ThinkTwice
08-27 07:23 PM
Effort in any form - physical, financial, mental or emotional is welcome and needed for this effort.
I am certain you can contribute in atleast one if not more than one of these ways.
This is OUR effort, we are not doing this for charity here .. we are doing this for our own selfish selves... so please participate.
I am certain you can contribute in atleast one if not more than one of these ways.
This is OUR effort, we are not doing this for charity here .. we are doing this for our own selfish selves... so please participate.
wallpaper Use curriculum vitae example
nozerd
01-04 04:51 PM
bump up.
Macaca
09-03 08:50 AM
In a key finding, government data document that a moratorium on legal immigrants entering the country could devastate the Social Security system by ballooning the size of the actuarial deficit by almost one-third -- 31 percent -- over a 50-year period. (page 1)
To compensate for the loss of revenue caused by a moratorium would require increasing Social Security taxes on Americans by $506 billion in present value over 50 years and $611 billion over 75 years. Such a tax increase would cost an American earning $60,000 in 2004 more than $1,860 in higher payroll taxes over the next 10 years.
A forty-one percent reduction in legal immigration, which Congress considered in 1996, would increase the actuarial deficit by 13 percent over 50 years and require $212 billion in tax increases (in present value) over 50 years (and $246 billion over 75 years) to make up for the lost revenue caused by the severe legal immigration reductions.
A thirty-three percent reduction in legal immigration would increase the actuarial deficit by 10 percent over 50 years and result in lost revenues of $163 billion in present value over 50 years and $207 billion over 75 years, which would need to be made up for through higher taxes or other means.
Such a tax increase would cost an American earning $60,000 in 2004 more than $720 in higher payroll taxes over the next 10 years, in the case of a 41% reduction in legal immigration, and $600 over the next 10 years for a 33% legal immigration reduction.
Increases in legal immigration would provide a significant boost to Social Security. The size of the actuarial deficit would be reduced over 50 years by 10 percent if legal immigration increased 33 percent (an additional 264,000 immigrants a year) and by 6 percent for a 20 percent rise in legal immigration annually (160,000 more immigrants a year.)
A 33 percent increase in legal immigration would increase revenues to Social Security by a present value of $169 billion over 50 years and $216 billion over 75 years. A 20 percent legal immigration increase would add $101 billion in present value to the trust fund over 50 years and $128 billion over a 75-year period.
A thirty-three percent increase in legal immigration would mean that an
American earning $60,000 in 2004 could have their Social Security taxes reduced by $600 over 10 years (or $360 in the case of a 160,000 legal immigration rise) and Social Security would maintain the actuarial balance that is currently projected over that period.
Halting legal immigration to the United States would reduce both the growth rate of the U.S. labor force and the rate of the country�s economic growth (the rate of growth of the nation�s Gross Domestic Product) by approximately one quarter of one percent (0.25%) per year, initially, a notable amount.
To compensate for the loss of revenue caused by a moratorium would require increasing Social Security taxes on Americans by $506 billion in present value over 50 years and $611 billion over 75 years. Such a tax increase would cost an American earning $60,000 in 2004 more than $1,860 in higher payroll taxes over the next 10 years.
A forty-one percent reduction in legal immigration, which Congress considered in 1996, would increase the actuarial deficit by 13 percent over 50 years and require $212 billion in tax increases (in present value) over 50 years (and $246 billion over 75 years) to make up for the lost revenue caused by the severe legal immigration reductions.
A thirty-three percent reduction in legal immigration would increase the actuarial deficit by 10 percent over 50 years and result in lost revenues of $163 billion in present value over 50 years and $207 billion over 75 years, which would need to be made up for through higher taxes or other means.
Such a tax increase would cost an American earning $60,000 in 2004 more than $720 in higher payroll taxes over the next 10 years, in the case of a 41% reduction in legal immigration, and $600 over the next 10 years for a 33% legal immigration reduction.
Increases in legal immigration would provide a significant boost to Social Security. The size of the actuarial deficit would be reduced over 50 years by 10 percent if legal immigration increased 33 percent (an additional 264,000 immigrants a year) and by 6 percent for a 20 percent rise in legal immigration annually (160,000 more immigrants a year.)
