.:[Double Click To][Close]:.

Thursday, July 7, 2011

the charlotte observer font

images Businesses all over Charlotte the charlotte observer font. Photo: The Charlotte Observer,
  • Photo: The Charlotte Observer,



  • wizpal
    06-05 05:06 PM
    A very simple, dumbed down calculation to see which one trumps the other, buying or renting:


    1. Home Cost: $300,000
    2. Down: $ 30,000 (10% of 300k)
    3. Mortgage: $270,000

    4. Mortgage Interest/yr: $ 13,500 (5% of 270K)
    5. Tax, Insurance, Maintenance /yr: $ 9,000 (3% of 300K)

    6. Returns on Downpayment otherwise/yr: $ 3,000 (10% of 30K)
    7. Rent on a similar home/yr: $ 18,000 (1.5K/month)

    8. Equity/yr: $ 15,000 (5% of 300K)
    9. Savings on tax deductions/yr: $ 4,050 (30% bracket, $13.5K interest)


    I'll take a home appraised and bought for 300K for my example. The numbers are basically self explanatory. Contrary to popular claim among those who are pro renting, I don't think I pay more than 3% for tax, insurance and maintenance combined (item# 5). Of course, I was wise enough to buy a home in good condition. But that number will change as the home gets older. Maintenance should not include any upgrades that you do, which is basically only "gravy" and based on owner's discretion. Item# 6; I am going with the average returns if you invested in S&P 500. Item# 7; is what a similar 300K home costs to rent. Item# 8; I have only taken 5% growth which is I think under normal market conditions is the growth you would see on your home. The principal payment has not been accounted for yet. I'll do it later.

    Situation Rent:
    If you rent, then your expense per year is item# 7 minus item# 6 = $15,000.
    Of course, your capital of $30,000 is still earning compounded returns.

    Situation Own:
    Your expense is item# 4 + item# 5 - item# 9 - item# 8 = $3,450.

    As I mentioned in the first line, this is a dumbed down cost comparator. There are many loopholes that can be plugged. All comments are welcome.


    Your analysis is so spot on except for item #8 and item # 9. I have a question though.. The example you have given suits my scenario so well. I am planning to buy a house (310k ) very soon. The loan offers I have from my lender has interest rates pretty much the same for both 10% down payment and 20% down payment, 5.0 with 20% and 5.25 with 10% down payment. I can down pay 10% right away and the other 10% is also available in a risk free(can withdraw without penalty) cd which yield me a return of 3.5% . So which is better for me 10% or 20% down pay. thanks in advance.

    As for buying or renting..it is more of a personal choice - to me, buying a house has tangible benefits over renting.. like a sense of entitlement to call some place ur true home and most likely a good enviroment for raising the kids. Life has phases like education, marriage, kids, job, etc..Now that I am into my 30's, I would like to see
    what it feels like to have owned a home.





    wallpaper Photo: The Charlotte Observer, the charlotte observer font. Wallcovering Tuscan Font Wallpaper in Charlotte | Charlotte Observer
  • Wallcovering Tuscan Font Wallpaper in Charlotte | Charlotte Observer



  • Macaca
    02-13 09:31 AM
    This thread is for resources on lobbying for legislation

    Pre-requisite: What is Legislation? (http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=3317&highlight=legislation)

    Lobbying is the practice of trying to persuade legislators to propose, pass, or defeat legislation or to change existing laws. A lobbyist may work for a group, organization, or industry, and presents information on legislative proposals to support his or her clients' interests.

    Resources

    History of lobbying (http://www.senate.gov/legislative/common/briefing/Byrd_History_Lobbying.htm)
    The Nonprofit Lobbying Guide (http://www.independentsector.org/programs/gr/lobbyguide.html)
    Center for Lobbying in the Public Interest (http://www.clpi.org/)
    The Democracy Center (http://www.democracyctr.org/)





    the charlotte observer font. makeup The Charlotte Burger
  • makeup The Charlotte Burger



  • axp817
    03-25 01:26 PM
    UN,
    Any stories of AOS applicants porting to self employment under AC21, that you could share with us?

    Given your explanation on risks involved with porting to a small company, I wonder how self employment plays out in an AC21 scenario.

    Thanks very much, as always.





