Monday, July 4, 2011

banco popular de puerto rico

images Puerto Rico- San Juan- Banco banco popular de puerto rico. Banco Popular De Puerto Rico
  • Banco Popular De Puerto Rico



  • puddonhead
    06-05 12:42 PM
    Sorry but no matter how you spin it, owning a home is better than renting. Renting is not smart. period. your money is gone every month. You are not getting that money back.

    When you own a home, the money goes towards a mortgage, and although most of it goes to interest at first, all interest paid is tax deductible which is a huge chunk of change every year. I get more money back as an owner than a renter and in the long run I save more AND own the home.

    30 year renter vs 30 year home owner? That is not rocket science.

    I doubt it is as clear cut as you make it to be. Rent vs. buy has two components in each option - the monthly cost and the long term saving/investment. Let me take the example of the apartment I live in. It would cost about 360k (I am not considering the closing cost, the cost to buy new appliances and so on when you move in etc) if we were to buy it as a condo in the market. We rent it for $1300.

    Buy:
    Monthly Cost:
    Interest (very simplistic calculation): 5% on 180k on average over 30 years. i.e. $750 per month. After Tax deduction cost ~$700 (you lose on standard deduction if you take property tax deduction - so effective saving is wayyy lower than the marginal tax rate).

    Property Tax: $400 per month.

    Maintenance/depreciation of appliances: assume $200 per month (easily could be more).
    Total: 1300.
    Long term investment: $360k at 3% per annum (long term housing price increase trend).
    You pay for this saving with leverage and $1000 amortization every month for the loan principal.

    Loss of flexibility/Risk : Not sure how to quantify.

    Rent:
    Monthly cost = $1300.
    Long Term Saving (assuming you put the same $1000 every month in a normal high yeild savings account - a Reward Checking maybe) - you will get a risk free 5%.

    So in this case you are paying the same monthly cost for house purchase vs rent. but you are losing out on the additional 2% per month in investment return.

    Plus - buying gets you into a lot riskier position.

    I have seen the proponents of buying fails to take a couple of factors into account:
    1. Real Estate, historically, is not a good investment. It is even worse than the best savings accounts available. And you could easily save your monthly amortization in better savings vehicles.
    2. Tax deduction from interest means you lose on standard deduction. In the above example - a family of 3 with 1 earner will have NO saving from housing tax deduction. They would be better off using the standard deduction. If there are 2 earners - they could try to work around this by filing separately and one taking deduction for housing interest and the other taking the standard deduction. But even that will probably not save you any money since many other tax rates are stacked up against single filers.





    wallpaper Banco Popular De Puerto Rico banco popular de puerto rico. por el anco popular de pr
  • por el anco popular de pr



  • WantGCQuick
    06-05 02:36 PM
    This is a very healthy discussion!!.
    My two cents.

    Buying a house is the best decision no matter what, if you can get for a good price(price u can afford) at a GOOD LOCATION!!!. I think location is more important...
    As far as real estate investment is concerned.. It is
    LOCATION LOCATION LOCATION..

    Nothing...else..!! .. Even if you are in H1B or GC if you know that u can stick to one job for a while and u get a house in a good location... this is the best time to invest!!





    banco popular de puerto rico. Comercial Banco Popular - 2006
  • Comercial Banco Popular - 2006



  • delax
    07-14 10:43 PM
    if people have to debate this issue, surely we can do it without needless slander and accusations?

    i agree with GC applicant, words like that do not sound right and have no place here please.

    btw when the vertical spillover started, there was alot of angst, these last two years all retrogressed categories except EB3 ROW have suffered. so that is not true either. except that there was frankly nothing we could do about it. there were long debates similar to the current ones- then they were between Eb2I and EB3 ROW and no conclusion was reached of course, and nothing changed by screaming at each other. finally USCIS as stated by them, has taken counsel about that "change" they made and concluded that they made an error in interpretation. what they have actually done now is rolled back a change they previosuly made.

    i also want to say to all the EB2 I crowd here- all this chest thumping is pointless. EB2 I will go back, a lot, this is just a temporary flood gate to use the remaining Gc numbers for the year. meanwhile, the plight of EB3I is truly bad. lets please keep working on the recapture/exemption/ country quota bill trio that would incraese available Gc numbers- for ALL our sakes.

    Paskal,
    Thanks for your post. But I beg to differ. If calling a spade a spade without any implication built into the language is slander/chest thumping then I stand down. You are free to moderate the forum per the framework laid out.