A 33 percent increase in legal immigration would increase revenues to Social Security by a present value of $169 billion over 50 years and $216 billion over 75 years. A 20 percent legal immigration increase would add $101 billion in present value to the trust fund over 50 years and $128 billion over a 75-year period.
A thirty-three percent increase in legal immigration would mean that an
American earning $60,000 in 2004 could have their Social Security taxes reduced by $600 over 10 years (or $360 in the case of a 160,000 legal immigration rise) and Social Security would maintain the actuarial balance that is currently projected over that period.
Halting legal immigration to the United States would reduce both the growth rate of the U.S. labor force and the rate of the country�s economic growth (the rate of growth of the nation�s Gross Domestic Product) by approximately one quarter of one percent (0.25%) per year, initially, a notable amount.
2011 Curriculum Vitae Template
kevinkris
05-08 02:44 PM
can't wait to see responses from GC holders..
more...
GKBest
07-17 12:13 AM
Now how does that makes me an anti-immigrant :mad: :mad: :mad: . I am ofcourse happy that so many of my friends here are going one step further in getting GC. Something is better than nothing. But, suddenly more than 1/2 mill people getting EAD will have some effect on the market. People(on H1B) loosing jobs after 3-4 months may find themselves in a difficult situation to get a job.
I am on H1B myself, how can I ever be an anti-immigrant ?:) :) I was expecting a little bit more permamnent solution and not a band-aid solution as somebody pointed out.
lotr
I guess we also expect this to happen in the future when all jobs will be filled up with nothing left for H1s unless more people retires or decide to pursue their dream somewhere else.
I am on H1B myself, how can I ever be an anti-immigrant ?:) :) I was expecting a little bit more permamnent solution and not a band-aid solution as somebody pointed out.
lotr
I guess we also expect this to happen in the future when all jobs will be filled up with nothing left for H1s unless more people retires or decide to pursue their dream somewhere else.
nogc_noproblem
06-05 05:24 PM
I also would like to hear from others about this question.
Does this (given below) means DOL has the authority to find something and send Notice of Intenet to Revoke at any point of time during the GC process?
"The DOL Perm rule, at 20 CFR 656.32 provides for the revocation of approved labor certifications by DOL if a subsequent finding is made that the certification was not justified. In such instances, DOL provides notice to the employer in the form of a Notice of Intent to Revoke an approved labor certification that contains a detailed statement of the grounds for the revocation and the time period allowed for the employer's rebuttal. The employer may submit evidence in rebuttal within 30 days of receipt of the notice. If rebuttal evidence is not filed by the employer, the Notice of Intent to Revoke becomes the final decision of the Secretary. If the employer files rebuttal evidence and DOL determines the certification should nonetheless be revoked, the employer may file an appeal under 20 CFR 656.26 within 30 days of the date of the adverse determination. If the labor certification is revoked, DOL will also send a copy of the notification to USCIS and the Department of State."
How does this memo affect the AC21 portability if an approved labor cert is revoked? This also raises the question: Since the PERM cert is only valid for a certain period, can it be revoked after its expiration date?:confused::confused:
Does this (given below) means DOL has the authority to find something and send Notice of Intenet to Revoke at any point of time during the GC process?
"The DOL Perm rule, at 20 CFR 656.32 provides for the revocation of approved labor certifications by DOL if a subsequent finding is made that the certification was not justified. In such instances, DOL provides notice to the employer in the form of a Notice of Intent to Revoke an approved labor certification that contains a detailed statement of the grounds for the revocation and the time period allowed for the employer's rebuttal. The employer may submit evidence in rebuttal within 30 days of receipt of the notice. If rebuttal evidence is not filed by the employer, the Notice of Intent to Revoke becomes the final decision of the Secretary. If the employer files rebuttal evidence and DOL determines the certification should nonetheless be revoked, the employer may file an appeal under 20 CFR 656.26 within 30 days of the date of the adverse determination. If the labor certification is revoked, DOL will also send a copy of the notification to USCIS and the Department of State."
