mpadapa
06-04 04:29 PM
Please call the house reps listed on this thread. Your calls are having a great impact. But we need more members to call to create a greater impact. Another one of the CHC member (Rep. Raul Grijalva) has become a co-sponsor for one of the bill (HR 5882)
source: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:HR05882:@@@P
Members please make the calls. Do also call the Reps listed on http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=19387
Together we can make it a success.
source: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d110:HR05882:@@@P
Members please make the calls. Do also call the Reps listed on http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=19387
Together we can make it a success.
wallpaper Miss Utah 2011 Christina Lowe.
fromnaija
05-16 01:32 PM
However, should the dates be retrogressed before you file, you will not be able to file until your PD becomes current again.
There is no time limit. You can file it as long as your PD makes the cut off time
There is no time limit. You can file it as long as your PD makes the cut off time
smisachu
08-03 10:01 AM
Thanks a bunch...
Congrads. What was your notice date. My case is similar to yours. Dec 2005 PD with Sep 4th notice date. Hope my case is in the same pile as yours :)
Congrads. What was your notice date. My case is similar to yours. Dec 2005 PD with Sep 4th notice date. Hope my case is in the same pile as yours :)
2011 Miss Utah, Christina Lowe,
tonyHK12
01-12 10:26 AM
Yes. I am very well aware of the process. I have done it in the past. Will followup with Call.
Aditi and Ganesh's Blog (http://)
The task is uphill and very difficult. We have no option but to try the beaten track. !
cheers. we need a few hundred people like you two guys and anything is possible.
Aditi and Ganesh's Blog (http://)
The task is uphill and very difficult. We have no option but to try the beaten track. !
cheers. we need a few hundred people like you two guys and anything is possible.
more...
StarSun
02-23 08:48 AM
Poster (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/images/a/a7/Myposter.pdf) to spread the word..
sam2006
02-02 07:31 AM
Was OH Law following our post yesterday and posted the Bill on his site ??
may be may be not
looks to be a interesting day ahead
i say lets keep our spirits low for now till the dust settels
may be may be not
looks to be a interesting day ahead
i say lets keep our spirits low for now till the dust settels
more...
singhsa3
05-16 04:16 PM
Called three of them, in process of calling others.
2010 Miss Utah 2011 Christina Lowe.
amitjoey
12-21 11:26 AM
Hi IV members!
I know many of us have been toying with ideas to increase membership. I wanted to start a separate thread just to highlight the following idea - Every member bring one additional member to IV.
Specifically, these are the bullet points I suggest:
1. By December 31, each of you bring one member to IV.
If you really think about it, it is not a difficult task. Every one of us knows atleast one person stuck in GC process, that is talking conservatively. It takes less than 15 minutes to call one person and explain IVs efforts and request his/her support.
2. By January 15, each of us take responsibility to get the member we brought to IV to contribute to the cause. And I am not suggesting any particular amount.
3. Each of take responsibility in having them update their information on IV website, so that when the need arises, they can be contacted (for sending webfaxes etc. like last week).
Also, whenever you bring someone to IV, please post on this thread (it will encourage others). I feel this approach will work, if we keep this thread alive, and try to stick to the time deadline (deadlines might not have worked before, because they were too long term).
Also, please keep this thread on track, without any other discussions.
So IV'ers, lets add ONE member, and get ONE contribution!!!!
Thank you.
Neelu
===========
You can also use the tool
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_iv_invite_friends&Itemid=55
to invite your friends
=========
If you have not helped bring atleast one member to this forum, stop. Make that call right now, help a friend register, explain and make them aware.
This is the homework before the holidays.
I know many of us have been toying with ideas to increase membership. I wanted to start a separate thread just to highlight the following idea - Every member bring one additional member to IV.
Specifically, these are the bullet points I suggest:
1. By December 31, each of you bring one member to IV.
If you really think about it, it is not a difficult task. Every one of us knows atleast one person stuck in GC process, that is talking conservatively. It takes less than 15 minutes to call one person and explain IVs efforts and request his/her support.
2. By January 15, each of us take responsibility to get the member we brought to IV to contribute to the cause. And I am not suggesting any particular amount.
3. Each of take responsibility in having them update their information on IV website, so that when the need arises, they can be contacted (for sending webfaxes etc. like last week).
Also, whenever you bring someone to IV, please post on this thread (it will encourage others). I feel this approach will work, if we keep this thread alive, and try to stick to the time deadline (deadlines might not have worked before, because they were too long term).
