ak27
01-30 02:33 PM
Text looks fine..
Everyone: Pls help with adding some dramain it with Pictures and Graphics...
Everyone: Pls help with adding some dramain it with Pictures and Graphics...
wallpaper More Bleach wallpaper.
coopheal
03-19 05:34 PM
Before EB2 moves faster, every EB3 guy will get a new LC and jump in to EB2 line. Then EB3 line will be little lighter and moves a little faster. Then people will start asking like this - "Can we go back to EB3 line ? Can we have 3rd EB3 LC ( like LC sells in walmart) and another 485 ?" . Pretty much everyone wants to have 2 LC , 2 I-140 and 2 I-485 at any time. That way whichever category moves faster they will beat the system.
Then we come to this forum and wonder why there is so much backlog or why USCIS is so slow ( my favorite one).
This madness has to stop !
What is your point?? You stop your madness?
Then we come to this forum and wonder why there is so much backlog or why USCIS is so slow ( my favorite one).
This madness has to stop !
What is your point?? You stop your madness?
Imigrait
07-11 05:28 PM
Can you provide the source of this info? a link or something?
Here's your link
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4252.html
Look at Section E. I have also pasted the text below.
E. EMPLOYMENT SECOND PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
There have been questions raised regarding the way numbers have been provided to the China and India in the Employment Second preference categories beginning in April. Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that if total demand for visas in an Employment preference category is insufficient to use all available visa numbers in that category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limit. (For example: If the second preference annual limit were 40,000, number use by �All Other Countries� were estimated to be only 25,000, and the China/India combined number use based on their per-country limits were 6,000, then there would be 9,000 numbers unused. Those 9,000 numbers could then be made available to China and India applicants without regard to their per-country limits.)
Based on the informaiton available, it was been determined that the demand from �All Other Countries� for Second preference numbers, plus the amount of numbers available under China and India Second preference per-country limit, would be insufficient to utilize all available numbers under the annual limit for this category. Therefore, pursuant to Section 202(a)(5) of the Act, the unused numbers have been made available to China and India Second preference applicants. Since Section 203(e)(1) of the Act requires that such unused numbers be made available strictly in priority date order, the China and India applicants have been subject to the identical cut-off date. As there are more Employment Second preference applicants from India and the Indian applicants may have earlier priority dates, it is likely that Indian applicants will receive a larger portion of the available numbers than Chinese applicants.
It should be noted that the Employment Second preference category is "Current" for all countries except China and India. If at any point it appears that demand from �All Other Countries� would utilize all available numbers, then an adjustment would be made to the China/India cut-off date. Therefore, providing the unused numbers to China and India in no way disadvantages applicants from any other country, and helps to insure that the worldwide annual limit can be reached.
Here's your link
http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4252.html
Look at Section E. I have also pasted the text below.
E. EMPLOYMENT SECOND PREFERENCE VISA AVAILABILITY
There have been questions raised regarding the way numbers have been provided to the China and India in the Employment Second preference categories beginning in April. Section 202(a)(5) of the Immigration and Nationality Act states that if total demand for visas in an Employment preference category is insufficient to use all available visa numbers in that category in a calendar quarter, then the unused numbers may be made available without regard to the annual per-country limit. (For example: If the second preference annual limit were 40,000, number use by �All Other Countries� were estimated to be only 25,000, and the China/India combined number use based on their per-country limits were 6,000, then there would be 9,000 numbers unused. Those 9,000 numbers could then be made available to China and India applicants without regard to their per-country limits.)
Based on the informaiton available, it was been determined that the demand from �All Other Countries� for Second preference numbers, plus the amount of numbers available under China and India Second preference per-country limit, would be insufficient to utilize all available numbers under the annual limit for this category. Therefore, pursuant to Section 202(a)(5) of the Act, the unused numbers have been made available to China and India Second preference applicants. Since Section 203(e)(1) of the Act requires that such unused numbers be made available strictly in priority date order, the China and India applicants have been subject to the identical cut-off date. As there are more Employment Second preference applicants from India and the Indian applicants may have earlier priority dates, it is likely that Indian applicants will receive a larger portion of the available numbers than Chinese applicants.
It should be noted that the Employment Second preference category is "Current" for all countries except China and India. If at any point it appears that demand from �All Other Countries� would utilize all available numbers, then an adjustment would be made to the China/India cut-off date. Therefore, providing the unused numbers to China and India in no way disadvantages applicants from any other country, and helps to insure that the worldwide annual limit can be reached.