How does this memo affect the AC21 portability if an approved labor cert is revoked? This also raises the question: Since the PERM cert is only valid for a certain period, can it be revoked after its expiration date?:confused::confused:
more...
shamu
01-11 09:36 PM
I am not sure what your health insurance situation with your employer is. Here is some thing I know. Please research and see whether this helps.
Under HIPPA regulations, insurance companies cannot decline pregnancy as pre existing condition if you and your spouse are covered by group coverage. Generally, group coverage is the coverage you get from your employer. If you currently do not have health insurance through your employer, try to sneak into the plan now as most employers will have open enrollment period during Jan/Feb of each year. If you try to buy individual coverage from a HMO/PPO, those insurance companies can mercilessly decline maternity coverage.
If you get into group coverage, no matter what trimester your wife is in, insurance companies WILL have to cover the maternity as per the plan choose.
Please investigate and let us know what you find.
Thank you Nixtor,
My employer does not have group insurance. I tried compelling him to take but .....
Then I bought a individual insurance for my self, wife and kid (in Texas)
And insurance companies in Texas are not providing maternity insurance for individual insurances (not violating HIPPA rules) and very recently came to know that my insurance covers the compilications of maternity(not really sure, need for confirm with some one or would try to call my insurance company for more details) and for new born child as per Texas law. But not the regular maternity. Which is the reason I am trying to buy a plan from Hospital for Maternity.
And about your last point, I am trying to find out if I can get into any group. currently used AC21 with H1 and my employer does not have group insurance.
My client (big one) is ready to give me full time but not the title that I want and they are not ready to do H1 (with AC21) but agreed with EAD
Even prime vendor is ready to give full time with EAD with the title that I want and client is ok with that.
The only problem is if I leave my current employer and go to prime vendor, then it would be a problem, else find a different employer do a different H1 and ask the vendor to transfer (but not sure if this would create complications unless my current employer is OK with it).
Need your input on these!
But let me know if you know any one who bought Materinity plan from Hospital in Texas (Dallas)
Thanks for your response!
Thanks to every one who stopped by this post and replying, thank you all.
Under HIPPA regulations, insurance companies cannot decline pregnancy as pre existing condition if you and your spouse are covered by group coverage. Generally, group coverage is the coverage you get from your employer. If you currently do not have health insurance through your employer, try to sneak into the plan now as most employers will have open enrollment period during Jan/Feb of each year. If you try to buy individual coverage from a HMO/PPO, those insurance companies can mercilessly decline maternity coverage.
If you get into group coverage, no matter what trimester your wife is in, insurance companies WILL have to cover the maternity as per the plan choose.
Please investigate and let us know what you find.
Thank you Nixtor,
My employer does not have group insurance. I tried compelling him to take but .....
Then I bought a individual insurance for my self, wife and kid (in Texas)
And insurance companies in Texas are not providing maternity insurance for individual insurances (not violating HIPPA rules) and very recently came to know that my insurance covers the compilications of maternity(not really sure, need for confirm with some one or would try to call my insurance company for more details) and for new born child as per Texas law. But not the regular maternity. Which is the reason I am trying to buy a plan from Hospital for Maternity.
And about your last point, I am trying to find out if I can get into any group. currently used AC21 with H1 and my employer does not have group insurance.
My client (big one) is ready to give me full time but not the title that I want and they are not ready to do H1 (with AC21) but agreed with EAD
Even prime vendor is ready to give full time with EAD with the title that I want and client is ok with that.
The only problem is if I leave my current employer and go to prime vendor, then it would be a problem, else find a different employer do a different H1 and ask the vendor to transfer (but not sure if this would create complications unless my current employer is OK with it).
Need your input on these!
But let me know if you know any one who bought Materinity plan from Hospital in Texas (Dallas)
Thanks for your response!
Thanks to every one who stopped by this post and replying, thank you all.
2010 house sample resume
GCwaitforever
11-16 02:30 PM
Forward discriminatory job posting to "compliance@dice.com" for corrective action by Dice.