Also, please keep this thread on track, without any other discussions.
So IV'ers, lets add ONE member, and get ONE contribution!!!!
Thank you.
Neelu
===========
You can also use the tool
http://immigrationvoice.org/index.php?option=com_iv_invite_friends&Itemid=55
to invite your friends
=========
If you have not helped bring atleast one member to this forum, stop. Make that call right now, help a friend register, explain and make them aware.
This is the homework before the holidays.
more...
susie
06-22 10:43 PM
CALIFORNIA IMMIGRATION LAW FIRM FILES CLASS ACTION LAW SUIT AGAINST USCIS ON BEHALF OF IMMIGRANTS
Posted on: 6/20/2008
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Los Angeles � Reeves & Associates, A Professional Law Corporation filed a class action lawsuit today in the U.S. District Court, Central District CA, Case Number SACV08-688 JVX (SHx) on behalf of tens of thousands of immigrant families whose adult children have been wrongfully denied of visas. Attorneys for the families are seeking to compel the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (�USCIS�) to act in accordance with the provision of Child Status Protection Act (CSPA) that enables children to reunite with their families more quickly.
Prior to CSPA children who reached the age of 21 were no longer eligible to obtain an immigrant visa with the rest of their family. These children became known as �age-outs.� However, Congress enacted Section 3 of CSPA, codified as INA � 203(h)(3), to keep children together with their parents. Specifically, this provision allowed children to automatically convert the visa petition and retain the original filing date � known as the priority date � after the child had aged out. As such, an aged-out child, who is a derivative beneficiary of the visa petition of his parent, can reunite with their family faster by utilizing their parent�s earlier priority date. As of today, USCIS has not only failed to comply with INA � 203(h)(3), but has also failed to promulgate regulations or issue policy memorandum regarding this provision of law.
�This case affects tens of thousands of immigrant families,� said Robert L. Reeves, founder and Managing Attorney of Reeves & Associates, APLC. �A child abroad who aged-out is eligible under CSPA for an immigrant visa, and if the child is in the United States, he or she will be able to adjust to legal resident status,� explained Mr. Reeves.
The class action lawsuit presents two different classes of aggrieved individuals. Nancy Miller, a partner with Reeves & Associates and co-counsel, describes the two classes as �those who filed petitions with requests for retention of the parent�s original priority date whose petitions were denied and those who have received no response at all to their requests for retention of the original priority date.� In both cases parents remain separated from their children.
Although USCIS has granted some visa petitions and permitted retention of the earlier priority dates pursuant to INA � 203(h)(3) to some, there appears to be no uniform policy from USCIS as a whole. Jeremiah Johnson, a partner with Reeves & Associates and co-counsel, said �the lack of any regulations or even policy memorandum has lead to arbitrary and inconsistent decision-making affecting thousands on a global level.� Joyce Komanapalli, an associate with Reeves & Associates and co-counsel, added �USCIS�s refusal to issue visa petitions with the original priority date is at odds with the language, structure, history and purpose of the Child Status Protection Act.�
�It is incomprehensible why USCIS would deny these requests given the plain language of the statute and the Congressional history of CSPA.� said Mr. Reeves.
The class action lawsuit is seeking to compel USCIS to properly adjudicate all cases filed under CSPA, or INA � 203(h)(3), and comply with the requirements of retaining the parent�s original priority date in subsequent petitions filed by the parent.
Posted on: 6/20/2008
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Los Angeles � Reeves & Associates, A Professional Law Corporation filed a class action lawsuit today in the U.S. District Court, Central District CA, Case Number SACV08-688 JVX (SHx) on behalf of tens of thousands of immigrant families whose adult children have been wrongfully denied of visas. Attorneys for the families are seeking to compel the United States Citizenship and Immigration Service (�USCIS�) to act in accordance with the provision of Child Status Protection Act (CSPA) that enables children to reunite with their families more quickly.
Prior to CSPA children who reached the age of 21 were no longer eligible to obtain an immigrant visa with the rest of their family. These children became known as �age-outs.� However, Congress enacted Section 3 of CSPA, codified as INA � 203(h)(3), to keep children together with their parents. Specifically, this provision allowed children to automatically convert the visa petition and retain the original filing date � known as the priority date � after the child had aged out. As such, an aged-out child, who is a derivative beneficiary of the visa petition of his parent, can reunite with their family faster by utilizing their parent�s earlier priority date. As of today, USCIS has not only failed to comply with INA � 203(h)(3), but has also failed to promulgate regulations or issue policy memorandum regarding this provision of law.
