answers_seeker
07-18 01:13 PM
I am not sure if that is going to be an advantage since my PD was not current in JUNE
For all practical purposes, the date on which it was recieved is your RD=> Receipt Date. The postmark date has no relevance except for records unless USCIS explicitly states so ( which it did once in 2001 http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=89a5f3cee754ad0499e55e731191f 360).
485 filings are strictly Receipt date. I am still searching for the uscis link and will post one as soon as I find one.
For all practical purposes, the date on which it was recieved is your RD=> Receipt Date. The postmark date has no relevance except for records unless USCIS explicitly states so ( which it did once in 2001 http://www.uscis.gov/propub/ProPubVAP.jsp?dockey=89a5f3cee754ad0499e55e731191f 360).
485 filings are strictly Receipt date. I am still searching for the uscis link and will post one as soon as I find one.
wallpaper Alex Pettyfer Wallpaper by
unitednations
03-31 11:51 AM
I (and I�m sure others too) would like to know how the following works,
Employer X filed labor, 140 for their employee. Both were approved (assumption - no RFEs, etc. until now), 485 was filed for in July 2007, and remains pending.
The employee was employed with Employer X from before the labor was applied and until ~360 days after the 485 was filed, and was always paid more than the LC prevailing wage/offered salary.
In July 2008, the employee leaves employer X and joins employer Y under AC21 provisions. An AC21 letter, G-28N are submitted.
140 never gets revoked by employer X.
In Jan 2009, employer X receives an Ability to Pay RFE for another pending 140 of theirs.
At this point, employer X has 16 140s that are open (pending OR approved with 485 pending to be filed/filed and pending). Out of those 16 140s, one was for the employee that left under AC21.
When they respond to that RFE, I do understand that they could be asked to show ability to pay for all 16 140s, even for the one that doesn�t work for them anymore, because of the fact that it was never revoked.
In this case, is the employee (that left) covered or at risk? I ask this question because the employee that left submitted AC21 documentation immediately upon leaving, thus notifying the USCIS that the �ability to pay� responsibility for his case, if any at all, now lies with the new future employer. There probably isn�t any clear definition of such a situation in the law, but can such an argument ever hold up in court, and protect the employee�s AOS application from getting affected due to any ability to pay issues the old employer (X) has had AFTER the employee left them.
The only person on here that I expect to be able to give a non-speculative answer to this is UN, unless someone else has personally gone through something similar.
Long post, I know, and I hope it does get read.
Thank you.
I worked on a very big case back in 2006.
Company had 20 pending 140's which were filed in 2005
Company had 42 approved 140's
in Janaury 2006 they sent RFE on one of the cases and asked for ability to pay. Before response was sent; second rfe is received on another pending casestating ability to pay and that uscis has noted company has filed many 140's; then third rfe is received on another case asking ability to pay on all pending cases (note this was in vermont service center and at this time the whole cybersoftech issue was going on; so there was a heightened alert from vermont service center).
In preparing for the response to the 20 pending cases; we had to analyze the 42 approved cases to ensure that just in case USCIS went after those cases together with the 20 then we should be ready in this particular response to justify the 42 approved cases.
In the response we only showed the 20 pending cases and that we had ability to pay for them.
Within three weeks; USCIS sent notice of intent to revoke the approved 140's. In the notice of intent to revoke; they stated that their records showed 20 pending; 42 approved cases and 205 h-1b's filed. USCIS went through their calculations and stated that if the average salary was xxx on all these petitions then the company would have to have paid close to $15 million in salaries which was (at that time the 2004 tax returns) more then five times the revenue. USCIS also went on to state they thought the company was involved in fraudulently obtaining h-1b's and 140's.
Now; company guy talks to Shusterman and he wants $2k per case and he can only handle the immigration component and that he neeed a CPA (which was me) and the company guy should also get a criminal attorney.
Well anyways; because in the first 20 cases we thought uscis may go after the approved 140's; the financials looked the right way to support all the cases.
The response was very scientific; hire dates; priority dates; amounts people got paid before priority date; amounts paid after; dates people left the company, etc.
In the various calculations; we proved out that even with people leaving who used ac21; we still had ability to pay for them (ie., even though they were no longer there we still had the financials to pay them). Then we gave another scenario that ability to pay clock should stop once person used ac21. We then did recalculation under this scenario.