2011 Bleach Ichigo-Rukia wallpaper
ajm
11-02 12:40 AM
NRC 2008 063585
The request is in the complex track.
The request is in the complex track.
more...
nirenjoshi
03-09 12:53 PM
EB3 ROW has been retrogressed as predicted in Oh's website.
All non-India EB3 are at March 03 now....
Will they keep them at March 03 for few months and give a bump to EB3?
Something is cooking...Otherwise they wouldn't retrogress ROW by almost 2 years...
From the bulletin -
E. RETROGRESSON OF THE WORLDWIDE, MEXICO, AND PHILIPPINES EMPLOYMENT THIRD PREFERENCE CUT-OFF DATES FOR APRIL
Despite the established cut-off date having been held for the past five months in an effort to keep demand within the average monthly usage targets, the amount of demand being received from Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) Offices for adjustment of status cases remains extremely high. Therefore, it has been necessary to retrogress the April cut-off dates in an attempt to hold demand within the FY-2009 annual limit. Since over 60 percent of the Worldwide and Philippines Employment Third preference CIS demand received this year has been for applicants with priority dates prior to January 1, 2004, the cut-off date has been retrogressed to 01MAR03 to help ensure that the amount of future demand is significantly reduced. As indicated in the last sentence of Item A, paragraph 1, of this bulletin, this cut-off date will be applied immediately. It should also be noted that further retrogression or �unavailability� at any time cannot be ruled out.
It has also been necessary to retrogress the Employment Third Preference Other Worker cut-off date for all countries in order to hold the issuance level within the annual limit.
All non-India EB3 are at March 03 now....
Will they keep them at March 03 for few months and give a bump to EB3?
Something is cooking...Otherwise they wouldn't retrogress ROW by almost 2 years...
From the bulletin -
E. RETROGRESSON OF THE WORLDWIDE, MEXICO, AND PHILIPPINES EMPLOYMENT THIRD PREFERENCE CUT-OFF DATES FOR APRIL
Despite the established cut-off date having been held for the past five months in an effort to keep demand within the average monthly usage targets, the amount of demand being received from Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) Offices for adjustment of status cases remains extremely high. Therefore, it has been necessary to retrogress the April cut-off dates in an attempt to hold demand within the FY-2009 annual limit. Since over 60 percent of the Worldwide and Philippines Employment Third preference CIS demand received this year has been for applicants with priority dates prior to January 1, 2004, the cut-off date has been retrogressed to 01MAR03 to help ensure that the amount of future demand is significantly reduced. As indicated in the last sentence of Item A, paragraph 1, of this bulletin, this cut-off date will be applied immediately. It should also be noted that further retrogression or �unavailability� at any time cannot be ruled out.
It has also been necessary to retrogress the Employment Third Preference Other Worker cut-off date for all countries in order to hold the issuance level within the annual limit.
fromnaija
07-24 08:56 AM
We could pose this question to the USCIS Director today. He will be at Ask the White House at 4pm ET today. Pose your question at:
http://www.whitehouse.gov/ask
http://www.whitehouse.gov/ask
more...
arunmohan
02-04 02:12 PM
For people who don't know, Country Cap goes by Country of Birth , not country of citizenship...So if you are born in India but now you are canadian Citizen, you will still be counted as Indian for EB based Green Card allocation, isn't this a blatent racist agenda. I have a letter from Congresswoman Zoe Logfren's office, which clearly says 'I will work on removing arbitrary country quota on employement based Green Cards', we just need to pursue her...
I sent you a PM.
I sent you a PM.
2010 [Ningen]wallpapers-BLEACH-2-
thirdworldman
02-23 03:04 PM
I haven't forgotten, but I haven't had time either. I'm going away for the weekend and won't be able to work on it until after Monday.
more...
ak_2006
04-08 09:35 AM
Please Participate in this...
hair Bleach Wallpaper # 12
Beemar
01-18 02:45 AM
I have a slightly off track question. Can the creator of this thread, and other guys who also said they got laid off too, name their companies. I am just curious to know which companies are going through downsizing.
more...
pappu
01-09 07:53 PM
thanks for pointing it out. We need volunteers to do this task. anyone interested pls sign up here and start posting.
hot leach girls wallpaper
shantanup
02-04 10:39 AM
Some questions to those who are supporting country cap.