�This case affects tens of thousands of immigrant families,� said Robert L. Reeves, founder and Managing Attorney of Reeves & Associates, APLC. �A child abroad who aged-out is eligible under CSPA for an immigrant visa, and if the child is in the United States, he or she will be able to adjust to legal resident status,� explained Mr. Reeves.
The class action lawsuit presents two different classes of aggrieved individuals. Nancy Miller, a partner with Reeves & Associates and co-counsel, describes the two classes as �those who filed petitions with requests for retention of the parent�s original priority date whose petitions were denied and those who have received no response at all to their requests for retention of the original priority date.� In both cases parents remain separated from their children.
Although USCIS has granted some visa petitions and permitted retention of the earlier priority dates pursuant to INA � 203(h)(3) to some, there appears to be no uniform policy from USCIS as a whole. Jeremiah Johnson, a partner with Reeves & Associates and co-counsel, said �the lack of any regulations or even policy memorandum has lead to arbitrary and inconsistent decision-making affecting thousands on a global level.� Joyce Komanapalli, an associate with Reeves & Associates and co-counsel, added �USCIS�s refusal to issue visa petitions with the original priority date is at odds with the language, structure, history and purpose of the Child Status Protection Act.�
�It is incomprehensible why USCIS would deny these requests given the plain language of the statute and the Congressional history of CSPA.� said Mr. Reeves.
The class action lawsuit is seeking to compel USCIS to properly adjudicate all cases filed under CSPA, or INA � 203(h)(3), and comply with the requirements of retaining the parent�s original priority date in subsequent petitions filed by the parent.
hair Miss Utah 2011 Christina Lowe. that google hits Miss+utah
Saralayar
04-14 12:46 PM
I guess we have enough people convinced and for those short sighted ones will have an option whether they want to get naturalized or live on their dear GCs so by that time if they educate themselves they will be convinced too.
Now what are the next steps in chanelling this effort through IV Core?
IV Core, please go through this thread and consolidate all the valid and genuine points and consider this for the phase 2 campaign...
Now what are the next steps in chanelling this effort through IV Core?
IV Core, please go through this thread and consolidate all the valid and genuine points and consider this for the phase 2 campaign...
more...
sledge_hammer
04-07 09:56 AM
I was thinking this for a long time, and I totally agree with you...
The only and simple way to stop H1B abuse is to allow only max 10% non-immigrant (H1, L1, TN etc) employee in a company. Rest 90% have to be Green Card or Citizen. These desi consulting, Indian big companies must be hving at leaset 90 % employees on non-immigrant status.
Simple and universal rule that will solve all the H1B problems
The only and simple way to stop H1B abuse is to allow only max 10% non-immigrant (H1, L1, TN etc) employee in a company. Rest 90% have to be Green Card or Citizen. These desi consulting, Indian big companies must be hving at leaset 90 % employees on non-immigrant status.
Simple and universal rule that will solve all the H1B problems
hot miss utah 2011 christina lowe
pappusheth
08-06 07:26 PM
I filed for my wife's EAD in the late May (e-file TSC).
Receipt date is May 29th.
Soft LUD on June 6th
FP done on June 21st
no updates, no changes after that. there is no LUD after FP. It's been 66 days since filed. Does any one know if I can take Infopass appointement before I complete 90 days of pending status and see what's going on? Or do I have to wait until 90 days are complete? any experiences?
EFiled on 29th May and still waiting. Opened a SR yesterday and lets see what happens.
The good thing is now we are seeing some approvals, so i think everything is back moving again.
GO IV GO.
How to open the SR akhilmahajan? Is it same as the Infopass appointment?
Also, there is no LUD after FP in my case. Does that mean that TSC has not received FP results yet? The post by kartikiran on the same page shows that FP was done on 5/13 but the LUD was on 7/20 when TSC received FP. I suspect the same has happened in my case. Should I check with the FP office?
please give your thoughts..
Receipt date is May 29th.
Soft LUD on June 6th
FP done on June 21st
no updates, no changes after that. there is no LUD after FP. It's been 66 days since filed. Does any one know if I can take Infopass appointement before I complete 90 days of pending status and see what's going on? Or do I have to wait until 90 days are complete? any experiences?