    2011 Wallcovering Tuscan Font Wallpaper in Charlotte | Charlotte Observer the charlotte observer font. The Charlotte Burger Blog
  • The Charlotte Burger Blog



  • gc_aspirant_prasad
    09-26 10:02 AM
    I dont consider myself pessimist just a realist. Take a long hard ( cold) look at the facts, try to read in between the lines you will end up being concerned & discouraged just like Chanduv23 and some others on the forum.
    If they really wanted to post a sign of encouragement, they would talk about STEM perhaps ?



    more...


    the charlotte observer font. The Charlotte Observer
  • The Charlotte Observer



  • ssa
    06-24 06:18 PM
    You should compare only the interest part of your mortgage payment when comparing with rent.

    Not exactly. Whatever one saves by renting can be invested somewhere else. So the apples to apples comparison would be the return homeowner gets on the amount of his monthly mortgage payment that goes towards the principle (home equity) to the return the renter gets on the difference he invested. Return on home equity is currently negative all over US (houses declining in price) where as you still can get some positive returns on 100% safe investment like CDs or US treasury bills.

    In any case majority of your payment for the first five year goes towards paying interest. So unless you expect hosue prices to rise in next 3-4 years - a remote possibility, the best we can hope for is they stabilize - there is no monitory benefit to be gained by buying now against renting for some more time and saving more money for your future down payment.





    the charlotte observer font. pictures by The Charlotte
  • pictures by The Charlotte



  • Suva
    01-09 01:47 PM
    Civilians will die in any war. It's a fact. In this case Hamas started the fight by firing rockets for a week. Who was affected? Some civilians in Israel died due to this rocket firing. So this is natural that any country will give a strong reply against these rocket attacks. It's very sad that kids are getting killed due to this fight. But It is hamas faults not Israel. Didn't Hamas know that Israel would attack due to their rocket attacks. Didn't hamas know that they are hiding behind civilians and they would be bombarded by Israelis as a result of this some of the civilians would die. So before blaming Israel you should first blame Hamas.

    Now the killing has gone mad. Apart from killing the innocent civilians, crazy war mongers started bombing schools and killing innocent school kids. Today two schools were bombed and more than 40 children have been massacred.

    Its sad to see school children being brutally killed by missles and tanks. I don't understand how people could blow up innocent kids, women and men under the name of self-defence?

    This world has gone crazy and there's no one questioning about this in-human atrocities committed against fellow human being.

    Lets us pray for those who are going thru this hardship, and for an immediate end to this war crime.

    How many more innocent civilians including children they are planning to kill?. All these so called peace loving nations blocking the UN from making a cease-fire resolution. Looks like so called freedom lovers want more innocent lives.

    When Mumbai was attacked by terrorists, whole world was united and supported the victim(India). Now the same world is against the victim and encouraging more killing by not stopping the attrocities.



    more...


    the charlotte observer font. charlotte observer logo.
  • charlotte observer logo.



  • ss1026
    12-22 11:00 PM
    Good post,
    You post is a testimony that not all hope is lost with Islam. There are still people like yourselves who can think objectively or at least open to one.
    And this is the reason why I am not against Islam as this would also mean that I am raising my fingers on the guys like urself.

    Though I sense your intent, I am too feeble to carry the burden even a fraction of the weight of your point. And I am not even trying to be modest here. Though there is a quite a bit of work to be done for moderate muslims to come forward and lead the way, Muslims have a very proud history (along with issues like most religions/races). Lets hope the people on all sides tone down the rheotric and live and let live





    2010 makeup The Charlotte Burger the charlotte observer font. Businesses all over Charlotte
  • Businesses all over Charlotte



  • abhisam
    07-26 04:01 PM
    UN,

    A quick question for you. So far, I havent found anything wrong with my I-485 application.

    My wife is currently on an H4 visa and is a dependent applicant on our AOS application. She was working in our native country before coming to the US. When the lawyer filled her biographic information, she did not mention her employment in India. She just filled that section as N/A. We did not care at that moment because we thought USCIS might be more concerned about my employment history, as I am the primary applicant.

    Now after reading all this, I'm a bit worried. And my question is exactly opposite of what most people are asking. Does not stating my wife's foreign employment mean fraud to USCIS? I really appreciate all help that you can extend in this regard.

    Thanks,
    abhisam



    more...


    the charlotte observer font. charlotte observer logo.
  • charlotte observer logo.



  • chanduv23
    03-24 03:15 PM
    [QUOTE=ganguteli;329173]Unitednations,

    Ganguteli, it seems you are confusing two things at the same time.