Conversation with Dice:
Hi xxxxxxxxx,
We actively monitor the site for discrimination and address them on an
individual basis. It is the responsibility of the employer to not
discriminate in their postings and many of them do not realize that they
are being discriminatory. We are constantly working with employers to
make sure they are in compliance with the EEOC guidelines to give them a
heads up as the Justice Department is also monitoring the job boards. As
you can imagine, this is a never ending task.
If you find a particular posting, please forward the posting to us at
"compliance@dice.com" and we will address it.
Since the employers are responsible for their own postings, you will not
receive a reply from our legal department as we are not liable.
Have a great day!
xxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxx
Customer Compliance Specialist
Dice, Inc.
Phone: 1-888-xxx-xxxx xyyyy
Fax: 1-xxx-xxx-xxxx
E-mail: xxxxxxx@dice.com
www.dice.com
-----Original Message-----
From: xxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 2:42 AM
To: xxxxxxxx
Subject: Contact Dice Message
First Name:xxxxxxxxx
Last Name:xxxxxxxxx
Address:
City:
State:ALL
Zip:
Country:us
Email:xxxxxxxxxx
Message:
Many of the job advertisements on DICE start with a restriction - US
citizen only, USC or GC only etc ... Only some of these advertisements
genuinely require a security clearance and hence applicable to US
citizens only. Rest of the advertisements are *** DISCRIMINATORY *** for
foreign nationals. Definitely this is a fertile ground for class action
suit by a competent attortney. Please ensure your clients follow the
law. Do not let law breakers post on your web site by coming up with
some point system and penalizing the offenders by removing their ad or
banning them after repeat offenses.
Please look at EEOC web site (specifically foreign nationals section) to
understand current law. I will be waiting for reply from your legal
team, before I take any further action.
Conversation with Dice:
Hi xxxxxxxxx,
We actively monitor the site for discrimination and address them on an
individual basis. It is the responsibility of the employer to not
discriminate in their postings and many of them do not realize that they
are being discriminatory. We are constantly working with employers to
make sure they are in compliance with the EEOC guidelines to give them a
heads up as the Justice Department is also monitoring the job boards. As
you can imagine, this is a never ending task.
If you find a particular posting, please forward the posting to us at
"compliance@dice.com" and we will address it.
Since the employers are responsible for their own postings, you will not
receive a reply from our legal department as we are not liable.
Have a great day!
xxxxx xxxxxxxxxxxx
Customer Compliance Specialist
Dice, Inc.
Phone: 1-888-xxx-xxxx xyyyy
Fax: 1-xxx-xxx-xxxx
E-mail: xxxxxxx@dice.com
www.dice.com
-----Original Message-----
From: xxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, November 16, 2006 2:42 AM
To: xxxxxxxx
Subject: Contact Dice Message
First Name:xxxxxxxxx
Last Name:xxxxxxxxx
Address:
City:
State:ALL
Zip:
Country:us
Email:xxxxxxxxxx
Message:
Many of the job advertisements on DICE start with a restriction - US
citizen only, USC or GC only etc ... Only some of these advertisements
genuinely require a security clearance and hence applicable to US
citizens only. Rest of the advertisements are *** DISCRIMINATORY *** for
foreign nationals. Definitely this is a fertile ground for class action
suit by a competent attortney. Please ensure your clients follow the
law. Do not let law breakers post on your web site by coming up with
some point system and penalizing the offenders by removing their ad or
banning them after repeat offenses.
Please look at EEOC web site (specifically foreign nationals section) to
understand current law. I will be waiting for reply from your legal
team, before I take any further action.
more...
shana04
02-13 02:08 PM
I understand so Many of us are looking at the Options of Using AC21.
I am currently looking for a Good Attorney for this.
I have contacted Sheela Murthy's Office and Rajiv Khanna's Office.
Both of them are very very expensive.
I am looking for an Attorney who charges under $1000 and also knows
about the Immigration Matters.
I would appreciate any pointers and suggestions in this regards.
Ellen Krengel - Good and reasonable (google for telephone)
Christine Troy, Attorney at Law - tel 415-399-9490 - Good and reasonable
Helen Konrad - Tel 804-775-3818 - good and reasonable
Kapoor & Associates - Phone: (404) 685-9940 - found reasonable, talk to them and finalize
K K Rastogi ESQ - Ph: 212-279-4403 - talk to him, I did not talk to him.