In every scenario we showed we had ability to pay. Now; we never requested USCIS to revoke the approved 140's for people who had left; in one of the scenarios we adjusted the calculation to stop showing ability to pay once a person left.
USCIS re-approved all the cases. However; they sent notice of intent to deny for pepole who left using ac21. those candidates then gave updated letters and they all eventually got the greencards approved.
Now;this particular case is a little different because even though people left; the company still had ability to pay for them. Therefore, it is difficult to draw conclusion from this for other peoples particular cases. In this case; the fair value of the work I did for them would have cost them about $100K (i actually did audited financial statements for them; they are the only company I did audited financial statements for becuase the stakes were very very high for everyone concerned).
I can tell you that when a company does get this type of RFE; it is very difficult to substantiate everyone together and the calculations and supporting documentation is very complex AND companies have very little desire to help those who have already left. In these types of queries; the company/lawyer doesn't even bother to justify those who have already left; they just ask for revoation and they prove ability to pay for those who are still left with the company. Therefore; USCIS could just make the determination that those revoked cases were approved in error.
The main law for ability to pay is that company has to prove it from priority date until person obtains lawful permanent residency; law was never changed/modified to accomodate ability to pay for a company whose candidates have left using ac21.
Note: This is all pure speculation of what is going on in these cases. I am just writing out loud of why/if there is a shift within uscis.
Employer X filed labor, 140 for their employee. Both were approved (assumption - no RFEs, etc. until now), 485 was filed for in July 2007, and remains pending.
The employee was employed with Employer X from before the labor was applied and until ~360 days after the 485 was filed, and was always paid more than the LC prevailing wage/offered salary.
In July 2008, the employee leaves employer X and joins employer Y under AC21 provisions. An AC21 letter, G-28N are submitted.
140 never gets revoked by employer X.
In Jan 2009, employer X receives an Ability to Pay RFE for another pending 140 of theirs.
At this point, employer X has 16 140s that are open (pending OR approved with 485 pending to be filed/filed and pending). Out of those 16 140s, one was for the employee that left under AC21.
When they respond to that RFE, I do understand that they could be asked to show ability to pay for all 16 140s, even for the one that doesn�t work for them anymore, because of the fact that it was never revoked.
In this case, is the employee (that left) covered or at risk? I ask this question because the employee that left submitted AC21 documentation immediately upon leaving, thus notifying the USCIS that the �ability to pay� responsibility for his case, if any at all, now lies with the new future employer. There probably isn�t any clear definition of such a situation in the law, but can such an argument ever hold up in court, and protect the employee�s AOS application from getting affected due to any ability to pay issues the old employer (X) has had AFTER the employee left them.
The only person on here that I expect to be able to give a non-speculative answer to this is UN, unless someone else has personally gone through something similar.
Long post, I know, and I hope it does get read.
Thank you.
I worked on a very big case back in 2006.
Company had 20 pending 140's which were filed in 2005
Company had 42 approved 140's
in Janaury 2006 they sent RFE on one of the cases and asked for ability to pay. Before response was sent; second rfe is received on another pending casestating ability to pay and that uscis has noted company has filed many 140's; then third rfe is received on another case asking ability to pay on all pending cases (note this was in vermont service center and at this time the whole cybersoftech issue was going on; so there was a heightened alert from vermont service center).
In preparing for the response to the 20 pending cases; we had to analyze the 42 approved cases to ensure that just in case USCIS went after those cases together with the 20 then we should be ready in this particular response to justify the 42 approved cases.
In the response we only showed the 20 pending cases and that we had ability to pay for them.
Within three weeks; USCIS sent notice of intent to revoke the approved 140's. In the notice of intent to revoke; they stated that their records showed 20 pending; 42 approved cases and 205 h-1b's filed. USCIS went through their calculations and stated that if the average salary was xxx on all these petitions then the company would have to have paid close to $15 million in salaries which was (at that time the 2004 tax returns) more then five times the revenue. USCIS also went on to state they thought the company was involved in fraudulently obtaining h-1b's and 140's.
Now; company guy talks to Shusterman and he wants $2k per case and he can only handle the immigration component and that he neeed a CPA (which was me) and the company guy should also get a criminal attorney.