    What USCIS is now doing is going by the strict interpretation of the rule and when they start doing that lots of cases that fall in the gray area and were ignored in the past are now being looked into more closely. I read in one of the forums that an applicant�s 140 was rejected because in an H1 which he applied in early 2000 he had a different job description of an earlier job than the one he had on his 140 Petition. Who would have thought that USCIS would ever go back and pull out a resume from an application that was filled for H1-B in 2000 and compare the resume for 140 you are filling in 2009. In the last few years USCIS has spent a lot of money on technology. They I believe have scanned all the past applications, which can now be linked to all your immigration benefits you are filling for. It�s become a lot easier for an IO to pull out all the past information- like all your H1-B petitions, your 140 petitions today if they wish too when you apply say for an EAD renewal. The sad fact is that USCIS is a blackhole where they can sit on your application for years or decades while you suffer while you cannot do much. Yes you can go to a senator/Congressman or write letters, but if your application is pending with a smart IO who did not like your complaining to the Senator, he can make your life difficult by asking documents after documents before making a decision on your application, while the senator cannot interfere with the process. Welcome to the world of bureaucracy.

    It all depends on the IO who deals with your case.

    We can find tonnes of discrepancies if we want to with any case.

    Most of us here discuss consulting companies - but it is just not consulting companies that are suffering. Sometime back, TSC changed its original interpretation that MBBS is equivalent to masters degree and denied EB2 140s for Physicians from India. This has been or is being corrected.

    I had been doing some enquiring about h1b visas for physicians - and figured out that there are now a lot of issues - especially on interpretations of offer letter, type of institution, kind of work etc and a h1b petitions are also being denied for Physicians - and once again Attorneys are handling these issues.

    It is obvious that things are tightening up. So one must be potentially ready to face challenges and overcome them





    hair The Charlotte Burger Blog the charlotte observer font. breaking The+observer+logo
  • breaking The+observer+logo



  • Vsach
    08-08 08:09 PM
    Hi,

    In addition to what everyone else has recommended please contact Zoe Lofgren and seek help from Prakash the ombudsman and a personal meeting with Director Gonzales.

    All the best!

    VS



    more...


    the charlotte observer font. Photo: Charlotte Observer
  • Photo: Charlotte Observer



  • HopeSprings
    08-06 10:48 AM
    Although the discussion has deteriorated to a point where it will not be healthy anymore, these are valid questions.

    I think a good compromise would be if interfiling is allowed only if the candidate was eligible for the EB2 position at the time of filing the EB3 labor. The current rule punishes those who go to grad school full-time, especially if you did a PhD but do not qualify for EB1.

    sroyc,
    What a resolution!!! I completely agree with you. Interfiling should NOT be scrapped but limited to people who qualified for the later category (EB2/EB1) on the date of their PD.





    hot The Charlotte Observer the charlotte observer font. Photo: The Charlotte Observer,
  • Photo: The Charlotte Observer,



  • validIV
    06-26 10:32 AM
    I have only one sentence to say ..watch the movie "pacific heights" ..I was watching it now and that is a perfect movie for those who intend to rent their homes.

    LOL. Why dont you throw in Armageddon, Knowing and Deep Impact. Those are also valid points since thats what can happen to the earth tommorow or the day after.

    Investment carries risk. Anyone who tells you otherwise is lying. I have lost money on other investments before, but that is what makes u grow smarter. You fall and you get back up and you know better the next time round.

    If you spend the rest of your life renting, the risk is 100%�you end up with nothing. I will take my chances investing my money in buying a home because its certainly better than losing 100%.



    more...


    house of The Charlotte Observer the charlotte observer font. The Charlotte Observer
  • The Charlotte Observer



  • file485
    07-08 11:02 AM
    unitednations..!!

    r u the same from immigrationportal.com.. !! people r looking out for u in this immigration greencard darkness..





    tattoo pictures by The Charlotte the charlotte observer font. The Charlotte Observer.
  • The Charlotte Observer.



  • Macaca
    12-27 06:59 PM
    India chasing a U.N. chimera (http://www.thehindu.com/opinion/op-ed/article995760.ece) By K. S. DAKSHINA MURTHY | The Hindu

    In recent years it has become standard practice for the Indian media to ask visiting foreign dignitaries where they stand on New Delhi's claim to a permanent seat in the UNSC. If the answers are in the affirmative, there are smiles all round and the glow is then transmitted to readers or viewers as the case may be.