Why not put a country cap on foreign students’ visas since many of them get into the green card line eventually?
Why not put a country cap on H1B visas since many of them get into the green card line eventually?
Why not put a country cap on labor certifications?
Why not put a country cap on I-140s?
Why not impose a country cap at the port of entry?
Why not put a country cap on visitors’ visas?
Why not put a country cap on business visas?
Why not put a country cap on US trade with other countries?
Why not put a country cap on amount of US $ reserves that each country can have?
Why not put a country cap on children that foreigners in the US can bear?
Why not put a country cap on the foreigners’ earnings in the US?
.
.
.
And the list can go on.
Putting country cap on greens cards serves a hidden racist agenda of not letting the people of one particular ethnic group grow in number and become strong.
Why not put a country cap on foreign students’ visas since many of them get into the green card line eventually?
Why not put a country cap on H1B visas since many of them get into the green card line eventually?
Why not put a country cap on labor certifications?
Why not put a country cap on I-140s?
Why not impose a country cap at the port of entry?
Why not put a country cap on visitors’ visas?
Why not put a country cap on business visas?
Why not put a country cap on US trade with other countries?
Why not put a country cap on amount of US $ reserves that each country can have?
Why not put a country cap on children that foreigners in the US can bear?
Why not put a country cap on the foreigners’ earnings in the US?
.
.
.
And the list can go on.
Putting country cap on greens cards serves a hidden racist agenda of not letting the people of one particular ethnic group grow in number and become strong.
more...
house Bleach - Wallpaper No Shaking
Jaime
09-10 12:09 PM
Let's go! Let's all go! Sponsor a friend and come together!!!!
tattoo PSP Wallpaper 640x480
jprangi
07-03 02:10 PM
Hello All,
This whole story is a mess. USCIS is very much wrong on what they did. We all ended up in spending hundreds of thousands of dollars and on average one week of time to file the application. Few people took off from their work to complete the application on time. Few people paid as much as $700 for medical.
I have seen tons of blogs on internet and every blogs is talking about the same things.
Even though there are hundreds thousands of people were suffered. I don't see a single line on any major new web website or TV news channels. I doubt if any senator even knows how USCIS has been torturing (emotionally as well as financially) good, educated, responsible, and legal residents.
Dont you think its time to wake up and scream so loudly that these deafs can
hear and feel the pain.
Dont you think its time to help yourself. Forget about your employers, its not in their benefit to fight for you.
Dont you thinks its time for US citizens to know what their great US govt ( lovely responsible senators) are doing for legal resident. They are working hard to make illegals (out of them so many are criminals) legal. Giving hard time to legals.
Dont you think its time to tell every one that what can happen to America if we go mad and do system maintenance by running the command "rm -rf /*"
MAY BE ITS THE TIME TO COME ON ROADS IN LA, Chicago, NY, and Washington DC.
Its time to tell them that we can do it and we can do it very hard.
Its time to stop beating around bush and do something useful.
Just some thought..
-JP
This whole story is a mess. USCIS is very much wrong on what they did. We all ended up in spending hundreds of thousands of dollars and on average one week of time to file the application. Few people took off from their work to complete the application on time. Few people paid as much as $700 for medical.
I have seen tons of blogs on internet and every blogs is talking about the same things.
Even though there are hundreds thousands of people were suffered. I don't see a single line on any major new web website or TV news channels. I doubt if any senator even knows how USCIS has been torturing (emotionally as well as financially) good, educated, responsible, and legal residents.
Dont you think its time to wake up and scream so loudly that these deafs can
hear and feel the pain.
Dont you think its time to help yourself. Forget about your employers, its not in their benefit to fight for you.
Dont you thinks its time for US citizens to know what their great US govt ( lovely responsible senators) are doing for legal resident. They are working hard to make illegals (out of them so many are criminals) legal. Giving hard time to legals.
Dont you think its time to tell every one that what can happen to America if we go mad and do system maintenance by running the command "rm -rf /*"
MAY BE ITS THE TIME TO COME ON ROADS IN LA, Chicago, NY, and Washington DC.
Its time to tell them that we can do it and we can do it very hard.
Its time to stop beating around bush and do something useful.
Just some thought..