    However here is some food for thought for the mods and the community at large:

    1. Is IV officially and specifically endorsing this consideration campaign of giving numbers to EB3 based on the letter.
    2. If not, then the implication in the letter is that IV is doing so based on the logo used.
    3. Lets take a step back and think over what the letter/campaign/posts in this thread are asking the USCIS to do.
    4. There is a request to allocate numbers to EB3 based on length of wait.
    5. These numbers can only come from EB1 or EB2 given that the pie is not going to grow pending new legislation.
    6. If we accept that EB2ROW spill over can go only to EB2-Retro and only after EB2-Retro becomes current can they flow to EB3 (ROW/Retro) then the only source of visa numbers for EB3-Retro becomes EB1 spill over.
    7. We are then saying that some EB1 spill over should go to both EB2 retro and EB3 ROW/retro. Even in this case EB3 ROW has to become current, then satisfy EB2-Retro and only then flow down to EB3-Retro.
    8. If this is the case then one of two things can happen. Either the spill over from EB1 is small enough to satisfy EB3 ROW and EB2-Retro partially leaving EB3-Retro still high and dry or the spill over is so large that it makes EB3ROW current, EB2-Retro current and moves EB3-Retro forward. Given the sheer volume of EB2-Retro petitions that is unlikely to happen even if the spill over is large.
    9. This means that the letter is really asking for EB1 spill over to be such that it makes EB3 ROW current and then splits the remainder between EB2-Retro and EB3-Retro - On what basis - I have no clue. We are sub-ordinating EB2-Retro to EB3ROW and considering it on par with EB3-Retro. Think about that for a moment. The law allows you to ignore the country limit. It does not allow you to ignore the category and country limit unless everything is current.
    10. Even worse, if EB3-Retro is not claiming such a large spill over from EB1 then the only way EB3-Retro can move fwd is if EB2-ROW spill over is split with EB3 making the allocation logic even more egregious - all based on length of stay and compassionate grounds.

    If the IT gurus on this forum care to draw a flow chart based on my points above they'll realize the obvious - the only implication in the language of this letter without directly putting any language to that effect is to shaft EB2-Retro and allocate numbers to EB3-Retro.

    I am only stating what is blatantly obvious. Again if this is chest thumping, I stand down - but as I have said before, I will call it as I see it. You are welcome to differ and I look forward to comments from the community – flattering or otherwise. As to the EB2 dates’ moving back, that is a part and parcel of life. Besides they have been stuck at Apr 2004 for more than a year so another year it is. Cheers





    2011 por el anco popular de pr banco popular de puerto rico. Trend: anco popular de puerto rico
  • Trend: anco popular de puerto rico



  • Macaca
    05-27 05:46 PM
    The Next Great Resource Shortage: U.S. Scientists (http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,2074024,00.html) By ANDREW J. ROTHERHAM | Time

    The word "stem" is tossed around so much at education meetings these days, you'd think you were at a gardening seminar. STEM is shorthand for "science, technology, engineering, and mathematics" � all fields that are growing, providing lucrative jobs, and key to future American competitiveness. That's why everyone from President Obama to the United States Chamber of Commerce is worried about whether we're producing enough STEM graduates from our colleges and universities. That this is a problem is one of the few things that everyone in education seems to agree upon.

    Part of the push for better STEM education stems � sorry � from American companies claiming there are shortages of American workers able to take on certain roles. Each year, American technology and engineering firms push to expand the number of workers allowed under the "H-1B" visa program, a category that allows companies to hire foreigners in roles where they cannot find a qualified American citizen. Critics claim the H-1B program is more a ploy to allow companies to hire skilled workers cheaper.

    STEM anxiety is also an outgrowth of larger concerns about American competitiveness. The growing number of STEM workers in countries like China and India has policymakers on edge. You often hear that China and India are producing many more engineers than the United States, but when researchers from Duke University looked closely at the numbers, they found that what's counted as an engineering degree in those countries would often be considered a vocational certificate or two-year degree in this country. The Duke team found relative parity between the United States and China and India when the engineering comparison was apples to apples.

    And part of our STEM obsession is frankly just longtime habit. In the 1950s, it was Admiral Hyman Rickover calling for more math and science education as part of the effort to keep us competitive with the Soviets. Congress passed legislation to support math and science education in 1958 and advocates have been pushing for more ever since. Congress passed several STEM measures in just the last decade, including the 2007 America Competes Act, which includes measures to recruit and train teachers in STEM subjects.