    Among the Permanent Five in the Council, the United Kingdom has long affirmed support, so have France and Russia. China has remained non-committal. So the United States' stand was deemed crucial. When President Barack Obama, during his recent visit, backed India for a permanent seat, the joy was palpable. The media went to town as if it were just a matter of time before India joined the select group of the World's almighty. The happiness lasted a few days until the first tranche of WikiLeaks punctured the mood somewhat.

    The revelation of U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's classified whisper, describing India as a self-appointed front-runner exposed Washington's innermost thoughts on the subject. Though the embarrassing leak was subsequently sought to be played down, it opened the curtain to a larger truth which is that the U.S. and the other four have never really been interested in real reforms to the Security Council.

    Public pronouncements, positive affirmations and slap-on-the-back relationships don't necessarily translate into action on the ground.

    Reforms

    Jakob Silas Lund of the Centre for U.N. Reform Education states a few individuals within the process believe that some of the Permanent Five countries “are more than happy to see reform moving at near-zero-velocity speed”.

    The reforms are open to interpretation. Broadly, they mean democratisation of the Security Council to make it representative and in tune with the contemporary world. This, for some, means more permanent members. The Group of four — India, Brazil, Japan and Germany — has been the most vocal in demanding it be included.

    What is surprising, especially where India is concerned, is the hope and optimism that it is heading towards a permanent seat. In reality, a committee set up by the United Nations 17 years ago to go into reforms shows little signs of progress.

    The first meeting was held in 1994 of the U.N. group, a mouthful, called the “Open-Ended Working Group on the Question of Equitable Representation and Increase in the Membership of the Security Council and Other Matters Related to the Security Council”. Until now, this group has completed four rounds of negotiations, just on preliminaries.

    A brief peek into the past will make it clear that the addition of more veto-wielding permanent members to the Council is a veritable pipe dream. For any amendment to the U.N. charter, two-thirds of the General Assembly needs to acquiesce. This may be possible but the next requirement, that of ratification by the Permanent Five, is the real obstacle.

    Since the formation of the United Nations in 1945, there have been only a handful of meetings of the Security Council to discuss the original charter, and even that, merely to discuss minor amendments. One of some significance came about in 1965 when the membership of temporary, non-veto powered countries in the Council was increased from six to 10 and the number of votes required to pass any decision increased to nine from seven.

    As academic and U.N. commentator Thomas G. Weiss wrote in the Washington Quarterly, “Most governments rhetorically support the mindless call for equity, specifically by increasing membership and eliminating the veto. Yet, no progress has been made on these numerical or procedural changes because absolutely no consensus exists about the exact shape of the Security Council or the elimination of the veto.”

    The argument for a bigger, more representative Council is undoubtedly valid but the issue is who will implement it and how.

    U.S. is the prime mover

    In today's global equation the U.S. is the acknowledged prime mover. It has already had to sweat it out to convince the other four members to go with it on several issues, like the sanctions against Iran. If more countries are allowed to join the Council the difficulties for U.S. interests are obvious, even if those included are vetted for their closeness to Washington.

    Real and effective reforms should have meant democratisation of the Security Council to reflect the aspirations of all its members. Ideally, this should mean removal of permanency and the veto power to be replaced with a rotating membership for all countries, where each one big or small, powerful or weak gets to sit for a fixed term in the hallowed seats of the Council. This is unthinkable within the existing framework of the United Nations. At the heart of the issue is the reluctance of the Permanent Five to give up the prized veto power.

    The situation is paradoxical given that democracy is being touted, pushed and inflicted by the U.S. across the world. But democracy seems to end where the Security Council begins. The rest of the world has no choice but to bow to its decisions. The consequences for defying the Council can be terrifying as was experienced by Saddam Hussein's Iraq through the 1990's. Iran is now on the receiving end for its defiance on the nuclear issue.

    Not just that, the credibility of the Security Council itself took a beating over its inability to prevent the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003. Having failed to convince France, Russia and China to vote for invading Iraq, the U.S. went alone. The Council was reduced to a bystander. It failed to fulfil its primary task, that of ensuring security — to Iraq.

    What this also implies is that Council or no Council, in today's unipolar world, the U.S. will go with what it decides and no one can stop it. This has been the case particularly since the end of the Cold War. “With a U.S. global presence as great as that of any empire in history, Security Council efforts to control U.S. actions are beginning to resemble the Roman Senate's efforts to control the emperor,” writes Weiss.

    Instead of trying to clamber onto a patently unfair arrangement it would have made more sense if the four self-appointed front-runners along with the rest of the world had demanded a more equitable and representative Council.