-JP
more...
pictures 25417 - Bleach Wallpaper
meridiani.planum
03-07 05:32 PM
Until last year, it was important to announce a job change via AC21 to USCIS. This was because many sponsoring employers would revoke the 140 (even after 180 days) so that they could reuse the Labor for someone else.
When that happened and there was no AC21 letter from the applicant, some IOs would deny the 485 even without a NOID. This would mean MTR and a lot of unnecessary work.
This problem no longer exists as Labot substitution has been removed. The employer has no incentive to revoke the 140 and so the chances of goofup from USCIS has been lowered.
Employer still has two incentives to revoke I-140:
* outstanding I-140s get counted in ability-to-pay issues of future I-140s. Better to clear out older ones.
* leaving an approved but unused I-140 is essentially leaving files open with USCIS as well as at your attorneys office. Expect the attorneys to revoke them (my own attorney of a big company asks the employer to close the files with USCIS by revoking the I-140). In addition to opened files, the attorneys get some fees atleast for doing this, so thats another motivation for them.
When that happened and there was no AC21 letter from the applicant, some IOs would deny the 485 even without a NOID. This would mean MTR and a lot of unnecessary work.
This problem no longer exists as Labot substitution has been removed. The employer has no incentive to revoke the 140 and so the chances of goofup from USCIS has been lowered.
Employer still has two incentives to revoke I-140:
* outstanding I-140s get counted in ability-to-pay issues of future I-140s. Better to clear out older ones.
* leaving an approved but unused I-140 is essentially leaving files open with USCIS as well as at your attorneys office. Expect the attorneys to revoke them (my own attorney of a big company asks the employer to close the files with USCIS by revoking the I-140). In addition to opened files, the attorneys get some fees atleast for doing this, so thats another motivation for them.
dresses Kon leach wallpapers
shantanup
02-04 10:39 AM
Some questions to those who are supporting country cap.
Why not put a country cap on foreign students’ visas since many of them get into the green card line eventually?
Why not put a country cap on H1B visas since many of them get into the green card line eventually?
Why not put a country cap on labor certifications?
Why not put a country cap on I-140s?
Why not impose a country cap at the port of entry?
Why not put a country cap on visitors’ visas?
Why not put a country cap on business visas?
Why not put a country cap on US trade with other countries?
Why not put a country cap on amount of US $ reserves that each country can have?
Why not put a country cap on children that foreigners in the US can bear?
Why not put a country cap on the foreigners’ earnings in the US?
.
.
.
And the list can go on.
Putting country cap on greens cards serves a hidden racist agenda of not letting the people of one particular ethnic group grow in number and become strong.
Why not put a country cap on foreign students’ visas since many of them get into the green card line eventually?
Why not put a country cap on H1B visas since many of them get into the green card line eventually?
Why not put a country cap on labor certifications?
Why not put a country cap on I-140s?
Why not impose a country cap at the port of entry?
Why not put a country cap on visitors’ visas?
Why not put a country cap on business visas?
Why not put a country cap on US trade with other countries?
Why not put a country cap on amount of US $ reserves that each country can have?
Why not put a country cap on children that foreigners in the US can bear?
Why not put a country cap on the foreigners’ earnings in the US?
.
.
.
And the list can go on.
Putting country cap on greens cards serves a hidden racist agenda of not letting the people of one particular ethnic group grow in number and become strong.
more...
makeup anime leach wallpaper
Googler
02-20 02:54 PM
I'd posted elsewhere about my Feb 13, 2008 conversation with the DOS official who sets cutoff dates:
And then there this piece of info from Ron Gotcher posted on Feb 14, 2008
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4285
"Last night, at a meeting of the American Immigration Lawyer's Assocation Southern California chapter, Charles Oppenheim spoke. Mr. Oppenheim is the officer within the Visa Office tasked with calculating visa bulletin cutoff dates each month. He offered the following thoughts as to cutoff date movement in the upcoming months:
In April, India and China EB2 will be set at 12/01/2003
EB3 for India and China will slow down for the rest of the fiscal year."
I am riveted by this because I spoke to Oppenheim just the day before this meeting (he referred to it). This was the conversation in which he told me that at present EB-2 India would only get numbers leftover from EB-1 India -- the problem is he doesn't know either exactly how many EB-2 India adjudicated applications there are in any specific PD range -- so every month he makes wild guesses, with the intent of using up visas. So I guess at least as of 2/14/08 he thought moving the date to 12/1/03 would more than mop up whatever was leftover from EB-1 India. Given the end of the FBI boondoggle (the effects of which have not been quantified by Oppenheim or USCIS) I'd predict that even a date in early 2002 would be good enough to mop up. Let us see if he changes his mind by mid March.