EFiled on 29th May and still waiting. Opened a SR yesterday and lets see what happens.
The good thing is now we are seeing some approvals, so i think everything is back moving again.
GO IV GO.
How to open the SR akhilmahajan? Is it same as the Infopass appointment?
Also, there is no LUD after FP in my case. Does that mean that TSC has not received FP results yet? The post by kartikiran on the same page shows that FP was done on 5/13 but the LUD was on 7/20 when TSC received FP. I suspect the same has happened in my case. Should I check with the FP office?
please give your thoughts..
more...
house Meet Miss Utah 2011
amitjoey
01-19 12:39 PM
Signed up for recurring $20 contribution.
Thanks, 872 more contributing members needed.
Thanks, 872 more contributing members needed.
tattoo Miss Utah 2011 Christina Lowe. Concerned about her ethnicity because jul
camarasa
07-11 06:24 PM
"those who have been living in this country -- working and paying taxes -- should be given an opportunity to embark on a lengthy and hard-earned path to citizenship"
Well he got the lengthy and hard-earned bit right.
Well he got the lengthy and hard-earned bit right.
more...
pictures Miss Utah Christina Lowe (of
GCard_Dream
02-01 10:18 PM
I am not really not sure if this is true. Logiclife and other core team members have already mentioned that nothing happened so you might see a correction on immigration-law.com tomorrow, like we have seen before. We all wish it was true, however. :(
02/01/2007 21/30 p.m.: Senate Passed Immigration Reform Bill Today
The Senate passed today Fair Minimum Wage Act, H.R. 2 today. The House passed this bill, H.R. 2 and the Senate debated the bill for the past several days. In the process, hundreds of amendments had been introduced on the Senate floor. The Senate floor then agreed to a lot of these amendments. One of these amendments which the Senate had agreed to and passed as Division B of the H.R. 2 is the Immigration Reform bill.
The immigration reform bill was introduced by Senator John Kerry and agreed to by the floor unanimously. The immigration reform bill that the Senate passed today covers a lot of the provisions which were part of the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 which the Senate passed last year and failed in the House.
We will analyze the bill and report it step by step for the next several days. Please stay tuned to this website.
02/01/2007 21/30 p.m.: Senate Passed Immigration Reform Bill Today
The Senate passed today Fair Minimum Wage Act, H.R. 2 today. The House passed this bill, H.R. 2 and the Senate debated the bill for the past several days. In the process, hundreds of amendments had been introduced on the Senate floor. The Senate floor then agreed to a lot of these amendments. One of these amendments which the Senate had agreed to and passed as Division B of the H.R. 2 is the Immigration Reform bill.
The immigration reform bill was introduced by Senator John Kerry and agreed to by the floor unanimously. The immigration reform bill that the Senate passed today covers a lot of the provisions which were part of the Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act of 2006 which the Senate passed last year and failed in the House.
We will analyze the bill and report it step by step for the next several days. Please stay tuned to this website.
dresses Miss Utah 2010 Christina Lowe
BharatPremi
10-12 04:51 PM
BharatPremi Please tell me I am wrong! i collected some data... and just by looking at it... it seems like EB3 will move very very slowly not as per your prediction! I m not a stats guru perhaps you or anyone who is a stats guru can shed some light here!
What is your EB3-India PD (I-485 either pending, or not yet filed)
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6203
Total Applicants (that voted) = 206
_______________
% distribution
_______________
43.21% 2001/2002/2003
25.25% 2004
16.51% 2005
13.59% 2006
1.46% 2007
_______________
Total Visa available / country = 140000/7% = 9800 in a year
Keep aside 10% for other categories, so 90% available for EB2 and EB3
9800 - 980 = 8820 total available for India EB2/EB3
50-50 between eb2 eb3 (assumption - probably a bad assumption)
4410/year available for EB3?
(This is where it really gets tricky!)
ASSUMPTION -
Approximate Indian EB3 Applications
Total Indian applicants / 2 (50-50 between eb2 and eb3)
Total 200k (low estimate) so EB3 100k approx
+ 100k Dependants = 200k Total EB3
Year 2001/2002/2003 = 43.21% = 46286
Number of years to clear off Backlog (2003 and prior) = 46286/4410 = 10 1/2 years
Up until 1/5/2007 PD was stable at around 5/8/2001
I think EB3 movement will be very slow based on above calculations
EDIT: Even if Unused Visas get funneled down to EB3 India > cut the time in 1/2 still looks like 4-5 years to clear EB3 < 2003
Does this sound right?