    Still, debatable need, confused statistics, and force of habit doesn't mean there isn't an actual STEM problem facing the United States. American students should be doing better in math and science than they are now, and we are arguably producing too few college STEM majors. If the global competitiveness race turns into a numbers game, we're in trouble absent dramatic improvements: If it were its own country, the populations of China and India aged 14 and younger would each still be among the top five nations in the world in terms of population. That means that even marginal improvements in education in those countries will pay big dividends and put them on a stronger competitive footing. Besides, there is little doubt that our own economic future hinges in no small part on remaining a leader in innovation in science and technology.

    So we want more college graduates in STEM careers. How do we get them? Right now policymakers are fixated on upgrading the quality of the math and science teaching force through better recruitment and training. "Out-of-field" teachers � meaning those without proper training in the subject � remain an acute problem in math and science. Scholarships, loan-forgiveness, and even higher pay are all used to attract more teachers into STEM fields. More creative ideas are emerging, too. Math For America provides $100,000 fellowships for math teachers and Partners in Science gives science teachers the opportunity to undertake actual scientific work at national laboratories during the summer. All good ideas, but to some extent we're chasing our tail: Not enough STEM graduates means not enough STEM teachers, regardless of the incentives.

    The second answer is to expose students to STEM fields early on and use scholarships and inducements for them to choose STEM careers. This is where the STEM rhetoric meets our educational reality: A lot of students are not going into STEM careers today not because they're unaware of the choice, but rather because they cannot make that choice because of the quality of education they are receiving.

    Think about it. With high school graduation rates of only about 75 percent overall (and 64 percent for Hispanics and 62 percent for African-Americans) we lose a lot of potential STEM students long before college. At the same time, many students graduating from high schools are not taking the math and science courses necessary to pursue a STEM career. Experts estimate that only about one-third of graduating high school students are genuinely college-ready.

    Of course, not all currently underserved students would choose STEM careers either. People chose their work for a variety of reasons. Yet it's a reasonable assumption that some percentage of currently underserved students would choose STEM just as some percentage of more advantaged students do now. So rather than trying to squeeze a few more STEM students from populations that can already choose STEM if they want to, perhaps policymakers should focus even more on giving currently under-served populations the ability to make a STEM choice in the first place. If you're not taking the right classes � or worse, if you're not in school � STEM careers are not a viable choice for you. Fixing that seems the path to the richest untapped vein of future American talent.

    In other words, in the long term, the STEM agenda really isn't that different than the more general school improvement agenda. Linking the two more explicitly would also help make the push for STEM more relevant and engaging for parents than it is today. Because while education leaders can't shut up about STEM, it's hardly even on the radar of most parents � when they talk about stems they usually are talking about plants.


    The Right Job? It�s Much Like the Right Spouse (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/22/business/22corner.html) By ADAM BRYANT | New York Times
    The Downsized College Graduate (http://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2011/05/24/the-downsized-college-graduate) The New York Times
    Top Colleges, Largely for the Elite (http://www.nytimes.com/2011/05/25/business/economy/25leonhardt.html) By DAVID LEONHARDT | The New York Times
    Five myths about America�s schools (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/five-myths-about-americas-schools/2011/05/09/AFunW27G_story.html) By Paul Farhi | The Washington Post
    The Failure of American Schools (http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/print/2011/06/the-failure-of-american-schools/8497/) By Joel Klein | The Atlantic



    more...


    banco popular de puerto rico. Banco Popular De PR Download
  • Banco Popular De PR Download



  • redgreen
    12-17 02:41 PM
    What is there in his remarks to be so 'terrorised' about? Where is 'Muslimism' here?

    I hope as far as there are people like you and some others who commented as if 'Muslim means Terrorist' (but you won't tell that directly), there will be more terrorists; and it is quite understandable.

    This is exactly I hate. To divert focus of terrorism to Hindu group, Muslim leader comes out - WOW!

    Sounds like LeT informed Hindu group in advance that they are going to attack so as a by-product they can kill Karkare. Ha ha ha.

    Times Of India Headline: Antulay raises doubts over Karkare's killing





    banco popular de puerto rico. Banco Popular de Puerto
  • Banco Popular de Puerto



  • Marphad
    12-23 10:17 AM
    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Antulays_U-turn_on_Karkare_killing/articleshow/3878674.cms

    This is the quality of ministers we have. I started this thread with his bullshit statement.

