almost Broke Down in Congress (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=198072&postcount=460) By Juliet Eilperin | Washington Post Staff Writer, November 22, 2007
Rangel said, adding that opponents of free trade on CNN and elsewhere have effectively linked recent U.S. job losses to trade pacts. "It's the Lou Dobbs thing: 'It's all due to trade.' "
Corsi's warning cry and gift for detail have given the theory traction in circles where anxieties about immigration and corporate oligarchy intersect. Lou Dobbs, whose CNN show portrays both free trade and increased immigration as sops to multinational corporations and body blows to the middle class, has devoted investigative segments to the NAU, the amero, and the NAFTA Superhighway.
From How Trade Breakthrough Almost Broke Down in Congress (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showpost.php?p=198072&postcount=460) By Juliet Eilperin | Washington Post Staff Writer, November 22, 2007
Rangel said, adding that opponents of free trade on CNN and elsewhere have effectively linked recent U.S. job losses to trade pacts. "It's the Lou Dobbs thing: 'It's all due to trade.' "
hair justin bieber six pack abs.
NKR
08-26 08:50 AM
ICICI can not predict rather no one can predict what will be the exchange rate tomorrow. The minimum forex transaction at dealer level is for $1 mil. So, they can't promise you some rate the moment you hit the submit button. They will pool all the transactions like yours and then do a big contract together. ICICI provides lot of other services which SBI will not in terms of convenience. And ICICI deals big time in forex transactions. In this market the guy with biggest transactions will have lowest cost and depending on competition will have incentive to pass it on to you as an end user. They might time it within a particular time frame but that is something unavoidable.
Why cannot they just say it?. Why can�t they say that it will take 2 days to 22 days or 222 days to transfer the amount?, if someone needs to send money due to an emergency, they do it thinking that the money will be transferred in two or three days, a week maybe�
Why cannot they just say it?. Why can�t they say that it will take 2 days to 22 days or 222 days to transfer the amount?, if someone needs to send money due to an emergency, they do it thinking that the money will be transferred in two or three days, a week maybe�
more...
ganguteli
04-27 12:14 PM
Agreed that this will throw out all the crappy body shoppers. This is what we need in future not to make it difficult for future h1-b or other people. We should infact support this bill as this will weed out many Indian Body shoppers and benefit everyone.
This is nothing new but most of it is just implementing what is already in low. Thats my take on it.
You are talking like an anti-immigrant. Are you one of those on this forum?
Just because you are out of H1B are now on EAD, you want nobody else to come in.
Did you not yourself come through a consulting company? Did you not use a consulting company to get H1 for your wife or get a substitute labor? If you lose your job today you will be going to these consulting companies only to beg for a job. Once you get your green card you will be starting one yourself if you are smart. So let us see this as an anti-immigrant bill.
This is nothing new but most of it is just implementing what is already in low. Thats my take on it.
You are talking like an anti-immigrant. Are you one of those on this forum?
Just because you are out of H1B are now on EAD, you want nobody else to come in.
Did you not yourself come through a consulting company? Did you not use a consulting company to get H1 for your wife or get a substitute labor? If you lose your job today you will be going to these consulting companies only to beg for a job. Once you get your green card you will be starting one yourself if you are smart. So let us see this as an anti-immigrant bill.
hot justin bieber six pack abs. known for his six-pack abs
eb1485wait
04-09 10:30 AM
I Just Contributed $100 To Show My Support For The Iv Efforts. I Will Do More Soon.
Whatever May Be The Outcome Of This Bill, I Have This Feeling That There Will Be A Bright Future For The Nri In Poltics In The Usa (which Is Lacking Now) If Some Of These Iv Members Decide To Use Their Skills In That Field.
Good Luck And Great Job
Whatever May Be The Outcome Of This Bill, I Have This Feeling That There Will Be A Bright Future For The Nri In Poltics In The Usa (which Is Lacking Now) If Some Of These Iv Members Decide To Use Their Skills In That Field.
Good Luck And Great Job
more...
house justin bieber six pack abs.
BrightSpark
06-22 07:45 PM
I wanted to win too!
*pokes mlk in the eye then kicks him in the *** and runs away shouting .. i win, i win!*
*pokes mlk in the eye then kicks him in the *** and runs away shouting .. i win, i win!*
tattoo justin bieber six pack abs.
misanthrope
10-03 12:12 PM
Dude, I'm not flaming at you (it was gctest not you) but you also made really demeaning statements and then tried to retract them when you started getting reds, I think. Its not good to trash others.