But his statement at the AILA meeting has been bothering me so I talked to him again today. Here is what he said -- that he is considering not only the EB-1 India excess, but the entire EB-1 worldwide excess being given to oversubscribed EB-2! I asked him about his earlier statement and he said that he had had a chance to look at the numbers and determine that unlike recent years EB-1 worldwide is not using numbers up at a rate that would max out EB-1 usage. BUT. He is waiting for USCIS to give him an estimate of the number of EB-2 India applications that would become eligible if he moves the cutoff dates up to 12/1/03, he will set the date ONLY after he gets that data and determines that there won't be too many within that cutoff date.
I also asked him to confirm that he was relying on his interpretation of Section 202(a)(5) (http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe) of the INA in order to proceed with this spillover. This is his current interpretation of that section -- spillover from EB-1 to EB-2 IF there appears to be a worldwide excess in EB-1, when there is no worldwide excess in EB-1 then country specific spillover for example, from EB-1 India to EB-2 India only etc. In past years like FY06, EB-1 ROW was looking maxed out, so barely any spillover from EB-1 to oversubscribed EB-2.
And then there this piece of info from Ron Gotcher posted on Feb 14, 2008
http://immigration-information.com/forums/showthread.php?t=4285
"Last night, at a meeting of the American Immigration Lawyer's Assocation Southern California chapter, Charles Oppenheim spoke. Mr. Oppenheim is the officer within the Visa Office tasked with calculating visa bulletin cutoff dates each month. He offered the following thoughts as to cutoff date movement in the upcoming months:
In April, India and China EB2 will be set at 12/01/2003
EB3 for India and China will slow down for the rest of the fiscal year."
I am riveted by this because I spoke to Oppenheim just the day before this meeting (he referred to it). This was the conversation in which he told me that at present EB-2 India would only get numbers leftover from EB-1 India -- the problem is he doesn't know either exactly how many EB-2 India adjudicated applications there are in any specific PD range -- so every month he makes wild guesses, with the intent of using up visas. So I guess at least as of 2/14/08 he thought moving the date to 12/1/03 would more than mop up whatever was leftover from EB-1 India. Given the end of the FBI boondoggle (the effects of which have not been quantified by Oppenheim or USCIS) I'd predict that even a date in early 2002 would be good enough to mop up. Let us see if he changes his mind by mid March.
But his statement at the AILA meeting has been bothering me so I talked to him again today. Here is what he said -- that he is considering not only the EB-1 India excess, but the entire EB-1 worldwide excess being given to oversubscribed EB-2! I asked him about his earlier statement and he said that he had had a chance to look at the numbers and determine that unlike recent years EB-1 worldwide is not using numbers up at a rate that would max out EB-1 usage. BUT. He is waiting for USCIS to give him an estimate of the number of EB-2 India applications that would become eligible if he moves the cutoff dates up to 12/1/03, he will set the date ONLY after he gets that data and determines that there won't be too many within that cutoff date.
I also asked him to confirm that he was relying on his interpretation of Section 202(a)(5) (http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=cb90c19a50729fb47fb0686648558 dbe) of the INA in order to proceed with this spillover. This is his current interpretation of that section -- spillover from EB-1 to EB-2 IF there appears to be a worldwide excess in EB-1, when there is no worldwide excess in EB-1 then country specific spillover for example, from EB-1 India to EB-2 India only etc. In past years like FY06, EB-1 ROW was looking maxed out, so barely any spillover from EB-1 to oversubscribed EB-2.
girlfriend wallpaper bleach.
yabadaba
07-24 02:15 PM
jc menon...have u ever taken a law class? do u have a jd? why are u then so adamant on thinking u "found" the loophole?
we are not stupid morons over here. Neither is the AILA/millions of lawyers that are associated with immigration law. Please for heaven sake dont start now about some conspiracy theory about immigration lawyers having a preference for backlog.
there is no loophole, there is no precedent and by emailing the director with a moronic question will only show that probably that we have morons stuck in retrogression and probably we deserve to be stuck.
we are not stupid morons over here. Neither is the AILA/millions of lawyers that are associated with immigration law. Please for heaven sake dont start now about some conspiracy theory about immigration lawyers having a preference for backlog.
there is no loophole, there is no precedent and by emailing the director with a moronic question will only show that probably that we have morons stuck in retrogression and probably we deserve to be stuck.
hairstyles house Bleach 800x600 Wallpaper
TexDBoy
09-10 03:30 PM
ya ... at least one issue will be closed by them ... hopefully they discuss our bill today ...
nomi
12-12 12:36 PM
Hi Logiclife,
If an attorney says that it cannot be done with administrative changes, then I guess, we dont have much to argue.