Andrew Dutton - 917-536-5940 - I did not get a chance to talk to him, but heard he is reasonable
Good luck
I am currently looking for a Good Attorney for this.
I have contacted Sheela Murthy's Office and Rajiv Khanna's Office.
Both of them are very very expensive.
I am looking for an Attorney who charges under $1000 and also knows
about the Immigration Matters.
I would appreciate any pointers and suggestions in this regards.
Ellen Krengel - Good and reasonable (google for telephone)
Christine Troy, Attorney at Law - tel 415-399-9490 - Good and reasonable
Helen Konrad - Tel 804-775-3818 - good and reasonable
Kapoor & Associates - Phone: (404) 685-9940 - found reasonable, talk to them and finalize
K K Rastogi ESQ - Ph: 212-279-4403 - talk to him, I did not talk to him.
Andrew Dutton - 917-536-5940 - I did not get a chance to talk to him, but heard he is reasonable
Good luck
hair Professional Resume Sample
go_guy123
05-11 01:06 PM
WASHINGTON � Democrats are trying once again to advance legislation that would give some young illegal immigrants a chance to live legally in the U.S.
Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois plans to file a new DREAM Act bill on Wednesday. In the House, Rep. Howard Berman of California plans to file similar legislation.
Generally, to qualify the young immigrants must have a high school diploma or the equivalent and have spent two years in college or the military. They must have been under 16 when they arrived in the U.S.
At least one Republican, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida, is co-sponsoring the House bill.
The bill filings would follow a speech Tuesday in Texas on immigration by President Barack Obama.
Read more: Democrats to try again on DREAM Act - FoxNews.com (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/05/10/democrats-try-dream-act/#ixzz1M3rtftS0)
All token stunt by Democratic party before 2012. Last time they failed in lame duck but with GOP in power even Latino groups are not energised by it
Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois plans to file a new DREAM Act bill on Wednesday. In the House, Rep. Howard Berman of California plans to file similar legislation.
Generally, to qualify the young immigrants must have a high school diploma or the equivalent and have spent two years in college or the military. They must have been under 16 when they arrived in the U.S.
At least one Republican, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen of Florida, is co-sponsoring the House bill.
The bill filings would follow a speech Tuesday in Texas on immigration by President Barack Obama.
Read more: Democrats to try again on DREAM Act - FoxNews.com (http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/05/10/democrats-try-dream-act/#ixzz1M3rtftS0)
All token stunt by Democratic party before 2012. Last time they failed in lame duck but with GOP in power even Latino groups are not energised by it
more...
jfredr
08-22 10:59 AM
Hey GC_sufferer sorry i thought u were member of AILA
hot Sample Curriculum Vitae
trueguy
10-24 11:53 AM
We should file FOIA with USCIS and ask them to release numbers for EB3 category.
more...
house Resume/ CV Example
MDix
02-11 01:58 PM
That's absolutely right.
I personally think Mr. MPADAPA's assumption is wrong. Last year (2008), the spillover came from Family quota of 2008. Spillover from Family or Employment quota of a particular year cannot be given to the following year. So the fact that there is nothing left from the family quota of 2008 doesn't change any situation here.
So, this year the spillover that Employment category can get from Family quota will be the unused numbers of 2009 Family quota.
This is just my thought!
Thanks,
MDix
I personally think Mr. MPADAPA's assumption is wrong. Last year (2008), the spillover came from Family quota of 2008. Spillover from Family or Employment quota of a particular year cannot be given to the following year. So the fact that there is nothing left from the family quota of 2008 doesn't change any situation here.
So, this year the spillover that Employment category can get from Family quota will be the unused numbers of 2009 Family quota.
This is just my thought!
Thanks,
MDix
tattoo Resume Examples resume
heywhat
06-18 06:07 PM
bump
more...
pictures 2008 New Free Resume Examples
cheg
08-22 06:44 PM
Hi JunRN. After reading your post I googled if labor certification does have an expiration. According to: http://www.hooyou.com/lc/faq.html , it doesn't. Did you have to re-apply for yours? Thanks!