Which statements of mine are demeaning?
I edited 2 posts because of grammatical errors.
Which statements of mine are demeaning?
I edited 2 posts because of grammatical errors.
more...
pictures justin bieber six pack abs. Six Pack Abs; Six Pack Abs. lazyrighteye
aadimanav
08-11 12:46 PM
Already done dana dan done. :)
Please visit:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=20190
Please visit:
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=20190
dresses justin bieber six pack
smisachu
08-01 05:34 PM
Hi smisachu,
Could you explain what you mean by this? Are you referring to "Flash Trading"
or the whole of HFT?
Yes Flash trading, ELP (enhanced liquidity program), direct access trading and even other program trading. The programs seek out discreet blocks that are being routed into the market and front run them. The main culprit according to many is GS. And to acheive a significant alpha the size and leverage are huge. Some program with a bug will dump a lot of shares on the market some day and before any one can react. Here is an article on some info that was made available only to bloomberg users.
"Lime Brokerage: "The Next 'Long Term Capital' Meltdown Will Happen In
A Five-Minute Time Period."
Posted by Tyler Durden at 11:25 AM
A recent Bloomberg piece that for some reason was made available only
to terminal subscribers, provides a very interesting discussion on the
dangers of sponsored access, how the associated pre-trade vs post-
trade monitoring deliberations by "regulators" will influence short
selling curbs, and not surprisingly, the desire by Goldman to not only
dominate this yet another aspect of high-frequency trading, but to
dictate market policy at will.
What is sponsored access:
In sponsored access, a broker-dealer lends its market participation
identification (MPID) number to clients for them to trade on exchanges
without going through the broker's trading system, to avoid slowing
down the execution. That places responsibility on the broker-dealer to
make sure the participant abides by securities regulations, and that
its trading, which can involve hundreds or thousands of orders a
second, does not run amok.
Is it thus surprising, that none other than Goldman Sachs is muscling
its way into providing not only a sponsored access platform to its
clients, but a new form of sponsored access that needs the blessing of
regulators:
Wall Street heavyweight Goldman Sachs, now launching its own sponsored-
access service to lend clients its identification to access securities
exchanges directly, said last week it favors monitoring client orders
prior to execution.
"Our view is that there is a real need for pre-trade checks in the use
of sponsored access to fulfill [broker-dealers'] regulatory
responsibilities," said Greg Tusar, managing director at Goldman.
Goldman's stand in favor of pre-trade instead of post-trade monitoring
of sponsored clients' activity is one side of a debate in which
regulators may choose a middle ground. The regulators' decision on how
to monitor sponsored access may also influence their deliberations on
restricting short sales.
What is the difference between pre-trade and post-trade monitoring? In
brief:
Pre-trade
Compliant with Reg SHO
Nip problems before they happen
View activity across exchanges
Post-trade
Faster order executions
Pre-trade systems still fallible
And another tidbit:
In traditional sponsored-access arrangements, a broker-dealer
determines a client's suitability to access market centers directly
and then allows the client to trade without monitoring its individual
orders prior to execution.
In other words, the Goldman endorsed pre-trade approach will allow
"monitoring of individual orders prior to execution." Whether or not
pre-trade checks provide the capacity to observe not just wholesale
exchange activity in the context of sponsored access but from a much
broader market angle is a discussion for another time, although this
could be one place where Sergey Aleynikov could shed an infinite
amount of light, especially as pertains to Goldman's sponsored-access
service. Conveniently, his gag order will prevent him from saying much
if anything until such time as there is an appetizing settlement to
keep him gagged in perpetuity. The bottom line is that with a pre-
trade environment, the sponsored access providers will be able to have
the potential to front run all those who use their platforms. The
residual question of how far they go to comply with regulations to
prevent this from happening, and remain true to their ethics standards
is also a topic for another day.
Going back to the topic at hand. Here is why sponsored access could
easily be quite a bother to capital markets sooner rather than later:
Unchecked errors or unintended repeat orders could deplete broker-
dealers' capital, and potentially wreak havoc in the broader market.
Concerns have arisen, however, about whether all broker-dealers are
able to fulfill that duty in today's electronic trading environment,
and according to which standards.
And here Goldman chimes in to not only promote their proposed
architecture but to expound on the virtues of pre-trade checking.
