red200
01-17 12:01 PM
What if they start screening EAD or GC guys and decide applications on the fact that at one point of time one has not maintained this rule and start denying.
I dont think one would get any lead time to figure this out. if they(USCIS) decide to do so, Example is where the H1's were turned back at newark airport(Did they get any lead time. i dont think so)
So the better thing is to understand first what the exact implications of this memo are and act now peace fully. atleast call ,send emails or some thing similar .
I dont think one would get any lead time to figure this out. if they(USCIS) decide to do so, Example is where the H1's were turned back at newark airport(Did they get any lead time. i dont think so)
So the better thing is to understand first what the exact implications of this memo are and act now peace fully. atleast call ,send emails or some thing similar .
wallpaper At 5#39;10quot; she has a tall and
arunmohan
06-12 01:59 PM
Group:
I don't see any improvement since 2005 except June/July 2007 fisaco. But people are still waiting since long time.
I will request all EB3-India/EB3 ROW filers to join this thread. We need help from IV.
I don't see any improvement since 2005 except June/July 2007 fisaco. But people are still waiting since long time.
I will request all EB3-India/EB3 ROW filers to join this thread. We need help from IV.
innervoice
05-01 11:03 PM
I also got LUD on I-129 on 4/26/2009, might be some batch.
2011 Jessica (Deborah Ann Woll)
rimzhim
01-29 07:03 PM
Why will it move PDs faster than now? Thanks.
could it be that ppl will not be able to sneak in with pre-approved labor now? if there is a significant number doing that, the PDs will move faster. Congrats IV on this achievement!
could it be that ppl will not be able to sneak in with pre-approved labor now? if there is a significant number doing that, the PDs will move faster. Congrats IV on this achievement!
more...
smisachu
08-01 05:34 PM
Hi smisachu,
Could you explain what you mean by this? Are you referring to "Flash Trading"
or the whole of HFT?
Yes Flash trading, ELP (enhanced liquidity program), direct access trading and even other program trading. The programs seek out discreet blocks that are being routed into the market and front run them. The main culprit according to many is GS. And to acheive a significant alpha the size and leverage are huge. Some program with a bug will dump a lot of shares on the market some day and before any one can react. Here is an article on some info that was made available only to bloomberg users.
"Lime Brokerage: "The Next 'Long Term Capital' Meltdown Will Happen In
A Five-Minute Time Period."
Posted by Tyler Durden at 11:25 AM
A recent Bloomberg piece that for some reason was made available only
to terminal subscribers, provides a very interesting discussion on the
dangers of sponsored access, how the associated pre-trade vs post-
trade monitoring deliberations by "regulators" will influence short
selling curbs, and not surprisingly, the desire by Goldman to not only
dominate this yet another aspect of high-frequency trading, but to
dictate market policy at will.
What is sponsored access:
In sponsored access, a broker-dealer lends its market participation
identification (MPID) number to clients for them to trade on exchanges
without going through the broker's trading system, to avoid slowing
down the execution. That places responsibility on the broker-dealer to
make sure the participant abides by securities regulations, and that
its trading, which can involve hundreds or thousands of orders a
second, does not run amok.
Is it thus surprising, that none other than Goldman Sachs is muscling
its way into providing not only a sponsored access platform to its
clients, but a new form of sponsored access that needs the blessing of
regulators:
Wall Street heavyweight Goldman Sachs, now launching its own sponsored-
access service to lend clients its identification to access securities
exchanges directly, said last week it favors monitoring client orders
prior to execution.
"Our view is that there is a real need for pre-trade checks in the use
of sponsored access to fulfill [broker-dealers'] regulatory
responsibilities," said Greg Tusar, managing director at Goldman.
Goldman's stand in favor of pre-trade instead of post-trade monitoring
of sponsored clients' activity is one side of a debate in which
regulators may choose a middle ground. The regulators' decision on how
to monitor sponsored access may also influence their deliberations on
restricting short sales.
What is the difference between pre-trade and post-trade monitoring? In
brief:
Pre-trade
Compliant with Reg SHO
Nip problems before they happen
View activity across exchanges
Post-trade
Faster order executions
Pre-trade systems still fallible
And another tidbit:
In traditional sponsored-access arrangements, a broker-dealer
determines a client's suitability to access market centers directly
and then allows the client to trade without monitoring its individual
orders prior to execution.
In other words, the Goldman endorsed pre-trade approach will allow
"monitoring of individual orders prior to execution." Whether or not
pre-trade checks provide the capacity to observe not just wholesale
exchange activity in the context of sponsored access but from a much
broader market angle is a discussion for another time, although this
could be one place where Sergey Aleynikov could shed an infinite
amount of light, especially as pertains to Goldman's sponsored-access
service. Conveniently, his gag order will prevent him from saying much
if anything until such time as there is an appetizing settlement to
keep him gagged in perpetuity. The bottom line is that with a pre-
trade environment, the sponsored access providers will be able to have
the potential to front run all those who use their platforms. The
residual question of how far they go to comply with regulations to
prevent this from happening, and remain true to their ethics standards
is also a topic for another day.