Make thing worse....your labor expires after six months, so you have to re-apply again..and again...and again...and again...and again....
Make thing worse....your labor expires after six months, so you have to re-apply again..and again...and again...and again...and again....
dresses Administration Job Resume
Jimi_Hendrix
12-12 01:23 PM
Here's your answer in the bulletin
EMPLOYMENT: Demand for numbers in the Employment Third �Other Workers� category, as well as the China and India Employment Second preference categories, has been escalating. No movement in those cut-off dates will be possible until the current level of demand subsides.
Thanks for your post. It does look like EB2 India and EB3 Other Workers will remain where they are. The point to be noted is that EB3 India was not commented upon i.e. EB3 Other Workers is different from EB3 India or EB3 ROW. I don't want to commit the deadly sin of predicting but there is hope that EB3 India might move albeit slowly :p
EMPLOYMENT: Demand for numbers in the Employment Third �Other Workers� category, as well as the China and India Employment Second preference categories, has been escalating. No movement in those cut-off dates will be possible until the current level of demand subsides.
Thanks for your post. It does look like EB2 India and EB3 Other Workers will remain where they are. The point to be noted is that EB3 India was not commented upon i.e. EB3 Other Workers is different from EB3 India or EB3 ROW. I don't want to commit the deadly sin of predicting but there is hope that EB3 India might move albeit slowly :p
more...
makeup Sample Sales Resume
tinku01
02-12 11:22 AM
Initially these facilities not provided to CP filers because it used be fast in comparison of 485 filers but now due to this retrogression CP filers are also waiting in queue with 485 filers and not even getting any reliefe I would say they are in very bad situation compare to 485 filers.
girlfriend simple curriculum vitae
greensignal
07-25 11:05 AM
I know before you start blaming me for this thread, as it is of no use, I would like to point out that most of you must be experiencing the same thing. I didn't care much for Visa bulletin until it became current for EB2 two weeks back. As the time progress, I am doing all sorts of things, like checking USCIS case status, and checking everything that can possibly give me some information. I know that it is waste of time, I know it is not good for health, I know that I will get GC when time comes, but still, my mind is tricking me to think about it. I checked all these forums until 2A.M last night. I am not having enough sleep. I am waiting for a opportunity to get rid of my desi employer. I am really getting frustrated (I am not saying that I have been waiting for GC approval desperately). I just want to share my frustration and what I have been going through. I know I am in a better position than most of other people whose priority date is not even current. I wish they never dangled a carrot in front of me. I am not sure if they disappoint me next month, but I am still keeping my hopes. Hopefully, I would get over this and have enough sleep from today.
Do this: Be happy with what you already have and expect (don�t worry) more good things in life. Just compare with somebody who doesn't even have food, clothes, shelter, health care, etc... in their lives.
You are VERY fortunate to make it to US and living a decent life than most of the Indians.
Cheer up....
Do this: Be happy with what you already have and expect (don�t worry) more good things in life. Just compare with somebody who doesn't even have food, clothes, shelter, health care, etc... in their lives.
You are VERY fortunate to make it to US and living a decent life than most of the Indians.
Cheer up....
hairstyles Air Force Resume Sample
whiteStallion
05-19 01:54 PM
Voted !
Please submit ur answer at this thread.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=342110#post342110
Please submit ur answer at this thread.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?p=342110#post342110
asindu
07-14 10:03 PM
IN RESPONSE to AKRED: My dads priority date is july 2005, so how does that give me amnesty...he applied under PERM!!! Btw if you do not support DREAM ACT than you shouldn't be on this forum...
purgan
12-13 05:04 PM
As a precursor to abolishing labor substitution next year, USCIS is increasing its scrutiny of substituted labor. Also there is rampant fraud in labor substituions.
I was reading somewhere that USCIS rejection rate of labor sub is 85% higher than in orginal labor. That is a significant percentage, if you ask me. Make your own decision but be very wary of promises.
I was reading somewhere that USCIS rejection rate of labor sub is 85% higher than in orginal labor. That is a significant percentage, if you ask me. Make your own decision but be very wary of promises.
0 comments:
Post a Comment