"In the case of high-frequency trading, in particular guarding against
technology failures, oversized orders and other situations where
there's potentially systemic market impact, we believe strongly that
pre-trade checks are a prerequisite," Tusar says.
Nasdaq's proposal as well as Securities and Exchange Commission
officials' speeches a few months ago appeared to lean toward
bolstering the traditional approach.
"We don't believe that's strong enough or what the regulators want
now, because of the potentially dire consequences, and because we-as
broker-dealers-bear much of that risk," Tusar says.
Now the reason why this is very relevant in the context of not just
potential front running, but also market structure is that Regulation
SHO, which is the primary regulatory framework for short selling (and
the purvey of potential Uptick Rule reinstatement, which will happen
once the market is allowed to hit a bid) is a post-trade
architecture.
Wedbush [Morgan] routinely tests clients' systems to ensure they are
compliant with Reg SHO. In addition, he says, the brokerage sets
limits on clients available locates-as well as credit and trading
limits--before the start of each trading day that its system tracks,
prohibiting shorts without locates and providing a type of pre-trade
check.
Or as has recently become the case, seeing rolling buy ins in the
middle of the day as borrowable shares in even the most liquid stocks
mysteriously disappear (look at today's market action for yet another
blatant example of this practice).
Anticipating the regulators' likely response, one should not be
surprised to see them siding with Goldman and against shorters:
As the SEC also seeks to appease investor concerns over rampant short
selling, especially naked short selling, new sponsored-access
standards may provide part of the solution. Given that day-traders may
be the last remaining culprits of such activity,, increasing and
standardizing scrutiny over their trading may reduce uncovered (and
illegal) shorts even further.
How about appeasing concerns over rampant, unjustified buying? When
will the downtick buy rule be implemented? But we jest.
And I digress again. Why should all this be concerning to advocates of
stability of high-frequency trading:
The mother of all concerns is a sponsored firm's algorithm going awry
and executing thousands of problematic trades across a range of
securities and market centers.
Well, this is not really a problem when it happens to the upside as
has been the case for months now - it is only a threat when Joe
Sixpack's 401(k) may be impacted, i.e., to the downside.
And here is where a SEC Comment submitted by broker Lime Brokerage is
a very troubling must read by all who naively claim that High-
frequency trading is a boon to an efficient market (which doesn't
provide . Well, yes and no - it is, until such moment that it causes
the market to, literally, break. I will post a critical excerpt from
the Lime submission, and leave the rest to our readers' independent
analysis:
Lime's familiarity with high speed trading allows us to benchmark some
of the fastest computer traders on the planet, and we have seen CDT
(Computerized Day Trading) order placement rates easily exceed 1,000
orders per second. Should a CDT algorithm go awry, where a large
amount of orders are placed erroneously or where the orders should not
have passed order validation, the Sponsor will incur a substantial
timelag in addressing the issue. From the moment the Sponsor�s
representative detects the problem until the time the problematic
orders can be addressed by the Sponsor, at least two mintues will have
passed. The Sponsor�s only tools to control Sponsored Access flow are
to log into the Trading Center�s website (if available), place a phone
call to the Trading Center, or call the Sponsee to disable trading and
cancel these erroneous orders � all sub-optimal processes which
require human intervention. With a two minute delay to cancel these
erroneous orders, 120,000 orders could have gone into the market and
been executed, even though an order validation problem was detected
previously. At 1,000 shares per order and an average price of $20 per
share, $2.4 billion of improper trades could be executed in this short
timeframe. The sheer volume of activity in a concentrated period of
time is extremely disruptive to the process of maintaining a �fair and
orderly� market. This shortcoming needs to be addressed if the
practice of Naked Access is going to be permitted to continue;
otherwise, the next �Long Term Capital� meltdown will happen in a five-
minute time period.
Could you explain what you mean by this? Are you referring to "Flash Trading"
or the whole of HFT?
Yes Flash trading, ELP (enhanced liquidity program), direct access trading and even other program trading. The programs seek out discreet blocks that are being routed into the market and front run them. The main culprit according to many is GS. And to acheive a significant alpha the size and leverage are huge. Some program with a bug will dump a lot of shares on the market some day and before any one can react. Here is an article on some info that was made available only to bloomberg users.
"Lime Brokerage: "The Next 'Long Term Capital' Meltdown Will Happen In
A Five-Minute Time Period."