    May its time to close now :)



    more...


    banco popular de puerto rico. Banco de Mexico, Banco Popular
  • Banco de Mexico, Banco Popular



  • unitednations
    07-17 12:47 PM
    Here is a real example that is going on right now.

    Person came here on F-1. OPT expired May 2002. His h-1b was approved with a starting validity date of December 2002.

    He gets an rfe to give I-20 and prove status.

    Now: he had an I-94 card from F-1 with duration of stay. Therefore; he is not accruing unlawful presence. However; he was out of status from May 2002 to December 2002. About 7 months. At first glance; he is not eligible to get 485 approved.

    However; in response it will say that there is a grace period of 60 days from end of OPT which will allow him valid status until middle of July. Therefore; from middle of july until h-1b approval he was out of status. By our calculations he was out of status for about 165 days from the end of the 60 day grace period until h-1b approval.

    Now; since he only has a buffer of 15 days remaining; uscis could go from 2002- until 2005 when he filed 485 to see if they can get 15 days of out of status and deny his 485.

    Big problem for him is that he used ac21 and is self employed and not on H-1b anymore. If USCIS should deny his 485; he can't re-file because he is not in non immigrant status and even if he was; the visa dates are unavailable and he would not be able to get cooperation from old employer to re-file 485 anyways because they wouldn't cooperate. He wouldn't be able to get labor substitution because that is gone now.

    If they should deny his 485 then he has to get an h-1b approval for the remainder of his six years; he won't get an I-94 card because he isn't in non immigrant status; he would have to go for visa stamping and then start all over again.

    Not a good situation all around for him.





    2010 Comercial Banco Popular - 2006 banco popular de puerto rico. Puerto Rico- San Juan- Banco
  • Puerto Rico- San Juan- Banco



  • Cheran
    04-12 07:59 PM
    When in college students used to rag others just because they were ragged when they joined the college. It�s not because they want to, it is just because they went through it. Indian software companies are just like, I worked enough in software industry and I have even been on call 24 hours but the truth is, it was never 12 hours or 10 hours work every day. Yes, occasionally I had 12 hours work which is the same in every industry and I used to get calls in the middle of the night at least once or twice during the night, but its not 10 hours work everyday. We want to impress our boss by working 10 hours, that�s the truth; it�s not that your boss wants.

    Similarly, in India people go to work on Saturday not because they have work but to show their face to their PM. Even if God comes down and says that people in India work 10 hours everyday, I cannot believe it. They might be in office for 10-12 hours but that does not mean they are working. It is the people who should be blamed for this. Yesterday�s programmer or today�s PM, and they expect the programmer to be there in the office for 10 hours just because they went through it. I am an ex TCSer, things worked exactly as I said. It is never going to change. All these talks about stress and coding 10 hours straight come on.....:cool:


    On a side note
    There are serious health implications working on a sedentry job like software coding for long hours. You will notice it after you are 40. No company will give you your health back.
    I recently had a big conversation with the doctor about this when i went for my phhysicals. Doctors say the software engineer lifestyle where people work long long hours is not a good lifestyle. I explained to him that it is because people's green cards is tied up and they do it by compulsion.
    I have seen some people working continuously for days , weeks , months together. I have done that too. It is not a good thing to do. health is wealth and one must take care of it first.

    This is what happens in India where a lot of outsourcing is going on. Young engineers getting high pay and expected to work long hours "this seems to be an unofficial protocol" and thats how the whole industry has turned out to be.

    Here you have your weekends - save your weekends for yoruself. Go out enjoy. If your office calls ur cell switch it off or keep it on vibrate. Go and golf, watch broad way shows, play tennis , etc..

    I do not wish to deviate from the original topic. But just wanted to let you know that "Your health is your first priority"



    more...


    banco popular de puerto rico. Banco Popular de Puerto
  • Banco Popular de Puerto



  • validIV
    06-05 02:01 PM
    This is your justification for renting? Your 1300 goes to that owners mortgage. You are paying so that he can own the property you live in. I would not be surprised if he has multiple condos renting to others like you.

    Since you cite an example, let me cite one of mine.