__________________________________________________ ______
VB History (Since Retrogression)
Year - Priority Date
1/12/2004 - C
1/1/2005 - 1/1/2002
1/2/2005 - 1/1/2002
1/3/2005 - 3/1/2002
1/4/2005 - 4/1/2002
1/5/2005 - 6/1/2002
1/6/2005 - 6/1/2002
1/7/2005 - U
1/8/2005 - U
1/9/2005 - U
1/10/2005 - 1/1/1998
1/11/2005 - 1/1/1998
1/12/2005 - 1/1/1999
1/1/2006 - 6/1/1999
1/2/2006 - 1/1/2000
1/3/2006 - 1/1/2001
1/4/2006 - 2/1/2001
1/5/2006 - 3/1/2001
1/6/2006 - 4/8/2001
1/7/2006 - 4/15/2001
1/8/2006 - 4/1/2001
1/9/2006 - 4/15/2001
1/10/2006 - 4/22/2001
1/11/2006 - 4/22/2001
1/12/2006 - 4/22/2001
1/1/2007 - 5/8/2001
1/2/2007 - 5/8/2001
1/3/2007 - 5/8/2001
1/4/2007 - 5/8/2001
1/5/2007 - 5/8/2001
1/6/2007 - 6/1/2003
1/7/2007 - C
1/8/2007 - U
1/9/2007 - U
1/10/2007 - 4/22/2001
1/11/2007 - 4/22/2001
___________________________
The fact is that most of Pre 2004 EB2 lot is already out of the system. Those who are still in are sufferer of namecheck and BECs.There is no perfect mechanism to determine the ratio but I would guess 80% are out from that group. Second factor what we need to look is Most of EB3 Mid 2002 to Mid 2005 are still in the system. Third factor what we need to understand is that EB3 filing is always more than double of EB2. Fourth fact is that USCIS has to see "FIFO" is followed or not. So end effect would be we will see EB3 India progressing from this December till April 2008 bulletins reasonably. EB2 will be put on hold . End result in summary would be both EB2 and Eb3 will be brought to Middle of 2005 by next June bulletin. Once that happens Eb2-I will moving faster with comparision to EB3-I.
What is your EB3-India PD (I-485 either pending, or not yet filed)
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=6203
Total Applicants (that voted) = 206
_______________
% distribution
_______________
43.21% 2001/2002/2003
25.25% 2004
16.51% 2005
13.59% 2006
1.46% 2007
_______________
Total Visa available / country = 140000/7% = 9800 in a year
Keep aside 10% for other categories, so 90% available for EB2 and EB3
9800 - 980 = 8820 total available for India EB2/EB3
50-50 between eb2 eb3 (assumption - probably a bad assumption)
4410/year available for EB3?
(This is where it really gets tricky!)
ASSUMPTION -
Approximate Indian EB3 Applications
Total Indian applicants / 2 (50-50 between eb2 and eb3)
Total 200k (low estimate) so EB3 100k approx
+ 100k Dependants = 200k Total EB3
Year 2001/2002/2003 = 43.21% = 46286
Number of years to clear off Backlog (2003 and prior) = 46286/4410 = 10 1/2 years
Up until 1/5/2007 PD was stable at around 5/8/2001
I think EB3 movement will be very slow based on above calculations
EDIT: Even if Unused Visas get funneled down to EB3 India > cut the time in 1/2 still looks like 4-5 years to clear EB3 < 2003
Does this sound right?