Posted by Tyler Durden at 11:25 AM
A recent Bloomberg piece that for some reason was made available only
to terminal subscribers, provides a very interesting discussion on the
dangers of sponsored access, how the associated pre-trade vs post-
trade monitoring deliberations by "regulators" will influence short
selling curbs, and not surprisingly, the desire by Goldman to not only
dominate this yet another aspect of high-frequency trading, but to
dictate market policy at will.
What is sponsored access:
In sponsored access, a broker-dealer lends its market participation
identification (MPID) number to clients for them to trade on exchanges
without going through the broker's trading system, to avoid slowing
down the execution. That places responsibility on the broker-dealer to
make sure the participant abides by securities regulations, and that
its trading, which can involve hundreds or thousands of orders a
second, does not run amok.
Is it thus surprising, that none other than Goldman Sachs is muscling
its way into providing not only a sponsored access platform to its
clients, but a new form of sponsored access that needs the blessing of
regulators:
Wall Street heavyweight Goldman Sachs, now launching its own sponsored-
access service to lend clients its identification to access securities
exchanges directly, said last week it favors monitoring client orders
prior to execution.
"Our view is that there is a real need for pre-trade checks in the use
of sponsored access to fulfill [broker-dealers'] regulatory
responsibilities," said Greg Tusar, managing director at Goldman.
Goldman's stand in favor of pre-trade instead of post-trade monitoring
of sponsored clients' activity is one side of a debate in which
regulators may choose a middle ground. The regulators' decision on how
to monitor sponsored access may also influence their deliberations on
restricting short sales.
What is the difference between pre-trade and post-trade monitoring? In
brief:
Pre-trade
Compliant with Reg SHO
Nip problems before they happen
View activity across exchanges
Post-trade
Faster order executions
Pre-trade systems still fallible
And another tidbit:
In traditional sponsored-access arrangements, a broker-dealer
determines a client's suitability to access market centers directly
and then allows the client to trade without monitoring its individual
orders prior to execution.
In other words, the Goldman endorsed pre-trade approach will allow
"monitoring of individual orders prior to execution." Whether or not
pre-trade checks provide the capacity to observe not just wholesale
exchange activity in the context of sponsored access but from a much
broader market angle is a discussion for another time, although this
could be one place where Sergey Aleynikov could shed an infinite
amount of light, especially as pertains to Goldman's sponsored-access
service. Conveniently, his gag order will prevent him from saying much
if anything until such time as there is an appetizing settlement to
keep him gagged in perpetuity. The bottom line is that with a pre-
trade environment, the sponsored access providers will be able to have
the potential to front run all those who use their platforms. The
residual question of how far they go to comply with regulations to
prevent this from happening, and remain true to their ethics standards
is also a topic for another day.
Going back to the topic at hand. Here is why sponsored access could
easily be quite a bother to capital markets sooner rather than later:
Unchecked errors or unintended repeat orders could deplete broker-
dealers' capital, and potentially wreak havoc in the broader market.
Concerns have arisen, however, about whether all broker-dealers are
able to fulfill that duty in today's electronic trading environment,
and according to which standards.
And here Goldman chimes in to not only promote their proposed
architecture but to expound on the virtues of pre-trade checking.
"In the case of high-frequency trading, in particular guarding against
technology failures, oversized orders and other situations where
there's potentially systemic market impact, we believe strongly that
pre-trade checks are a prerequisite," Tusar says.
Nasdaq's proposal as well as Securities and Exchange Commission
officials' speeches a few months ago appeared to lean toward
bolstering the traditional approach.
"We don't believe that's strong enough or what the regulators want
now, because of the potentially dire consequences, and because we-as
broker-dealers-bear much of that risk," Tusar says.
Now the reason why this is very relevant in the context of not just
potential front running, but also market structure is that Regulation
SHO, which is the primary regulatory framework for short selling (and
the purvey of potential Uptick Rule reinstatement, which will happen
once the market is allowed to hit a bid) is a post-trade
architecture.
Wedbush [Morgan] routinely tests clients' systems to ensure they are
compliant with Reg SHO. In addition, he says, the brokerage sets
limits on clients available locates-as well as credit and trading
limits--before the start of each trading day that its system tracks,
prohibiting shorts without locates and providing a type of pre-trade
check.
Or as has recently become the case, seeing rolling buy ins in the
middle of the day as borrowable shares in even the most liquid stocks
mysteriously disappear (look at today's market action for yet another
blatant example of this practice).