Going back to the topic at hand. Here is why sponsored access could
easily be quite a bother to capital markets sooner rather than later:
Unchecked errors or unintended repeat orders could deplete broker-
dealers' capital, and potentially wreak havoc in the broader market.
Concerns have arisen, however, about whether all broker-dealers are
able to fulfill that duty in today's electronic trading environment,
and according to which standards.
And here Goldman chimes in to not only promote their proposed
architecture but to expound on the virtues of pre-trade checking.
"In the case of high-frequency trading, in particular guarding against
technology failures, oversized orders and other situations where
there's potentially systemic market impact, we believe strongly that
pre-trade checks are a prerequisite," Tusar says.
Nasdaq's proposal as well as Securities and Exchange Commission
officials' speeches a few months ago appeared to lean toward
bolstering the traditional approach.
"We don't believe that's strong enough or what the regulators want
now, because of the potentially dire consequences, and because we-as
broker-dealers-bear much of that risk," Tusar says.
Now the reason why this is very relevant in the context of not just
potential front running, but also market structure is that Regulation
SHO, which is the primary regulatory framework for short selling (and
the purvey of potential Uptick Rule reinstatement, which will happen
once the market is allowed to hit a bid) is a post-trade
architecture.
Wedbush [Morgan] routinely tests clients' systems to ensure they are
compliant with Reg SHO. In addition, he says, the brokerage sets
limits on clients available locates-as well as credit and trading
limits--before the start of each trading day that its system tracks,
prohibiting shorts without locates and providing a type of pre-trade
check.
Or as has recently become the case, seeing rolling buy ins in the
middle of the day as borrowable shares in even the most liquid stocks
mysteriously disappear (look at today's market action for yet another
blatant example of this practice).
Anticipating the regulators' likely response, one should not be
surprised to see them siding with Goldman and against shorters:
As the SEC also seeks to appease investor concerns over rampant short
selling, especially naked short selling, new sponsored-access
standards may provide part of the solution. Given that day-traders may
be the last remaining culprits of such activity,, increasing and
standardizing scrutiny over their trading may reduce uncovered (and
illegal) shorts even further.
How about appeasing concerns over rampant, unjustified buying? When
will the downtick buy rule be implemented? But we jest.
And I digress again. Why should all this be concerning to advocates of
stability of high-frequency trading:
The mother of all concerns is a sponsored firm's algorithm going awry
and executing thousands of problematic trades across a range of
securities and market centers.
Well, this is not really a problem when it happens to the upside as
has been the case for months now - it is only a threat when Joe
Sixpack's 401(k) may be impacted, i.e., to the downside.
And here is where a SEC Comment submitted by broker Lime Brokerage is
a very troubling must read by all who naively claim that High-
frequency trading is a boon to an efficient market (which doesn't
provide . Well, yes and no - it is, until such moment that it causes
the market to, literally, break. I will post a critical excerpt from
the Lime submission, and leave the rest to our readers' independent
analysis:
Lime's familiarity with high speed trading allows us to benchmark some
of the fastest computer traders on the planet, and we have seen CDT
(Computerized Day Trading) order placement rates easily exceed 1,000
orders per second. Should a CDT algorithm go awry, where a large
amount of orders are placed erroneously or where the orders should not
have passed order validation, the Sponsor will incur a substantial
timelag in addressing the issue. From the moment the Sponsor�s
representative detects the problem until the time the problematic
orders can be addressed by the Sponsor, at least two mintues will have
passed. The Sponsor�s only tools to control Sponsored Access flow are
to log into the Trading Center�s website (if available), place a phone
call to the Trading Center, or call the Sponsee to disable trading and
cancel these erroneous orders � all sub-optimal processes which
require human intervention. With a two minute delay to cancel these
erroneous orders, 120,000 orders could have gone into the market and
been executed, even though an order validation problem was detected
previously. At 1,000 shares per order and an average price of $20 per
share, $2.4 billion of improper trades could be executed in this short
timeframe. The sheer volume of activity in a concentrated period of
time is extremely disruptive to the process of maintaining a �fair and
orderly� market. This shortcoming needs to be addressed if the
practice of Naked Access is going to be permitted to continue;
otherwise, the next �Long Term Capital� meltdown will happen in a five-
minute time period.
Could you explain what you mean by this? Are you referring to "Flash Trading"
or the whole of HFT?
Yes Flash trading, ELP (enhanced liquidity program), direct access trading and even other program trading. The programs seek out discreet blocks that are being routed into the market and front run them. The main culprit according to many is GS. And to acheive a significant alpha the size and leverage are huge. Some program with a bug will dump a lot of shares on the market some day and before any one can react. Here is an article on some info that was made available only to bloomberg users.
"Lime Brokerage: "The Next 'Long Term Capital' Meltdown Will Happen In
A Five-Minute Time Period."