Well anyways; because in the first 20 cases we thought uscis may go after the approved 140's; the financials looked the right way to support all the cases.
The response was very scientific; hire dates; priority dates; amounts people got paid before priority date; amounts paid after; dates people left the company, etc.
In the various calculations; we proved out that even with people leaving who used ac21; we still had ability to pay for them (ie., even though they were no longer there we still had the financials to pay them). Then we gave another scenario that ability to pay clock should stop once person used ac21. We then did recalculation under this scenario.
In every scenario we showed we had ability to pay. Now; we never requested USCIS to revoke the approved 140's for people who had left; in one of the scenarios we adjusted the calculation to stop showing ability to pay once a person left.
USCIS re-approved all the cases. However; they sent notice of intent to deny for pepole who left using ac21. those candidates then gave updated letters and they all eventually got the greencards approved.
Now;this particular case is a little different because even though people left; the company still had ability to pay for them. Therefore, it is difficult to draw conclusion from this for other peoples particular cases. In this case; the fair value of the work I did for them would have cost them about $100K (i actually did audited financial statements for them; they are the only company I did audited financial statements for becuase the stakes were very very high for everyone concerned).
I can tell you that when a company does get this type of RFE; it is very difficult to substantiate everyone together and the calculations and supporting documentation is very complex AND companies have very little desire to help those who have already left. In these types of queries; the company/lawyer doesn't even bother to justify those who have already left; they just ask for revoation and they prove ability to pay for those who are still left with the company. Therefore; USCIS could just make the determination that those revoked cases were approved in error.
The main law for ability to pay is that company has to prove it from priority date until person obtains lawful permanent residency; law was never changed/modified to accomodate ability to pay for a company whose candidates have left using ac21.
Note: This is all pure speculation of what is going on in these cases. I am just writing out loud of why/if there is a shift within uscis.
jkays94
05-25 02:35 PM
So please ask for your rights but remember you are in their country, nobody forced you to come here, and beggars can't be choosers.
Not everyone is an economic refugee and it should never be assumed to be the case or status quo. We pay taxes just like everyone else while some invest here and have a right to be represented by whomever makes decisions in congress besides we do pay taxes that goes towards their salaries and maintaining congressional offices. What would the US be like if the founders of immigrant founded or co-founded companies had decided to found their companies in other countries ? What if Google, Ebay, Intel were Russian, French or Hungarian companies instead ? Your point is not lost though, immigration is a priviledge not a right. If they deny us this priviledge we shall reluctantly leave but it should not assumed that we shall be the one's to suffer instead this economy will feel that impact. This is a global economy with many opportunities out there.
I wonder if the bashers of the H1-B program knew that :
More than 82,000 U.S. workers and professionals have completed training through programs funded by the H-1B fees as of December 31, 2005, according to the Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration. In addition, the Bush Administration recently has used the H-1B fees to provide multi-year grants to communities for training and economic revitalization. Through the WIRED (Workforce Innovation in Regional Economic Development) initiative, the U.S. Department of Labor is providing $195 million in grants to thirteen regional economies.
or that :
The H-1B fees paid by companies have funded more than 40,000 scholarships for U.S. students in math and science through the National Science Foundation. The fees obtained from employers have also funded hands-on science programs for 80,000 middle and high school students and 3,700 teachers. In addition, more than 55,000 U.S. workers and professionals have received training through the H-1B fees paid by companies.
Not everyone is an economic refugee and it should never be assumed to be the case or status quo. We pay taxes just like everyone else while some invest here and have a right to be represented by whomever makes decisions in congress besides we do pay taxes that goes towards their salaries and maintaining congressional offices. What would the US be like if the founders of immigrant founded or co-founded companies had decided to found their companies in other countries ? What if Google, Ebay, Intel were Russian, French or Hungarian companies instead ? Your point is not lost though, immigration is a priviledge not a right. If they deny us this priviledge we shall reluctantly leave but it should not assumed that we shall be the one's to suffer instead this economy will feel that impact. This is a global economy with many opportunities out there.