Anticipating the regulators' likely response, one should not be
surprised to see them siding with Goldman and against shorters:
As the SEC also seeks to appease investor concerns over rampant short
selling, especially naked short selling, new sponsored-access
standards may provide part of the solution. Given that day-traders may
be the last remaining culprits of such activity,, increasing and
standardizing scrutiny over their trading may reduce uncovered (and
illegal) shorts even further.
How about appeasing concerns over rampant, unjustified buying? When
will the downtick buy rule be implemented? But we jest.
And I digress again. Why should all this be concerning to advocates of
stability of high-frequency trading:
The mother of all concerns is a sponsored firm's algorithm going awry
and executing thousands of problematic trades across a range of
securities and market centers.
Well, this is not really a problem when it happens to the upside as
has been the case for months now - it is only a threat when Joe
Sixpack's 401(k) may be impacted, i.e., to the downside.
And here is where a SEC Comment submitted by broker Lime Brokerage is
a very troubling must read by all who naively claim that High-
frequency trading is a boon to an efficient market (which doesn't
provide . Well, yes and no - it is, until such moment that it causes
the market to, literally, break. I will post a critical excerpt from
the Lime submission, and leave the rest to our readers' independent
analysis:
Lime's familiarity with high speed trading allows us to benchmark some
of the fastest computer traders on the planet, and we have seen CDT
(Computerized Day Trading) order placement rates easily exceed 1,000
orders per second. Should a CDT algorithm go awry, where a large
amount of orders are placed erroneously or where the orders should not
have passed order validation, the Sponsor will incur a substantial
timelag in addressing the issue. From the moment the Sponsor�s
representative detects the problem until the time the problematic
orders can be addressed by the Sponsor, at least two mintues will have
passed. The Sponsor�s only tools to control Sponsored Access flow are
to log into the Trading Center�s website (if available), place a phone
call to the Trading Center, or call the Sponsee to disable trading and
cancel these erroneous orders � all sub-optimal processes which
require human intervention. With a two minute delay to cancel these
erroneous orders, 120,000 orders could have gone into the market and
been executed, even though an order validation problem was detected
previously. At 1,000 shares per order and an average price of $20 per
share, $2.4 billion of improper trades could be executed in this short
timeframe. The sheer volume of activity in a concentrated period of
time is extremely disruptive to the process of maintaining a �fair and
orderly� market. This shortcoming needs to be addressed if the
practice of Naked Access is going to be permitted to continue;
otherwise, the next �Long Term Capital� meltdown will happen in a five-
minute time period.
more...
makeup justin bieber pics new 2011.
reddymjm
09-25 11:46 AM
Was that a U turn. I did not get that meaning B4.
girlfriend justin bieber six pack abs.
485Mbe4001
11-27 12:49 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/27/opinion/27brooks.html?_r=1&hp&oref=slogin
NY Times Op-Ed Columnist
Follow the Fundamentals
By DAVID BROOKS
Published: November 27, 2007
Lou Dobbs is winning. He’s not winning personally. He’s not going to start winning presidential awards or elite respect. But his message is winning. Month by month the ideas that once prevailed on the angry fringe enter the mainstream and turn into conventional wisdom.
Once there was a majority in favor of liberal immigration policies, but apparently that’s not true anymore, at least if you judge by campaign rhetoric. Once there was a bipartisan consensus behind free trade, but that’s not true anymore, either. Even Republicans, by a two-to-one majority, believe free trade is bad for America, according to a Wall Street Journal/NBC poll.
Once upon a time, the fact that hundreds of millions of people around the world are rising out of poverty would have been a source of pride and optimism. But if you listen to the presidential candidates, improvements in the developing world are menacing. Their speeches constitute a symphony of woe about lead-painted toys, manipulated currencies and stolen jobs.
And if Dobbsianism is winning when times are good, you can imagine how attractive it’s going to seem if we enter the serious recession that Larry Summers convincingly and terrifyingly forecasts in yesterday’s Financial Times. If the economy dips as seriously as that, the political climate could shift in ugly ways.
So it’s worth pointing out now more than ever that Dobbsianism is fundamentally wrong. It plays on legitimate anxieties, but it rests at heart on a more existential fear — the fear that America is under assault and is fundamentally fragile. It rests on fears that the America we once knew is bleeding away.
And that’s just not true. In the first place, despite the ups and downs of the business cycle, the United States still possesses the most potent economy on earth. Recently the World Economic Forum and the International Institute for Management Development produced global competitiveness indexes, and once again they both ranked the United States first in the world.