Posted by Tyler Durden at 11:25 AM
A recent Bloomberg piece that for some reason was made available only
to terminal subscribers, provides a very interesting discussion on the
dangers of sponsored access, how the associated pre-trade vs post-
trade monitoring deliberations by "regulators" will influence short
selling curbs, and not surprisingly, the desire by Goldman to not only
dominate this yet another aspect of high-frequency trading, but to
dictate market policy at will.
What is sponsored access:
In sponsored access, a broker-dealer lends its market participation
identification (MPID) number to clients for them to trade on exchanges
without going through the broker's trading system, to avoid slowing
down the execution. That places responsibility on the broker-dealer to
make sure the participant abides by securities regulations, and that
its trading, which can involve hundreds or thousands of orders a
second, does not run amok.
Is it thus surprising, that none other than Goldman Sachs is muscling
its way into providing not only a sponsored access platform to its
clients, but a new form of sponsored access that needs the blessing of
regulators:
Wall Street heavyweight Goldman Sachs, now launching its own sponsored-
access service to lend clients its identification to access securities
exchanges directly, said last week it favors monitoring client orders
prior to execution.
"Our view is that there is a real need for pre-trade checks in the use
of sponsored access to fulfill [broker-dealers'] regulatory
responsibilities," said Greg Tusar, managing director at Goldman.
Goldman's stand in favor of pre-trade instead of post-trade monitoring
of sponsored clients' activity is one side of a debate in which
regulators may choose a middle ground. The regulators' decision on how
to monitor sponsored access may also influence their deliberations on
restricting short sales.
What is the difference between pre-trade and post-trade monitoring? In
brief:
Pre-trade
Compliant with Reg SHO
Nip problems before they happen
View activity across exchanges
Post-trade
Faster order executions
Pre-trade systems still fallible
And another tidbit:
In traditional sponsored-access arrangements, a broker-dealer
determines a client's suitability to access market centers directly
and then allows the client to trade without monitoring its individual
orders prior to execution.
In other words, the Goldman endorsed pre-trade approach will allow
"monitoring of individual orders prior to execution." Whether or not
pre-trade checks provide the capacity to observe not just wholesale
exchange activity in the context of sponsored access but from a much
broader market angle is a discussion for another time, although this
could be one place where Sergey Aleynikov could shed an infinite
amount of light, especially as pertains to Goldman's sponsored-access
service. Conveniently, his gag order will prevent him from saying much
if anything until such time as there is an appetizing settlement to
keep him gagged in perpetuity. The bottom line is that with a pre-
trade environment, the sponsored access providers will be able to have
the potential to front run all those who use their platforms. The
residual question of how far they go to comply with regulations to
prevent this from happening, and remain true to their ethics standards
is also a topic for another day.
Going back to the topic at hand. Here is why sponsored access could
easily be quite a bother to capital markets sooner rather than later:
Unchecked errors or unintended repeat orders could deplete broker-
dealers' capital, and potentially wreak havoc in the broader market.
Concerns have arisen, however, about whether all broker-dealers are
able to fulfill that duty in today's electronic trading environment,
and according to which standards.
And here Goldman chimes in to not only promote their proposed
architecture but to expound on the virtues of pre-trade checking.
"In the case of high-frequency trading, in particular guarding against
technology failures, oversized orders and other situations where
there's potentially systemic market impact, we believe strongly that
pre-trade checks are a prerequisite," Tusar says.
Nasdaq's proposal as well as Securities and Exchange Commission
officials' speeches a few months ago appeared to lean toward
bolstering the traditional approach.
"We don't believe that's strong enough or what the regulators want
now, because of the potentially dire consequences, and because we-as
broker-dealers-bear much of that risk," Tusar says.
Now the reason why this is very relevant in the context of not just
potential front running, but also market structure is that Regulation
SHO, which is the primary regulatory framework for short selling (and
the purvey of potential Uptick Rule reinstatement, which will happen
once the market is allowed to hit a bid) is a post-trade
architecture.
Wedbush [Morgan] routinely tests clients' systems to ensure they are
compliant with Reg SHO. In addition, he says, the brokerage sets
limits on clients available locates-as well as credit and trading
limits--before the start of each trading day that its system tracks,
prohibiting shorts without locates and providing a type of pre-trade
check.
Or as has recently become the case, seeing rolling buy ins in the
middle of the day as borrowable shares in even the most liquid stocks
mysteriously disappear (look at today's market action for yet another
blatant example of this practice).
Anticipating the regulators' likely response, one should not be
surprised to see them siding with Goldman and against shorters:
As the SEC also seeks to appease investor concerns over rampant short
selling, especially naked short selling, new sponsored-access
standards may provide part of the solution. Given that day-traders may
be the last remaining culprits of such activity,, increasing and
standardizing scrutiny over their trading may reduce uncovered (and
illegal) shorts even further.
How about appeasing concerns over rampant, unjustified buying? When
will the downtick buy rule be implemented? But we jest.