    Co-op bought in 2004, Queens NY 2 bedroom: $155,000
    Rented now for $1,350 / month (Wife and I live in another home we also own also in queens)
    Appraised value (Feb 2009) $195,000, Peak market value (my opinion) ~230,000 in 2006 but it seems to be worth more now which is clueless to me.
    Outstanding balance: 60,000
    Current mortgage (15y fixed@4.25): 452 / month (+525 maintenance)
    Monthly cost total: ~1,000
    Comps in area: See for yourself: http://newyork.craigslist.org/search/rea?query=kew+gardens+co-op&minAsk=min&maxAsk=max&bedrooms=2

    Lets say that person is you renting it. You are paying to stay in my unit, pay my mortgage, pay my monthly, allow me to build equity which i just used to buy another property (thank you) and using standard deductions, allowing me to have a healthy tax return from interest paid based on your money. I dont even need to do any math here to prove I am making money from your rent because believe me I am.

    Renters will never understand why owning a home is better than renting as thus they will continue to make arguments to continue doing so. And I'm sure that giving 1 example or 100 examples will not change your mind in the slightest. Which is why you will always be paying owners like me for a roof to live under.

    I doubt it is as clear cut as you make it to be. Rent vs. buy has two components in each option - the monthly cost and the long term saving/investment. Let me take the example of the apartment I live in. It would cost about 360k (I am not considering the closing cost, the cost to buy new appliances and so on when you move in etc) if we were to buy it as a condo in the market. We rent it for $1300.

    Buy:
    Monthly Cost:
    Interest (very simplistic calculation): 5% on 180k on average over 30 years. i.e. $750 per month. After Tax deduction cost ~$700 (you lose on standard deduction if you take property tax deduction - so effective saving is wayyy lower than the marginal tax rate).

    Property Tax: $400 per month.

    Maintenance/depreciation of appliances: assume $200 per month (easily could be more).
    Total: 1300.
    Long term investment: $360k at 3% per annum (long term housing price increase trend).
    You pay for this saving with leverage and $1000 amortization every month for the loan principal.

    Loss of flexibility/Risk : Not sure how to quantify.

    Rent:
    Monthly cost = $1300.
    Long Term Saving (assuming you put the same $1000 every month in a normal high yeild savings account - a Reward Checking maybe) - you will get a risk free 5%.

    So in this case you are paying the same monthly cost for house purchase vs rent. but you are losing out on the additional 2% per month in investment return.

    Plus - buying gets you into a lot riskier position.

    I have seen the proponents of buying fails to take a couple of factors into account:
    1. Real Estate, historically, is not a good investment. It is even worse than the best savings accounts available. And you could easily save your monthly amortization in better savings vehicles.
    2. Tax deduction from interest means you lose on standard deduction. In the above example - a family of 3 with 1 earner will have NO saving from housing tax deduction. They would be better off using the standard deduction. If there are 2 earners - they could try to work around this by filing separately and one taking deduction for housing interest and the other taking the standard deduction. But even that will probably not save you any money since many other tax rates are stacked up against single filers.





    hair Trend: anco popular de puerto rico banco popular de puerto rico. The 2009 Banco Popular musical
  • The 2009 Banco Popular musical



  • Berkeleybee
    05-17 12:59 PM
    Qualified_trash,

    We (IV Core) have no problem with dissent or discussion. Both gc03 and learning01 each expressed their opinions on reacting to Lou Dobbs.

    On the issue of what to do about Lou Dobbs:

    (1) Lou Dobbs is no friend of ours (immigrants) -- he absolutely doesn't make the list of people we should thank! A little googling will tell you more about Dobbs and his immigration politics. He is using this argument today to further his ends. Not just Dobbs but other anti-immigrants are on a divide and conquer path to kill this version of CIR.

    (2) IV as a group has plenty else to do, so there will be no IV-wide response to Lou Dobb's comment of the day.

    On the other hand, all of our members are individuals, and they are free to express their opinions by calling or writing, so long as they do not claim that these are the opinions of IV as a group.

    best,
    Berkeleybee



    more...


    banco popular de puerto rico. Banco popular de puerto rico
  • Banco popular de puerto rico



  • waitnwatch
    08-05 03:11 PM
    Seems like a lot of emotions running high on this thread!

    Given that the USCIS director doesn't visit IV before writing memos on interfiling and porting PD's it's meaningless getting your blood pressure up.

    Rolling flood is definitely free to file his/her lawsuit whether folks here like it or not and SunnySurya has every right to join in.