In the World Economic Forum survey, the U.S. comes in just ahead of Switzerland, Denmark, Sweden and Germany (China is 34th). The U.S. gets poor marks for macroeconomic stability (the long-term federal debt), for its tax structure and for the low savings rate. But it leads the world in a range of categories: higher education and training, labor market flexibility, the ability to attract global talent, the availability of venture capital, the quality of corporate management and the capacity to innovate.
William W. Lewis of McKinsey surveyed global competitive in dozens of business sectors a few years ago, and concluded, “The United States is the productivity leader in virtually every industry.”
Second, America’s fundamental economic strength is rooted in the most stable of assets — its values. The U.S. is still an astonishing assimilation machine. It has successfully absorbed more than 20 million legal immigrants over the past quarter-century, an extraordinary influx of human capital. Americans are remarkably fertile. Birthrates are relatively high, meaning that in 2050, the average American will be under 40, while the average European, Chinese and Japanese will be more than a decade older.
The American economy benefits from low levels of corruption. American culture still transmits some ineffable spirit of adventure. American students can’t compete with, say, Singaporean students on standardized tests, but they are innovative and creative throughout their lives. The U.S. standard of living first surpassed the rest of the world’s in about 1740, and despite dozens of cycles of declinist foreboding, the country has resolutely refused to decay.
Third, not every economic dislocation has been caused by trade and the Chinese. Between 1991 and 2007, the U.S. trade deficit exploded to $818 billion from $31 billion. Yet as Robert Samuelson has pointed out, during that time the U.S. created 28 million jobs and the unemployment rate dipped to 4.6 percent from 6.8 percent.
That’s because, as Robert Lawrence of Harvard and Martin Baily of McKinsey have calculated, 90 percent of manufacturing job losses are due to domestic forces. As companies become more technologically advanced, they shed workers (the Chinese shed 25 million manufacturing jobs between 1994 and 2004).
Meanwhile, the number of jobs actually lost to outsourcing is small, and recent reports suggest the outsourcing trend is slowing down. They are swamped by the general churn of creative destruction. Every quarter the U.S. loses somewhere around seven million jobs, and creates a bit more than seven million more. That double-edged process is the essence of a dynamic economy.
I’m writing this column from Beijing. I can look out the window and see the explosive growth. But as the Chinese will be the first to tell you, their dazzling prosperity is built on fragile foundations. In the United States, the situation is the reverse. We have obvious problems. But the foundations of American prosperity are strong. The U.S. still has much more to gain than to lose from openness, trade and globalization.
NY Times Op-Ed Columnist
Follow the Fundamentals
By DAVID BROOKS
Published: November 27, 2007
Lou Dobbs is winning. He’s not winning personally. He’s not going to start winning presidential awards or elite respect. But his message is winning. Month by month the ideas that once prevailed on the angry fringe enter the mainstream and turn into conventional wisdom.
Once there was a majority in favor of liberal immigration policies, but apparently that’s not true anymore, at least if you judge by campaign rhetoric. Once there was a bipartisan consensus behind free trade, but that’s not true anymore, either. Even Republicans, by a two-to-one majority, believe free trade is bad for America, according to a Wall Street Journal/NBC poll.
Once upon a time, the fact that hundreds of millions of people around the world are rising out of poverty would have been a source of pride and optimism. But if you listen to the presidential candidates, improvements in the developing world are menacing. Their speeches constitute a symphony of woe about lead-painted toys, manipulated currencies and stolen jobs.
And if Dobbsianism is winning when times are good, you can imagine how attractive it’s going to seem if we enter the serious recession that Larry Summers convincingly and terrifyingly forecasts in yesterday’s Financial Times. If the economy dips as seriously as that, the political climate could shift in ugly ways.
So it’s worth pointing out now more than ever that Dobbsianism is fundamentally wrong. It plays on legitimate anxieties, but it rests at heart on a more existential fear — the fear that America is under assault and is fundamentally fragile. It rests on fears that the America we once knew is bleeding away.
And that’s just not true. In the first place, despite the ups and downs of the business cycle, the United States still possesses the most potent economy on earth. Recently the World Economic Forum and the International Institute for Management Development produced global competitiveness indexes, and once again they both ranked the United States first in the world.
In the World Economic Forum survey, the U.S. comes in just ahead of Switzerland, Denmark, Sweden and Germany (China is 34th). The U.S. gets poor marks for macroeconomic stability (the long-term federal debt), for its tax structure and for the low savings rate. But it leads the world in a range of categories: higher education and training, labor market flexibility, the ability to attract global talent, the availability of venture capital, the quality of corporate management and the capacity to innovate.