And I digress again. Why should all this be concerning to advocates of
stability of high-frequency trading:
The mother of all concerns is a sponsored firm's algorithm going awry
and executing thousands of problematic trades across a range of
securities and market centers.
Well, this is not really a problem when it happens to the upside as
has been the case for months now - it is only a threat when Joe
Sixpack's 401(k) may be impacted, i.e., to the downside.
And here is where a SEC Comment submitted by broker Lime Brokerage is
a very troubling must read by all who naively claim that High-
frequency trading is a boon to an efficient market (which doesn't
provide . Well, yes and no - it is, until such moment that it causes
the market to, literally, break. I will post a critical excerpt from
the Lime submission, and leave the rest to our readers' independent
analysis:
Lime's familiarity with high speed trading allows us to benchmark some
of the fastest computer traders on the planet, and we have seen CDT
(Computerized Day Trading) order placement rates easily exceed 1,000
orders per second. Should a CDT algorithm go awry, where a large
amount of orders are placed erroneously or where the orders should not
have passed order validation, the Sponsor will incur a substantial
timelag in addressing the issue. From the moment the Sponsor�s
representative detects the problem until the time the problematic
orders can be addressed by the Sponsor, at least two mintues will have
passed. The Sponsor�s only tools to control Sponsored Access flow are
to log into the Trading Center�s website (if available), place a phone
call to the Trading Center, or call the Sponsee to disable trading and
cancel these erroneous orders � all sub-optimal processes which
require human intervention. With a two minute delay to cancel these
erroneous orders, 120,000 orders could have gone into the market and
been executed, even though an order validation problem was detected
previously. At 1,000 shares per order and an average price of $20 per
share, $2.4 billion of improper trades could be executed in this short
timeframe. The sheer volume of activity in a concentrated period of
time is extremely disruptive to the process of maintaining a �fair and
orderly� market. This shortcoming needs to be addressed if the
practice of Naked Access is going to be permitted to continue;
otherwise, the next �Long Term Capital� meltdown will happen in a five-
minute time period.
snathan
03-29 01:53 PM
@Snathan how did you know he didn't call me here , are you one of the consultants yourself who does this filthy work of cheating people.
I guess it was my employers discretion to make me sit home with him just not responding to my mails, i couldn't barge in to his office and say hey give me desk to work on? can i ?
Anyways looking at the LCA agreement i think you don't seem to know what you are talking about, I am here holding his company's name on my H1B form , His agreement on LCA and his employment letter, i dunno if there is any other way i could make inroads into barging into his office?
Now if he puts a security guard against me entering his office, shouldn't i report this to DOL too?
Mind your words you low life scum bag. You don’t know what you were doing and paid for H1B and landed here and informed your employer through email which states he did not invite you to the US though he applied for the H1B. By the way when did he informed about the project situation.
Yea...you go ahead and report DOL or even white house. I am sure you won’t get anything out of it as there are so many loop holes in your case. No one is going to pay you the green buck because you want it.
Getting emotional is not going to help you. Your case is not going to impact your employer until he is doing this as a pattern. The only other option is, if you can get another job apply for a transfer and the approval without I-94. Then you will have to go out of the country and come back.
Your first priority should be to get the job and fix your visa issues. Then find other employees working for this employer and if they are in similar situation like you. If so, you have a very strong case and complaint to DOL. May be you should use this as a leverage to get the pay stub and do transfer. Really speaking pay stub is not an issue as long as you are able to get a job.
You need to relax and think what do you want to do and whats your goal...do you want to put your life back on track or go after this guy. You can teach him a lesson but how it’s going to help improving your situation. Because of the current environment, no one needs to file any complaint and every application from any company is thoroughly scrutinized by the USCIS. Worst case he will shut the shop and open another one. All he needs is a $300 to register a company. USCIS is not going to deport him as he might be already on GC or USC. But there is every possibility for ICE to knock on your door. You are just shooting yourself in the foot. Good luck.
I guess it was my employers discretion to make me sit home with him just not responding to my mails, i couldn't barge in to his office and say hey give me desk to work on? can i ?
Anyways looking at the LCA agreement i think you don't seem to know what you are talking about, I am here holding his company's name on my H1B form , His agreement on LCA and his employment letter, i dunno if there is any other way i could make inroads into barging into his office?
Now if he puts a security guard against me entering his office, shouldn't i report this to DOL too?
Mind your words you low life scum bag. You don’t know what you were doing and paid for H1B and landed here and informed your employer through email which states he did not invite you to the US though he applied for the H1B. By the way when did he informed about the project situation.
Yea...you go ahead and report DOL or even white house. I am sure you won’t get anything out of it as there are so many loop holes in your case. No one is going to pay you the green buck because you want it.
Getting emotional is not going to help you. Your case is not going to impact your employer until he is doing this as a pattern. The only other option is, if you can get another job apply for a transfer and the approval without I-94. Then you will have to go out of the country and come back.
Your first priority should be to get the job and fix your visa issues. Then find other employees working for this employer and if they are in similar situation like you. If so, you have a very strong case and complaint to DOL. May be you should use this as a leverage to get the pay stub and do transfer. Really speaking pay stub is not an issue as long as you are able to get a job.