    Wondering why folks from EB-3 want to just move up to EB-2 and port PD. Why not go for EB-1? After all that category is current.





    hot Banco Popular De PR Download banco popular de puerto rico. Banco Popular de Puerto
  • Banco Popular de Puerto



  • vbkris77
    03-24 04:21 PM
    Hello, If I were to put you all guys in a room and give you a permission to fight each other, you will really beat the crap out of others..

    Any topic, any issue will lead to in-fighting..

    Why did most Indians were caught on wrong doings in H1B, becos, most Indians had to spend most time on H1B status. Atleast 5 more years than usual. I am not saying it is right. But that is the fact..

    How long is Long enough to prove that one is employed to a GC?? No one knows???

    How many of the FTEs do other jobs that are not listed on their H1B? I bet most.. You don't look at your H1B petition to see if you are qualified to do that job or not. You will do it if you asked by your boss. Even if you can't, you will learn and still do it.

    So stop these crazy talk and help the OP if you can or just give a moral support.

    Most of you are not still convinced that we are not the reason for backlog. It is CIS that wasted visas and is the reason for the backlog.. That is the problem..



    more...


    house Banco Popular De Puerto Rico banco popular de puerto rico. Banco Popular de Puerto
  • Banco Popular de Puerto



  • whoever
    07-17 01:55 PM
    United nations, some days back I sent you a private message. could you please please reply to that private message as a private message? thank you.





    tattoo Banco Popular de Puerto banco popular de puerto rico. SAN JUAN, P. R. RPPC - Banco
  • SAN JUAN, P. R. RPPC - Banco



  • logiclife
    05-16 12:14 PM
    No need to have Durbin's bill. Just ban Outsourcing, then all jobs will come back and everybody will be happy here in US.

    US congress cannot force investors to invest money only in US and get work done only in US.

    Its not possible for US Government to ban outsourcing. The only thing they can do is create incentives to limit outsourcing. However, if a company still wants to outsource jobs overseas, Congress cant do ANYTHING about it.



    more...


    pictures Banco de Mexico, Banco Popular banco popular de puerto rico. el anco popular de puerto
  • el anco popular de puerto



  • reedandbamboo
    06-07 04:03 PM
    Investment strategies of any kind - options, stocks, etfs failed miserably in the past couple of years. I dont think that argument stands well to justify against buying a house.



    I have not opined as to the relative merits/demerits of house-buying .. all I did was mention that it is possible to attain those kinds of returns in alternative "investments" (in response to Jun's statement that he/she wasn't sure if 5% returns per annum were available anywhere).





    dresses Banco Popular de Puerto banco popular de puerto rico. anco popular costa rica. and
  • anco popular costa rica. and



  • unitednations
    07-08 05:31 PM
    united nations,

    welcome back. it would be interesting to hear your views on the whole July VB fiasco and it's aftermath. thanks!


    I along with everyone was pretty surprised that they moved the dates in the june bulletin; let alone the july bulletin.

    The ombudsmen report had nothing new in it; he has been saying the same thing for a few years now.

    Go back to June 2005 when the bulletin for July 2005 came out and it made eb3 unavailable. Any time a total category goes unavailable that means that the oversubscribed countries should not have gotten more then 7%. ROW cannot be sacrificied under the current law for the oversubscribed countries.

    Back in 2005; row was sacrificied. Next time october bulletin came about; they learned their lesson and followed the law exactly the way it was supposed to be; more cases pending then approvable per quarter then hard country quota of 7%. The statistics that came out for fiscal year ended September 2006 was directly correlated to how the law is written.

    This year; everything was moving the same way. the unused from ROW should be spilled over in the fourt quarter for use by oversubscribed countries. This is not my opinion but the actual law says this.

    Now; when department of state moved the visa bulletin for june; eb3 row still wasn't current; which means hard country quota of 7% and no spillover from eb1 row or eb2 row until July. This can't be done on a whim; regardless of whether this may cause unused visas; it is the law plain and simple.

    Now; what department of state and uscis did to correct the mistake is a great piece of americana and how the system works here. that is; we didn't expect you to make the dates current; we will lose a lot of revenue; so how can we correct the situation; to correct the situation; they need to approve enough cases to take up enough visas to go unavailable. This is what they were proabably instructed and did their best to get there.

    If they didn't use up the visas then that is where the lawsuit would be won.

    A big part of this lawsuit during discovery or Q&A would be how the whole visa allocation is done. If it is determined as a side issue that the spillover happened way too early and they broke the law by giving more then 7% of the visas to the oversubscribed countries then that is definitely a death blow to the people who are really being overzealous right now in the criticisms of dos/uscis.