But I cannot understand the logic behind why it cant be done. I mean, disallowing concurrent processing is possible by an administrative change, why is the reverse (or something similar like allowing 485 filing without pd being current), not possible?
I am sorry for not being to let go of this, but I thought, logic-life can see some logic in this!!! :)
Thank you.
I agree with you. There is not logic in any of immigration related laws. I think they should re-write all those immigration laws again and all lawmakers should be Immigrant who can understand all the pain we have coz of these immigration laws. I don`t think any law maker knows "what I-485 is"
Once they approve the 1-140 and that`s it it shuold be all done. AOS
(Change of Status) is all stupid and meaning less. It just money making games for all Attorneys and law makers. All attorneys supports law makers so they make laws where attorney can have maximum benefits from us. These attorneys don`t do anything either about immigration laws coz this is the only way for them to make money.
If an attorney says that it cannot be done with administrative changes, then I guess, we dont have much to argue.
But I cannot understand the logic behind why it cant be done. I mean, disallowing concurrent processing is possible by an administrative change, why is the reverse (or something similar like allowing 485 filing without pd being current), not possible?
I am sorry for not being to let go of this, but I thought, logic-life can see some logic in this!!! :)
Thank you.
I agree with you. There is not logic in any of immigration related laws. I think they should re-write all those immigration laws again and all lawmakers should be Immigrant who can understand all the pain we have coz of these immigration laws. I don`t think any law maker knows "what I-485 is"
Once they approve the 1-140 and that`s it it shuold be all done. AOS
(Change of Status) is all stupid and meaning less. It just money making games for all Attorneys and law makers. All attorneys supports law makers so they make laws where attorney can have maximum benefits from us. These attorneys don`t do anything either about immigration laws coz this is the only way for them to make money.
chanduv23
09-28 03:48 PM
Those Asian Americans who are against new Asian immigrants, which include some of my relatives, sadly to tell you, are just helping White Americans in this fight. It is their wish and their passion. But if White Americans don't want it, they will have no chance of getting their voice heard. Not all White Americans are against immigration. But there is a big percentage of White Americans who are either fiercely against it or do not want it. I can hardly find any White American who says they want more immigrants. And a small percentage of White Americans are fiercely against immigrations. They would curse at anyone who they think is a new immigrant at any opportunity they have.
Well, unfortunately they all vote and their votes are important to all the candidates. Even Senators like Obama, Hillary etc... are playing the same vote bank politics. They seem to be loving immigrants of different ethnicities, but not skilled immigrants waiting for green card - VERY SIMPLE EQUATION - NO VOTING POWER NO SUPPORT - and people like Durbin and Grassley go a step ahead and damage the entire industry and attack tech companies. They do all these just for the sake of votes.
Our only mistake is that we are in the queue, followed all rules, contribute to economy and we do not vote. They do not see anything else but votes. They are not controlling brain drain, not recognizing skills, tried to break their own rules during the July bulletin fiasco - why so much hatred towards us? Just because we are competitive?
Well, unfortunately they all vote and their votes are important to all the candidates. Even Senators like Obama, Hillary etc... are playing the same vote bank politics. They seem to be loving immigrants of different ethnicities, but not skilled immigrants waiting for green card - VERY SIMPLE EQUATION - NO VOTING POWER NO SUPPORT - and people like Durbin and Grassley go a step ahead and damage the entire industry and attack tech companies. They do all these just for the sake of votes.
Our only mistake is that we are in the queue, followed all rules, contribute to economy and we do not vote. They do not see anything else but votes. They are not controlling brain drain, not recognizing skills, tried to break their own rules during the July bulletin fiasco - why so much hatred towards us? Just because we are competitive?
No comments:
Post a Comment