You need to relax and think what do you want to do and whats your goal...do you want to put your life back on track or go after this guy. You can teach him a lesson but how it’s going to help improving your situation. Because of the current environment, no one needs to file any complaint and every application from any company is thoroughly scrutinized by the USCIS. Worst case he will shut the shop and open another one. All he needs is a $300 to register a company. USCIS is not going to deport him as he might be already on GC or USC. But there is every possibility for ICE to knock on your door. You are just shooting yourself in the foot. Good luck.
more...
Ramba
03-10 05:47 PM
I seriously doubt that this list is a 140 pending. Not 485. In 485 stage NIW will not come into picture.
2010 3 Jessica Deborah Ann Woll as
webm
08-19 01:59 PM
Total Pending applications :700,000 after Jul-07
EB3 : 385000 (at 55% of the total)
EB3-I: 115000 (at 30% of the 385000)
# of pending apps before Sep-2002: 11500 (at 10% of 115000)
EB3-I quota per year: 2940 (at 7% of EB-3(42000))
Years before my priority date becomes current: 3.9:mad::mad:
Well predicted....:( hope it won't take that long though!!
EB3 : 385000 (at 55% of the total)
EB3-I: 115000 (at 30% of the 385000)
# of pending apps before Sep-2002: 11500 (at 10% of 115000)
EB3-I quota per year: 2940 (at 7% of EB-3(42000))
Years before my priority date becomes current: 3.9:mad::mad:
Well predicted....:( hope it won't take that long though!!
more...
kumar1
04-20 02:38 PM
I paid 100 USD to my attorney, just to reply to a small RFE. I think that is how it works.
I got soft LUD on 4/10 and a hard LUD on my wife's application on 4/13. My attorney recd the RFE today and informed that USCIS is requesting evidence of my marriage to be bonafide.
My attorney is asking for additional legal fees for replying to RFE. Gurus, do you think I should pay to the attorney or can I just reply to USCIS with evidence?
Thanks,
Praky
I got soft LUD on 4/10 and a hard LUD on my wife's application on 4/13. My attorney recd the RFE today and informed that USCIS is requesting evidence of my marriage to be bonafide.
My attorney is asking for additional legal fees for replying to RFE. Gurus, do you think I should pay to the attorney or can I just reply to USCIS with evidence?
Thanks,
Praky
hair Deborah Ann Woll
ashishgour
09-17 11:37 AM
Guess they are reaching a bi-partisan consent about giving discretion to judges...hopefully this gets done soon..we shud be up next..
more...
ragz4u
02-22 09:55 AM
Bill Frist Website
http://frist.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Columns.Detail&Column_id=82
AMERICA MUST NURTURE HOMEGROWN HIGH-TECHNOLOGY WORKFORCE
--Op/Ed in San Jose Mercury News--
Senator Frist listens as Dr. James Wingate, President of LeMoyne-Owen College in Tennessee, expresses support for the inclusion of the SMART Grant program in this week's Senate budget reconciliation bill, 11/2/05
February 2006 - Every time I visit Silicon Valley I'm reminded of a simple fact: American businesses lead the world because they employ talented people. From the top executives at companies like Apple and Cisco to the science and engineering students I'll speak with Monday at San Jose State University, Americans sit on the cutting edge of technology.
We have less than 5 percent of the world's population but produce almost a quarter of its wealth and enjoy the highest per capita income of any large industrial economy. Americans receive more patents than the citizens of any other country, have the world's best university system, do most of the world's basic research, and take home the lion's share of Nobel Prizes in the sciences.
As many people working in Northern California's technology sector have realized, however, we can't afford complacence. China and India together now produce at least twice as many engineers as the United States. Both have fast growing populations and high-quality universities. In search of profits, companies have begun to outsource more low- and medium-skilled jobs to these nations.
No amount of funding, furthermore, would allow the United States to catch -- much less exceed -- China and India's combined production of scientific personnel. We just don't have enough people. Even at our own universities, foreigners earn an ever-increasing percentage of degrees in the hard sciences. Some remain, but many end up taking their valuable skills back home. American companies, meanwhile, have thousands of scientific and engineering openings that they can't fill.
If we hope to remain the world's pre-eminent economic power,/ we need to produce more scientists and engineers and train them better. One recent study, indeed, found that 85 percent of income growth stems from technological change.
While every American deserves a high-quality education, we need to target additional resources on the most talented students to ensure America retains its competitive edge. In particular, we need to provide an incentive to all of America's bright, driven low-income students who want to pursue careers in the sciences. Right now, far too many talented students from poor backgrounds drop out of college or shift away from hard science because of the expense. It's bad for the country.