__________________________________________________ ______
VB History (Since Retrogression)
Year - Priority Date
1/12/2004 - C
1/1/2005 - 1/1/2002
1/2/2005 - 1/1/2002
1/3/2005 - 3/1/2002
1/4/2005 - 4/1/2002
1/5/2005 - 6/1/2002
1/6/2005 - 6/1/2002
1/7/2005 - U
1/8/2005 - U
1/9/2005 - U
1/10/2005 - 1/1/1998
1/11/2005 - 1/1/1998
1/12/2005 - 1/1/1999
1/1/2006 - 6/1/1999
1/2/2006 - 1/1/2000
1/3/2006 - 1/1/2001
1/4/2006 - 2/1/2001
1/5/2006 - 3/1/2001
1/6/2006 - 4/8/2001
1/7/2006 - 4/15/2001
1/8/2006 - 4/1/2001
1/9/2006 - 4/15/2001
1/10/2006 - 4/22/2001
1/11/2006 - 4/22/2001
1/12/2006 - 4/22/2001
1/1/2007 - 5/8/2001
1/2/2007 - 5/8/2001
1/3/2007 - 5/8/2001
1/4/2007 - 5/8/2001
1/5/2007 - 5/8/2001
1/6/2007 - 6/1/2003
1/7/2007 - C
1/8/2007 - U
1/9/2007 - U
1/10/2007 - 4/22/2001
1/11/2007 - 4/22/2001
___________________________
The fact is that most of Pre 2004 EB2 lot is already out of the system. Those who are still in are sufferer of namecheck and BECs.There is no perfect mechanism to determine the ratio but I would guess 80% are out from that group. Second factor what we need to look is Most of EB3 Mid 2002 to Mid 2005 are still in the system. Third factor what we need to understand is that EB3 filing is always more than double of EB2. Fourth fact is that USCIS has to see "FIFO" is followed or not. So end effect would be we will see EB3 India progressing from this December till April 2008 bulletins reasonably. EB2 will be put on hold . End result in summary would be both EB2 and Eb3 will be brought to Middle of 2005 by next June bulletin. Once that happens Eb2-I will moving faster with comparision to EB3-I.
more...
makeup Miss Utah 2011 Christina Lowe. She was crowned Miss Utah USA 2011 at the
hellomms
05-09 10:17 PM
@snathan: Have you checked with your lawyer if he sent an email to DOL. You may have been audited.
girlfriend christina, lowe and swaim
xyzgc
01-23 07:05 AM
Alright buddy, The only loan I've is few hundred dollars on my credit card which I pay every month though! Car is paid and no home! Sorry, no money from me to you! You have to find another person! I can buy you a cup of coffee though so that you can relax a bit!
Dude, now again you are taking it personal.:) Just because I replied to your post, you think everything was directed at you. Do you seriously think I have anything against you? That other guy masternyc is mentally retarded, not you.
But I do respect if any non GC holder go and buy a home.
I agree with your point about defaulters. But take your argument elsewhere.
In California, a musician who claimed 100K income/year was asked to stand in front of his home with his musical instrument and photographed. That photograph went into Washington Mutual's file as income proof.
I have heard this argument zillion times. So you are saying the musician should be bailed out, right? Dude, such musicians need to do 10 years of time! Instead, they are just declaring bankruptcy and walking away with a spoiled credit. And you seriously think they won't get loans in future? Sure they will. Loan interest is basically what a consumer bank profits on.
If you think, the housing crisis is because of defaulters, you are partially wrong! Prices went very high and people couldnt buy and that is the reason home prices went down. Since it went down, loans backed up by those very assets lost value. And people defaulted because what they owe was higher than the value of home!
You are really delusional if you think non GC home-owners are to be blamed for this mess!
No, you are partially wrong! Prices didn't come down because people couldn't buy. They crashed because of the huge number of foreclosures. Otherwise, you would have seen them stagnated for a while and then starting climbing down.
Did I ever say non-GC home owners are responsible for this mess? Now, you are drawing your own conclusions and attributing something to me which I never said :D.
All I am saying is folks who are forced to return to their home country should clear off their dues. That's all. Nothing more, nothing less. I have seen a friend who wanted to run away leaving his car behind in the mall in 2001. I advised him against it despite he saying I'm not coming back, not coming back. Finally he did the right thing, returned with $0.0 and he did come back in a year. People always come back, especially when they are forced to return against their wishes.Not clearing off your dues is absolutely criminal. And there is huge, huge difference between $20k car and $700-800k house in SF Bay area.
Finally, I think you are also partially right - even today the banks don't have proper checks for mortgages. The rate is down upto to 4.5% and there is not much change in the policy. All that 20% down thing will never happen in anytime in near future! There are just no takers!!
You really need a good tax refund from the government! File your taxes soon!
Another assumption. I always underpay my taxes and give thousands and thousands back to the govt at the year end. California tax board is bankrupt and most likely going to issue promissary notes, if you haven't heard. I don't trust this bankrupt governments.
Dude, now again you are taking it personal.:) Just because I replied to your post, you think everything was directed at you. Do you seriously think I have anything against you? That other guy masternyc is mentally retarded, not you.