William W. Lewis of McKinsey surveyed global competitive in dozens of business sectors a few years ago, and concluded, “The United States is the productivity leader in virtually every industry.”
Second, America’s fundamental economic strength is rooted in the most stable of assets — its values. The U.S. is still an astonishing assimilation machine. It has successfully absorbed more than 20 million legal immigrants over the past quarter-century, an extraordinary influx of human capital. Americans are remarkably fertile. Birthrates are relatively high, meaning that in 2050, the average American will be under 40, while the average European, Chinese and Japanese will be more than a decade older.
The American economy benefits from low levels of corruption. American culture still transmits some ineffable spirit of adventure. American students can’t compete with, say, Singaporean students on standardized tests, but they are innovative and creative throughout their lives. The U.S. standard of living first surpassed the rest of the world’s in about 1740, and despite dozens of cycles of declinist foreboding, the country has resolutely refused to decay.
Third, not every economic dislocation has been caused by trade and the Chinese. Between 1991 and 2007, the U.S. trade deficit exploded to $818 billion from $31 billion. Yet as Robert Samuelson has pointed out, during that time the U.S. created 28 million jobs and the unemployment rate dipped to 4.6 percent from 6.8 percent.
That’s because, as Robert Lawrence of Harvard and Martin Baily of McKinsey have calculated, 90 percent of manufacturing job losses are due to domestic forces. As companies become more technologically advanced, they shed workers (the Chinese shed 25 million manufacturing jobs between 1994 and 2004).
Meanwhile, the number of jobs actually lost to outsourcing is small, and recent reports suggest the outsourcing trend is slowing down. They are swamped by the general churn of creative destruction. Every quarter the U.S. loses somewhere around seven million jobs, and creates a bit more than seven million more. That double-edged process is the essence of a dynamic economy.
I’m writing this column from Beijing. I can look out the window and see the explosive growth. But as the Chinese will be the first to tell you, their dazzling prosperity is built on fragile foundations. In the United States, the situation is the reverse. We have obvious problems. But the foundations of American prosperity are strong. The U.S. still has much more to gain than to lose from openness, trade and globalization.
hairstyles justin bieber six pack abs.
Caliber
04-26 09:22 AM
Not a bit. If you want I can give you a plenty... L1 is for intercompany transfer. But So far I have seen companies put people only at the client place and their salary is starting at 32K and they are put up at extended staty, asked to share the cab or car. So let me know if you want and I can directly let you talk to those guys.
Yes, you can work for $8 but there is something called law. I have personelly checked their labor which states 55K. But they are paid only 32K.
So our common goal is to fix the broken system, remove the employer's undue advantage over the employee. No matter if they are MNC or desi consulting companies. Why the employee is tied to the employer when there is the need/demand for the skill set. Thats the only thing which is driving down the wages.
I fully agree with this. L1's being placed at Client's place is ILLEGAL. I have several proof's of this. TCS, Infy, CTS and LT do FAVOR their employees with a gift of filing in EB1 because these guys WOULD not complain to any one what they are paid and their benefits.
Any one want proof's?
Yes, you can work for $8 but there is something called law. I have personelly checked their labor which states 55K. But they are paid only 32K.
So our common goal is to fix the broken system, remove the employer's undue advantage over the employee. No matter if they are MNC or desi consulting companies. Why the employee is tied to the employer when there is the need/demand for the skill set. Thats the only thing which is driving down the wages.
I fully agree with this. L1's being placed at Client's place is ILLEGAL. I have several proof's of this. TCS, Infy, CTS and LT do FAVOR their employees with a gift of filing in EB1 because these guys WOULD not complain to any one what they are paid and their benefits.
Any one want proof's?
apple
06-11 10:27 AM
Sorry to hear about your case. Trust me, such liability suits are extremely common these days in America, and there is no cause for alarm as long as you take all the necessary steps.
If you had liability insurance for your auto at the time of the accident, the first thing you have to do is to call that insurance company and let them know about the lawsuit. THEY will hire and pay for a lawyer to defend you. If you want to be even more comfortable, you might also hire another defense attorney by yourself.
The catch is, your insurance lawyer will only defend you upto the amount of liability mentioned in your insurance. If there is any judgement over that amount, your personal assets are at stake. This happens only in very very rare scenarios. Most of the times, such lawsuits are settled out-of-court. The amount mentioned in the lawsuit ($3.25 M) is totally irrelevant- what they would eventually get (if any), will be far far away from this figure.