    If this does come out and i can't see why it wouldn't come out then what is uscis to do? rescind approvals? and re-allocate to rest of the world?

    The unused visas is a big problem in AC21; in that it can only happen in fourth quarter and there isn't enough time to approve cases and let them go to waste.

    This might be a catalyst to change the spillover and carryover of greencards from one year to the next.

    ----------------------------------------------------

    I am of the opinion that what happened in june 2007 actually helped greatly the oversubscribed countries in probably advancing the dates for next fiscal year as many people got approved who probably shouldn't have.

    However; it reamins to be seen whether uscis/dos will go to strictly following the country caps and spillover like they did in October 2005 to September 2006. If this is the case then it could be a very long road indeed for people with 2005-2007 priority dates.



    more...


    makeup Banco Popular de Puerto banco popular de puerto rico. Banco Popular De Puerto Rico
  • Banco Popular De Puerto Rico



  • shana04
    08-05 06:49 PM
    A guy in a bar was talking about how he always watched his wedding video backwards.

    When asked why, he replied:

    "Coz I love the end bit where she takes the ring off her finger, goes back down the aisle, and jumps in the car and disappears..."

    Too Good.......I could not control





    girlfriend SAN JUAN, P. R. RPPC - Banco banco popular de puerto rico. SME Puerto Rico
  • SME Puerto Rico



  • file485
    07-08 07:56 PM
    Assuming your husband is here from 2000, they are asking for 7 years, i.e. 12 * 7 = 84 months of paystubs? This is ridiculous. How many people keep paystubs from 7 years ago? Infact in those days paystubs used to have their social security numbers on them, they should be shredded, atleast that's the common advice.

    pls dont give wrong info..

    paystubs..W2's, tax returns r the most imp documents..especially for souls like us with employment based immigration..





    hairstyles Banco popular de puerto rico banco popular de puerto rico. Banco Popular Building San
  • Banco Popular Building San



  • walking_dude
    09-30 09:17 PM
    After the bail-out bill failed in the House, Obama immediately posted a response reassuring Americans and investors that the leaders will come up with another soon.

    Contrast this with McCains partisan blaming of Obama for failure of bailout, while it was him that pulled the stunt of rushing to Washington to 'rescue' the bailout. After failing to show the leadership of his own party -with majority of Repubs voting against the bailout (a clear indication of leadership failure and ineffectiveness of McCain Presidency in passing anything through his own party!), he found it convenient to Obama.

    And it was Obama who proposed raising FDIC insurance to $250,000 to which McCain has (thankfully) chimed in.





    unseenguy
    06-07 09:47 PM
    For me its a very simple thing, print that damn thing of plastic and I will buy. I have kept my down payment safe aside in CDs. If not, I am sending some chunk of yearly saving back to India, making it harder for me to live and settle here. :) No plastic, no investment.





    NKR
    08-05 08:26 PM
    What does it have to do with immigration lines?.

    Exactly, how does your below statement fall within the immigration lines?..

    I believe you missed the entire point.
    Whether you have money or not is irrelevant nonsense. This is like complaining that you are married so cannot have a girlfriend- that is your problem pal. Make your own choices, don't blame others for them.
    Now, answer the question- why are the years spent in MS/PhD not getting any credit? .

    This is what you need to be asking and fighting for, do not say that since you are not getting benefits then let EB3 guys also not get any benefit. It is like saying that since I do not have a girl friend neither should others. Two wrongs won’t make a right.

    If you and I both came in 2000, and I did a PhD and you worked..(this is not that far from my story- so it's not completely fictional), your PD might be 2002 and mine may be 2007. Now you are as close to current in EB3 as I am in EB2. Now if you jump to EB2 without porting), you would be 2008 (or even 2006) and given faster movement in EB2 you benefit. If you jump with porting, I'm totally screwed. You are way ahead of me simply because I chose to get the degree. Does it begin to make any sense? You are asking for the ability to get a GC because you have waited "x years". So HAVE I!!!!
    Except that my PD does not reflect it like yours. If you still insist you have first right...well that's your opinion. .

    Some people do not port, they directly apply for EB2 (this is not that far from my story- so it's not completely fictional) but I do know people whose PD is early 2002 and still waiting just because they filed in EB3 for some reason and if they want to port, I completely understand.



    No comments:

    Post a Comment