One program that the president signed into law earlier this year takes the first major step toward fixing the problem. The SMART Grant program, which I developed, will focus assistance on students in science, math and strategic foreign languages who earn B averages or better during their junior and senior years of college. Next year, the California State University system estimates, more than 3,000 students systemwide -- including many at San Jose State -- will benefit from the program. Many will have their tuition payments eliminated entirely and the numbers will rise in coming years as the program attracts more people into the sciences. Thousands more students in the University of California system will also benefit.
Of course, tuition subsidies alone can't ensure that we'll have enough talented workers. In the coming months, Congress will consider the president's proposals to improve K-12 math education, increase funding for basic research, support high-risk/high-reward applied science projects, and make the research and development tax credit permanent. Fiscal realities, of course, will play a role in any final decision as Congress examines these proposals.
Silicon Valley companies already do an excellent job recruiting America's best and brightest. Now the government needs to build on its efforts to increase the ranks of homegrown scientists and engineers.
Hey Sobers,
Great work....I always look forward to your postings. Positive energy like yours helps IV in more ways than one.
Keep it up
http://frist.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Columns.Detail&Column_id=82
AMERICA MUST NURTURE HOMEGROWN HIGH-TECHNOLOGY WORKFORCE
--Op/Ed in San Jose Mercury News--
Senator Frist listens as Dr. James Wingate, President of LeMoyne-Owen College in Tennessee, expresses support for the inclusion of the SMART Grant program in this week's Senate budget reconciliation bill, 11/2/05
February 2006 - Every time I visit Silicon Valley I'm reminded of a simple fact: American businesses lead the world because they employ talented people. From the top executives at companies like Apple and Cisco to the science and engineering students I'll speak with Monday at San Jose State University, Americans sit on the cutting edge of technology.
We have less than 5 percent of the world's population but produce almost a quarter of its wealth and enjoy the highest per capita income of any large industrial economy. Americans receive more patents than the citizens of any other country, have the world's best university system, do most of the world's basic research, and take home the lion's share of Nobel Prizes in the sciences.
As many people working in Northern California's technology sector have realized, however, we can't afford complacence. China and India together now produce at least twice as many engineers as the United States. Both have fast growing populations and high-quality universities. In search of profits, companies have begun to outsource more low- and medium-skilled jobs to these nations.
No amount of funding, furthermore, would allow the United States to catch -- much less exceed -- China and India's combined production of scientific personnel. We just don't have enough people. Even at our own universities, foreigners earn an ever-increasing percentage of degrees in the hard sciences. Some remain, but many end up taking their valuable skills back home. American companies, meanwhile, have thousands of scientific and engineering openings that they can't fill.
If we hope to remain the world's pre-eminent economic power,/ we need to produce more scientists and engineers and train them better. One recent study, indeed, found that 85 percent of income growth stems from technological change.
While every American deserves a high-quality education, we need to target additional resources on the most talented students to ensure America retains its competitive edge. In particular, we need to provide an incentive to all of America's bright, driven low-income students who want to pursue careers in the sciences. Right now, far too many talented students from poor backgrounds drop out of college or shift away from hard science because of the expense. It's bad for the country.
One program that the president signed into law earlier this year takes the first major step toward fixing the problem. The SMART Grant program, which I developed, will focus assistance on students in science, math and strategic foreign languages who earn B averages or better during their junior and senior years of college. Next year, the California State University system estimates, more than 3,000 students systemwide -- including many at San Jose State -- will benefit from the program. Many will have their tuition payments eliminated entirely and the numbers will rise in coming years as the program attracts more people into the sciences. Thousands more students in the University of California system will also benefit.
Of course, tuition subsidies alone can't ensure that we'll have enough talented workers. In the coming months, Congress will consider the president's proposals to improve K-12 math education, increase funding for basic research, support high-risk/high-reward applied science projects, and make the research and development tax credit permanent. Fiscal realities, of course, will play a role in any final decision as Congress examines these proposals.
Silicon Valley companies already do an excellent job recruiting America's best and brightest. Now the government needs to build on its efforts to increase the ranks of homegrown scientists and engineers.
Hey Sobers,
Great work....I always look forward to your postings. Positive energy like yours helps IV in more ways than one.
Keep it up
hot Deborah Ann Woll Picture
Openarms
06-17 10:47 AM
Did anybody used IMG Global Medical Insurance for parents? How is their service about availability of providers and claim processing.
They are suggesting that people above 60 years old multiple deductible plans. For $2500 deductible and $100,000 max premium is $1300.00 for 6 months.
I am planning to take.
http://www..com
They are suggesting that people above 60 years old multiple deductible plans. For $2500 deductible and $100,000 max premium is $1300.00 for 6 months.
I am planning to take.
http://www..com
more...
house Deborah Ann Woll Arrives at
smartboy75
09-29 01:14 PM
Hey Tampacoolie...
With due respect ..man ..please do not highjack my thread.....please start a new one if you have a query...what you have posted is no way relevant to the one I opened...
With due respect ..man ..please do not highjack my thread.....please start a new one if you have a query...what you have posted is no way relevant to the one I opened...
tattoo Deborah Ann Woll.
prioritydate
08-22 12:53 PM
Seriously, folks. What's with this thread? Total waste of time.