Assuming that there are no criminal charges, and this is a civil tort case, there will be no impact on your immigration proceedings at all.
Make sure you take all the paperwork very seriously and do not ignore any letter/notice/deadlines. Don't even think of running away- its not worth losing your career you have worked so hard for. Unless yours is an extremely unusual case, all that you stand to lose is several nights of sleep and thats all.
I have some links for you to look at:
http://www.illinoisprobono.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.dsp_content&contentID=2116
http://www.laborlawtalk.com/showthread.php?t=111066
http://www.millerandzois.com/Maryland-Personal-Injury-Lawsuit.html
http://ask.metafilter.com/18037/Insurance-Company-Woes
http://www.ashcraftandgerel.com/autoacc.html
http://www.psp-interactive.com/issues/articles/2007-02_09.asp
http://www.rbs2.com/cc.htm
http://medicaleconomics.modernmedicine.com/memag/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=111402
Good Luck!
Thx for the response..
I am already in touch with my insurance claim representative. He told that the insurance's attorney will be responding to the suit and requested me the send the papers asap (which I am going to do today). and they will take care of attorney's expenses.
One more thing that he clearly told is, that they can pay up to $50K and beyond that I have to take care.
-- I don't have any assets here(like shares, house etc)
-- Though I have a house in my country(not sure that would be counted as asset here in this case)
-- Even my bank balance is minimal
I already went thru lots of pain since the accident, and when I thought its all over, it is coming back..Hope I will be able to pass this test, as it is not as complicated as long waiting of GC :)
If you had liability insurance for your auto at the time of the accident, the first thing you have to do is to call that insurance company and let them know about the lawsuit. THEY will hire and pay for a lawyer to defend you. If you want to be even more comfortable, you might also hire another defense attorney by yourself.
The catch is, your insurance lawyer will only defend you upto the amount of liability mentioned in your insurance. If there is any judgement over that amount, your personal assets are at stake. This happens only in very very rare scenarios. Most of the times, such lawsuits are settled out-of-court. The amount mentioned in the lawsuit ($3.25 M) is totally irrelevant- what they would eventually get (if any), will be far far away from this figure.
Assuming that there are no criminal charges, and this is a civil tort case, there will be no impact on your immigration proceedings at all.
Make sure you take all the paperwork very seriously and do not ignore any letter/notice/deadlines. Don't even think of running away- its not worth losing your career you have worked so hard for. Unless yours is an extremely unusual case, all that you stand to lose is several nights of sleep and thats all.
I have some links for you to look at:
http://www.illinoisprobono.org/index.cfm?fuseaction=home.dsp_content&contentID=2116
http://www.laborlawtalk.com/showthread.php?t=111066
http://www.millerandzois.com/Maryland-Personal-Injury-Lawsuit.html
http://ask.metafilter.com/18037/Insurance-Company-Woes
http://www.ashcraftandgerel.com/autoacc.html
http://www.psp-interactive.com/issues/articles/2007-02_09.asp
http://www.rbs2.com/cc.htm
http://medicaleconomics.modernmedicine.com/memag/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=111402
Good Luck!
Thx for the response..
I am already in touch with my insurance claim representative. He told that the insurance's attorney will be responding to the suit and requested me the send the papers asap (which I am going to do today). and they will take care of attorney's expenses.
One more thing that he clearly told is, that they can pay up to $50K and beyond that I have to take care.
-- I don't have any assets here(like shares, house etc)
-- Though I have a house in my country(not sure that would be counted as asset here in this case)
-- Even my bank balance is minimal
I already went thru lots of pain since the accident, and when I thought its all over, it is coming back..Hope I will be able to pass this test, as it is not as complicated as long waiting of GC :)
induabhay
01-13 08:49 PM
Folks
Is there any person on IB who can express concern vividly and also suggest solutions eloquently? Also is there anybody else with media contacts who can get this person some prime time explosure? What do you guys think about the idea? IB has been doing a good job of pushing our case with the legislature. Should we now look at puhsing the case with media?
Is there any person on IB who can express concern vividly and also suggest solutions eloquently? Also is there anybody else with media contacts who can get this person some prime time explosure? What do you guys think about the idea? IB has been doing a good job of pushing our case with the legislature. Should we now look at puhsing the case with media?
No comments:
Post a Comment