    To achieve this, academic and U.N. expert Erik Voeten suggests pressure tactics to counter veto power. One tactic is for countries en bloc to ignore the decisions taken in the Security Council. Another is for Germany and Japan, which are among the largest contributors to the United Nations, to turn off the tap.

    Despite this, if nothing happens, countries may have no choice but to look for, or at least threaten to float, an alternative U.N.-like organisation whose structure would be more in tandem with the contemporary world. Idealistic, perhaps. But this should force the Permanent Five to sit up and take real notice.

    K.S. Dakshina Murthy was formerly Editor of Al Jazeera based in Doha, Qatar



    more...


    pictures charlotte observer logo. the charlotte observer font. Photo: Charlotte Observer
  • Photo: Charlotte Observer



  • leoindiano
    03-24 08:57 AM
    Thanks for your insight. Its about time most of us here understand not to take immigration rules lightly, and I've been preaching this for the longest time already!

    People here had their own justification about "consulting". Well, this is what they get for exploiting loopholes.

    Dear Sledge_hammer,

    Dont just hammer around. The people who are doing consulting is not doing it out of their choice. It is the economy it forced some of us into consulting (fulltime to the company we work for but work for a client). In 2001, when we came out of school and tech bubble burst, there was no fulltime jobs, we were forced to do consulting. Some of my freinds who graduated in 2000 got into microsoft, oracle, cisco who didnt had damn good GPA. The guys who had 4.0 GPA and graduated a semester later didnt get those offers, coz bubble burst by that time.

    I am forced to tell you that the guys who are doing fulltime jobs working in same technology and same companies and doing same thing everyday are by no means smarter than the consultants who work in different industries, different technologies and enjoy their work. I would challenge the guys to come out and find a job faster than a consultant with same amount of experience.

    Luck By Chance doesnt give them a right to cry foul on consultants everyday....I am really sorry if i hurt anybodys feelings. I was forced by some of our fellow members. You have lot of other things to talk about. Dont blame consultants for your misery. If you are destined to suffer, you will suffer one or other way.

    I would advice all FTE's to be prepared for unexpected twists and turns in bad economy.





    dresses Photo: The Charlotte Observer, the charlotte observer font. of The Charlotte Observer
  • of The Charlotte Observer



  • senthil1
    04-08 07:34 PM
    IBM and Oracle will survive without H1B as they will hire US workers and set back will be temporary for them. So this bill is targeting the Indian bodyshoppers who are running company just by H1b persons. This was expected for long time. If it is not happening now it is going to happen in a few years. We knew that hundreds of US companies went out of business after 2000 as they were not able to compete with Indian consulting companies because of rate.


    What about professional services? Like IBM global services, Oracle consulting etc.... all these companies thrive on after sales customization and support based on professional services contract and there are thousands of h1b visa holders doing professional services. It is also outsourcing of a employee to a client implementing their system. Look at SAP, Siebel consultants, they are outsourced at client places for years together to finish implementations and their work locations are changed based on client's needs from time to time in between jobs - this is again a huge pool of H1bs.
    I used to work fulltime for a company in their professional services group and travelled on the job to a lot of places. The company thrives on h1b resources for their high pressured jobs and they always bring in people from outside the country to do their jobs.

    I think outsourcing employees to a different location is a part and parcel of H1b, and this bill is nailing exactly on that. It is aimed solely to purge out H1bs from the country.

    So all said and done, we may now go down based on a racially motivated bill. I am not sure what it takes to educate the law makers, I would like to see the senior personnel at IV and more analysts to look into what can be done on this bill.



    more...


    makeup charlotte observer logo. the charlotte observer font. of The Charlotte Observer
  • of The Charlotte Observer



  • unitednations
    08-02 02:17 PM
    Definitely so. The fundamental problems of visa numbers and national quota remain and I think the next few months are going to be hell because of this stupid decision to rescind the July bulletin and allow everybody to apply for the I-485. How does one travel in an emergency after the I-485 is filed for but the receipt has not been received?

    Once 485 is filed you can leave and re-enter the country if you have H or L visa.

    You don't need to wait for the actual receipt.

    Problem occurs if you leave before august 17th; thinking that lawyer has sent the case when he really hasn't and you were out when ucis receives the package. Eventually; uscis would figure it out and could deny the case becuase of this.

    Also, not wise to leave before august 17th; because if the package gets returned for whatever reason then you need to be here to send it in again and you would have to update with new passport pages with stamps and i-94 card and date of last entry, etc.