Someone announces his 'greatest achievement' ... others challenge him to show true patriotism... yet others ask him to continue supporting India etc., AND this chap actually responds :)!
Wow! Seriously we all have too much time on our hands to be self promoting / congratulating / reminiscing etc...
Glad that this person will call US Senators etc., lets thank him for that and keep moving... instead of grilling him on things that matter to you! He owes you all no explanations or apologies.
Peace!
Right on! It is not a great achievement, but he was happy to share this with immigration community. I don't think anyone need to get offended by his post.
Someone announces his 'greatest achievement' ... others challenge him to show true patriotism... yet others ask him to continue supporting India etc., AND this chap actually responds :)!
Wow! Seriously we all have too much time on our hands to be self promoting / congratulating / reminiscing etc...
Glad that this person will call US Senators etc., lets thank him for that and keep moving... instead of grilling him on things that matter to you! He owes you all no explanations or apologies.
Peace!
Right on! It is not a great achievement, but he was happy to share this with immigration community. I don't think anyone need to get offended by his post.
more...
pictures 14 Deborah Ann Woll
GCwaitforever
07-20 10:02 AM
Can anyone share some information on this?
I am planning to pose question to the immigration lawyer in the conference. Please do join the talk.
I am planning to pose question to the immigration lawyer in the conference. Please do join the talk.
dresses Deborah Ann Woll
imhrb
12-29 06:47 AM
Congratulations! What a story!
I have been waiting for my GC application to be approved (marriage-based) for over 2 years now and haven't heard anything. People are suggesting me to go the Writ of Mandumus route...
Do you mind telling me approximately how much it cost you to go through the Writ of Mandumus process?
I have been waiting for my GC application to be approved (marriage-based) for over 2 years now and haven't heard anything. People are suggesting me to go the Writ of Mandumus route...
Do you mind telling me approximately how much it cost you to go through the Writ of Mandumus process?
more...
makeup Deborah Ann Woll on set in New
anzerraja
07-19 07:40 PM
There is a funding drive in this other thread towards reimbursing Aman's expenses.
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10708
Could you please pledge an amount ?
Even if it is a typo and it turns out to be 6400$ which is unlikely, can everyone contribute 64$? Lets do our 1%. What say?
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=10708
Could you please pledge an amount ?
Even if it is a typo and it turns out to be 6400$ which is unlikely, can everyone contribute 64$? Lets do our 1%. What say?
girlfriend Deborah Ann Woll has admitted
ajs4123
10-24 11:47 AM
why bother about I129 if you have a GC ?
I'm just keen to find out what's going on, and to get input on whether the I-129 being revoked is anything that can affect the I-140/I-485. I doubt it but would like to be sure. And to share what's going on in my case with others where it may have more of an impact if their H-1B ends up being revoked.
Anyway, I doubt if it's anything that can't be fixed; my company is very reputable and our attorneys are already engaged.
I'm just keen to find out what's going on, and to get input on whether the I-129 being revoked is anything that can affect the I-140/I-485. I doubt it but would like to be sure. And to share what's going on in my case with others where it may have more of an impact if their H-1B ends up being revoked.
Anyway, I doubt if it's anything that can't be fixed; my company is very reputable and our attorneys are already engaged.
hairstyles Deborah Ann Woll at the Oscars
gc_chahiye
11-02 04:45 PM
Do we really believe there aren't enough Americans to handle IT work in America?
yes. I honestly do. Having been through multiple recruitment attempts, at three different companies, in the bay area of all places: there are simply not enough qualified/interested american citizens available.
H-1b is not cheap labor. American companies prefer to hire H-1bs with US master's degrees or with substantial amounts of US experience. When they do hire foreigners, they do not discriminate against them by paying them lesser.
H-1bs are abused by desi vendors and the like who take advantage of the indenturing nature of the visa and also on the naivety of "fresh off the boat" people who newly arrive into the US and are unfamilar with US economy. They are starry eyed, still busy converting each dollar into their local currency and feeling happy they are earning relatively more and dreaming about paying off their EMIs back home, sooner. It takes quite a few months for them to settle down and understand US dynamics.
I agree.
Lastly, we should not confuse the need for H-1bs as equal to the need for GC holders. Take the example of middle eastern countries. They use foreign labor, but they never grant them permanent status. That way, they do not get stuck with them in the event of a downturn. American could have chosen to follow a similar model. Use H-1b temps when necessary and send them out when they are expendable. They have no reaons to hand out GCs, like I said earlier. The benefit is all ours.
good point. However unlike the kind of work being done in the middle-east, there are a ton of companies in the US founded or co-founded by immigrants. There is a reason this place is called the land of immigrants. Handing out GCs gives these people options to start companies and many many of them do. this creates jobs, creates more intellectual capital, all within the US. In 6 years if you make a cook in Dubai leave and go back to Kerala (just picking a typical example) he is not going to do anything to compete with Dubai. You make these H1-Bs who have spent 6 years here (working on various products, technologies, ramping up, understanding customers, relationships etc) go back, they are going to start companies in India. Now all the capital stays out there. The same 5 products that could have been built in the US and sold to lots of companies abroad, will now have to be bought by the US.