But I do respect if any non GC holder go and buy a home.
I agree with your point about defaulters. But take your argument elsewhere.
In California, a musician who claimed 100K income/year was asked to stand in front of his home with his musical instrument and photographed. That photograph went into Washington Mutual's file as income proof.
I have heard this argument zillion times. So you are saying the musician should be bailed out, right? Dude, such musicians need to do 10 years of time! Instead, they are just declaring bankruptcy and walking away with a spoiled credit. And you seriously think they won't get loans in future? Sure they will. Loan interest is basically what a consumer bank profits on.
If you think, the housing crisis is because of defaulters, you are partially wrong! Prices went very high and people couldnt buy and that is the reason home prices went down. Since it went down, loans backed up by those very assets lost value. And people defaulted because what they owe was higher than the value of home!
You are really delusional if you think non GC home-owners are to be blamed for this mess!
No, you are partially wrong! Prices didn't come down because people couldn't buy. They crashed because of the huge number of foreclosures. Otherwise, you would have seen them stagnated for a while and then starting climbing down.
Did I ever say non-GC home owners are responsible for this mess? Now, you are drawing your own conclusions and attributing something to me which I never said :D.
All I am saying is folks who are forced to return to their home country should clear off their dues. That's all. Nothing more, nothing less. I have seen a friend who wanted to run away leaving his car behind in the mall in 2001. I advised him against it despite he saying I'm not coming back, not coming back. Finally he did the right thing, returned with $0.0 and he did come back in a year. People always come back, especially when they are forced to return against their wishes.Not clearing off your dues is absolutely criminal. And there is huge, huge difference between $20k car and $700-800k house in SF Bay area.
Finally, I think you are also partially right - even today the banks don't have proper checks for mortgages. The rate is down upto to 4.5% and there is not much change in the policy. All that 20% down thing will never happen in anytime in near future! There are just no takers!!
You really need a good tax refund from the government! File your taxes soon!
Another assumption. I always underpay my taxes and give thousands and thousands back to the govt at the year end. California tax board is bankrupt and most likely going to issue promissary notes, if you haven't heard. I don't trust this bankrupt governments.
hairstyles OF COURSE CHRISTINA LOWE, MISS
reedandbamboo
02-03 02:46 AM
Cam somebody please explain what ETF's are with a simple example; web definitions on it are too technical for me. Thanks
ETFs (simple definition) are a hybrid of mutual funds and stocks - they are similar to mutual funds in that they represent a basket of securities (for example stocks or bonds) but they trade like stocks (i.e. they can be bought and sold throughout the day and their quoted price changes as they are traded throughout the trading day .. mutual funds on the other hand are priced only once at the end of the trading day).
ETFs charge a management fee which tends to be lower than mutual fund fees.
For example, check out VWO (Vanguard Emerging Markets ETF)
Or FXI (China large-cap stocks ETF)
ETFs (simple definition) are a hybrid of mutual funds and stocks - they are similar to mutual funds in that they represent a basket of securities (for example stocks or bonds) but they trade like stocks (i.e. they can be bought and sold throughout the day and their quoted price changes as they are traded throughout the trading day .. mutual funds on the other hand are priced only once at the end of the trading day).
ETFs charge a management fee which tends to be lower than mutual fund fees.
For example, check out VWO (Vanguard Emerging Markets ETF)
Or FXI (China large-cap stocks ETF)
redgreen
01-12 10:16 PM
all the studies by economists, investment experts, psychologists, etc for the last several decades clearly showed that for 99% of the people day trading makes them lose all their money. it is highly addictive and on an average everbody loses their savings. legally it is another style of trading and there are no consequences whether you are on J1, H1B, on EAD or a citizen! (ofcourse if somebody knows which stock is going to be up/down and exactly when, he can make a lot of money (better call him a prophet than a day trader/pattern trader).
ksircar
05-14 10:09 PM
I am little confused. As your wife is already in legal status (h4) till 09/2007, why do you want another extension when you switch job? As far as I know (I had similar situation in 2003), you can transfer your H1 to new employer and before her H4 expires, apply for extension with your new H1B (it may not be required even as she has already applied for H1). Once, I did exactly same when I switched job and I didn't had any legal problem with my wife/daughters' H4 extension.
Still I suggest you consult an attorney.
Best of luck.
Still I suggest you consult an attorney.
Best of luck.