    I understand that people have to go out on business but they are unnecessary complications that people are doing.





    girlfriend The Charlotte Observer. the charlotte observer font. Jeff Willhelm/The Charlotte
  • Jeff Willhelm/The Charlotte



  • brb2
    04-07 07:12 PM
    If the Strive act passes then a large part of the H1B visa demand from US STEM will be out of the que, because these people will not need a H1B Visa. The proposed restrictions on H1B will put the body shoppers out of business where people are hired, put on the bench if there are no contracts, and if they do have a job, then the company will collect a hefty cut off the work of the H1B worker. If this part of the H1B numbers are out, then companies which genuinely hire hi-tech workers such as foreign qualified Engineers, Scientists, technicians etc. These people will then not have to compete for visa numbers with these Desi companies who might just bring in web developers to hire out on contracts at various sites accross the US. Currently, as things stand, a smart lawyer can get an H1B petition written up even to collect garbage or to pump gas at a gas station. No one can dispute that all this goes on. The restrictions should be in place only for new H1B employees not existing ones to minimize the effect on businesses and these employees too.





    hairstyles Photo: Charlotte Observer the charlotte observer font. Photo: (AP Photo/The Charlotte
  • Photo: (AP Photo/The Charlotte



  • mrajatish
    07-08 10:07 AM
    Hi,
    I applied for GC under schedule A in may06 .My husband filed as derivative.He received a notice of intent to denial last month .Reason being he did not have paystubs for a period of more than 6 months during 2000 and 2001.His employer at that time did not pay him even after he worked for 4 months then he took few more months to change his company(more than 180 days)In 2002 he went to India and came back .and in 2004 filed for a GC as primary petitioner and me as a derivative .last year he withdrew the petition after he received several RFE`S fearing the worst.Even though he no longer has GC filed as primary petitioner he received notice of intent to deny for the petion filed through me saying that his H1 was not legal as could`nt show proof for several months and that when he filed for AOS he used those years as work experience.
    and now another problem is I applied for EAD in march and have not received new ead.my old ead expired 10 days ago.and now Iam not working.
    We bought a house last year thinking that under schedule A we`ll get GC in no time.Now we know it is a terrible mistake.Now both of us can`t work and had to take my son out of daycare. and we have house payments to make.We put our house for sale weeks ago and so far no offers.I contacted local representative to expedite My EAD and also contacted USCIS to expedite it,
    citing financial burden.We are spending sleepless nights and have no clue what to do for my EAD and his AOS.pLEASE HELP.
    Did anyone face similar situation .Any suggestions are welcome.

    1. When you filed I-485, you should file under 245(K) immediately - I believe someone already mentioned that below. For derivative applications, the derivative applicant may be "out of status" for any length without any issues for AOS approval.

    2. For the 6 mos period he was without pay check, does he have any proof of employment and correspondingly any letter showing that he was on vacation/leave of absense. I had a 15 day period between 2 jobs where I took time off but had no vacation, hence leave without pay but I have leave letter from my manager in letter-head (I know a lot of people do that as taking vacation between jobs gives them a fresh start).

    3. Did the period length where he did not have a pay check exceed 180 days at a stretch?

    Bottomline, it seems an overzealous USCIS officer is trying to find ways to deny your application - you should involve a good lawyer and get immediate rebuttal for Notice of Denial.





    gc03
    05-17 10:56 AM
    Wouldn't it have been nice as well for this president to suggest that the U.S. government would also take seriously its responsibilities to create a new and efficient immigration system to accommodate the backlog of millions of people trying to do the right thing? The same agency that would have to oversee Mr. Bush's amnesty program could not begin to do so because the Citizenship and Immigration Services already faces a backlog of millions of people who are trying to enter this country lawfully.

    Read on full (http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/17/dobbs.bushspeech/index.html?section=cnn_topstories)

    Should we thank CNN Writer Lou Dobbs?





    learning01
    02-01 09:02 PM
    Please give me a link to what you refer, and I will write to Lou-foul mouth. Also, I request you to wirte and update status.
    It is time for IV to do its job by letting the truth out. The claim that H1Bs do not pay any taxes are outrageous. They should know that H1Bs pay all the tax but do not enjoy the benefits, e.g., when they get laid off, they have to leave the coutry right away without getting a penny of unemployment benefits. They will not get the social socurity benefits if they do not work in the U.S. for at least 10 years while their visas only allow them to work 6 years in a row. Such unfairness can go on and on...:mad:



    No comments:

    Post a Comment