If there is any kind of immigration that I think the US does not gain much from, its the diversity lottery and to an extend the chain migration that comes from family based immigration. EB immigration is a BIG win for the US economy.
yes. I honestly do. Having been through multiple recruitment attempts, at three different companies, in the bay area of all places: there are simply not enough qualified/interested american citizens available.
H-1b is not cheap labor. American companies prefer to hire H-1bs with US master's degrees or with substantial amounts of US experience. When they do hire foreigners, they do not discriminate against them by paying them lesser.
H-1bs are abused by desi vendors and the like who take advantage of the indenturing nature of the visa and also on the naivety of "fresh off the boat" people who newly arrive into the US and are unfamilar with US economy. They are starry eyed, still busy converting each dollar into their local currency and feeling happy they are earning relatively more and dreaming about paying off their EMIs back home, sooner. It takes quite a few months for them to settle down and understand US dynamics.
I agree.
Lastly, we should not confuse the need for H-1bs as equal to the need for GC holders. Take the example of middle eastern countries. They use foreign labor, but they never grant them permanent status. That way, they do not get stuck with them in the event of a downturn. American could have chosen to follow a similar model. Use H-1b temps when necessary and send them out when they are expendable. They have no reaons to hand out GCs, like I said earlier. The benefit is all ours.
good point. However unlike the kind of work being done in the middle-east, there are a ton of companies in the US founded or co-founded by immigrants. There is a reason this place is called the land of immigrants. Handing out GCs gives these people options to start companies and many many of them do. this creates jobs, creates more intellectual capital, all within the US. In 6 years if you make a cook in Dubai leave and go back to Kerala (just picking a typical example) he is not going to do anything to compete with Dubai. You make these H1-Bs who have spent 6 years here (working on various products, technologies, ramping up, understanding customers, relationships etc) go back, they are going to start companies in India. Now all the capital stays out there. The same 5 products that could have been built in the US and sold to lots of companies abroad, will now have to be bought by the US.
If there is any kind of immigration that I think the US does not gain much from, its the diversity lottery and to an extend the chain migration that comes from family based immigration. EB immigration is a BIG win for the US economy.
srikondoji
06-07 12:46 PM
I am married too, but i only said that there are other easier paths aswell.
Regarding working late, i am a fulltime employee with H1-B and never came to office before 10:00AM and stayed after 6:00PM and never ever worked weekends. Mine can be an exceptional case, but what iam saying is, your relationship with your manager is important. This can make a lot of difference in your lives.
As long as you deliver what is expected of you, you can even work 4 days a week and get paid for 40 hrs per week.
I don't know, if we are deviating from our main discussion agenda started by LogicLife.
--sri
I am sorry srikondoji but i have to disagree on some points.
Yes you can do that. But you work late coz people Not dependant on H1B's can leave on their scheduled times coz if they get laid off, they wont be deported if they dont get a job in 10 days. Sure there is No Formal distinction on paper between H1B's and Non H1Bs, but it is assumed that since ur application depends on the employer (entirely), you will put urself to the grind.
What about people who come here already married? Now for those unmarried you have to marry a Citizen to get a Green card. Marriage is a totally seperate thing and is not something that should be used solely for getting a GC (IMHO). Sorry but i do not agree that marrying a citizen is an easier way of doing ur immigration.
Regarding working late, i am a fulltime employee with H1-B and never came to office before 10:00AM and stayed after 6:00PM and never ever worked weekends. Mine can be an exceptional case, but what iam saying is, your relationship with your manager is important. This can make a lot of difference in your lives.
As long as you deliver what is expected of you, you can even work 4 days a week and get paid for 40 hrs per week.
I don't know, if we are deviating from our main discussion agenda started by LogicLife.
--sri
I am sorry srikondoji but i have to disagree on some points.
Yes you can do that. But you work late coz people Not dependant on H1B's can leave on their scheduled times coz if they get laid off, they wont be deported if they dont get a job in 10 days. Sure there is No Formal distinction on paper between H1B's and Non H1Bs, but it is assumed that since ur application depends on the employer (entirely), you will put urself to the grind.
What about people who come here already married? Now for those unmarried you have to marry a Citizen to get a Green card. Marriage is a totally seperate thing and is not something that should be used solely for getting a GC (IMHO). Sorry but i do not agree that marrying a citizen is an easier way of doing ur immigration.
zigma
04-19 02:55 PM
Net Income is calculated after expenses (such as administrative and Salaries) have been deducted.
Net Income = Gross Income - Expenses
It is on Net income that the company pays taxes.
A company does not pay anyone from their net income. This is the profit.
Net Income = Gross Income - Expenses
It is on Net income that the company pays taxes.
A company does not pay anyone from their net income. This is the profit.
No comments:
Post a Comment