I wonder if the bashers of the H1-B program knew that :
More than 82,000 U.S. workers and professionals have completed training through programs funded by the H-1B fees as of December 31, 2005, according to the Department of Labor Employment and Training Administration. In addition, the Bush Administration recently has used the H-1B fees to provide multi-year grants to communities for training and economic revitalization. Through the WIRED (Workforce Innovation in Regional Economic Development) initiative, the U.S. Department of Labor is providing $195 million in grants to thirteen regional economies.
or that :
The H-1B fees paid by companies have funded more than 40,000 scholarships for U.S. students in math and science through the National Science Foundation. The fees obtained from employers have also funded hands-on science programs for 80,000 middle and high school students and 3,700 teachers. In addition, more than 55,000 U.S. workers and professionals have received training through the H-1B fees paid by companies.
2011 Alex-pettyfer-mobile-wallpaper
cdeneo
04-22 04:42 PM
Thanks RajuSeattle - this is the information I was looking for.
more...
deletedUser459
06-14 05:41 PM
good job!
welcome to the forum
welcome to the forum
cal97
07-18 02:54 PM
Pd: June 2004
Category: EB2
Reached NSC: 7/2 8:46 AM
Rejected: Don't Know
Category: EB2
Reached NSC: 7/2 8:46 AM
Rejected: Don't Know
more...
seahawks
04-28 02:30 AM
don't forget to file change of address AR11 if you move. People tend to forget this since after getting GC there is very little or no paper work required unlike people who are waiting like me:).
2010 Alex-pettyfer-mobile-wallpaper
ThinkTwice
07-12 02:06 PM
Please vote so that we can have an estimate of how many people may show up....
more...
trueguy
03-10 06:35 PM
If these numbers are correct then total EB-I pending applications are about 125K only. Thats less than one year of total quota and If USCIS work properly then this backlog can be cleared in one year (ignoring ROW for now). But thats not happening and backlog is increasing every year, especially for India.
Howcome, USCIS reports that pending I-485 is 620249 as Jan'2009.
Something is wrong. I wish we can get pending applications per year per category.
Thanks.
Howcome, USCIS reports that pending I-485 is 620249 as Jan'2009.
Something is wrong. I wish we can get pending applications per year per category.
Thanks.
hair Pettyfer chose to appear in
inskrish
09-26 02:02 AM
Thanks Lasantha for all your help. Even after getting your green card you continue to participate and help others in this struggle. That is Great. For the sake of disclosure here are some of the messages you left for other members. I think that these messages are extremely abusive and very harsh as compared to the message left for you. Although we do not encourage the use of words like moron, stupid, idiot, we see these words being used often on the forum.
Lasantha 02:39, 23rd Sep 2007 -23 Ass hole !!!
Lasantha 10:59, 14th Nov 2007 -27 Eat Crap you bastard!
Lasantha 00:54, 19th Nov 2007 -27 DUMBASS YOURSELF!!!
Lasantha 17:03, 5th Dec 2007 -28 WTF
Lasantha 18:05, 14th Jan 2008 -39 WTF is wrong with you?
Lasantha 16:06, 11th Mar 2008 -45 Wacko???
Lasantha 21:29, 18th Mar 2008 -52 what the fuck???
You be the judge the let us know if you want to know the user who left you that remark. We will go ahead and post that on this thread. And for the sake of fairness, we will also post the members for whom you left the above messages. You be the judge and decide.
Thanks for your understanding.
Lasantha, what do you say? It is very clear that people are really frustrated while waiting for their GCs, as Lasantha did.
Lasantha 02:39, 23rd Sep 2007 -23 Ass hole !!!
Lasantha 10:59, 14th Nov 2007 -27 Eat Crap you bastard!
Lasantha 00:54, 19th Nov 2007 -27 DUMBASS YOURSELF!!!
Lasantha 17:03, 5th Dec 2007 -28 WTF
Lasantha 18:05, 14th Jan 2008 -39 WTF is wrong with you?
Lasantha 16:06, 11th Mar 2008 -45 Wacko???
Lasantha 21:29, 18th Mar 2008 -52 what the fuck???
You be the judge the let us know if you want to know the user who left you that remark. We will go ahead and post that on this thread. And for the sake of fairness, we will also post the members for whom you left the above messages. You be the judge and decide.
Thanks for your understanding.
Lasantha, what do you say? It is very clear that people are really frustrated while waiting for their GCs, as Lasantha did.
more...
learning01
02-01 01:08 PM
it is pure exploitation of physicians on j1/h1 visas. And everyone know about it, including the law makers.
People finishing residencies and fellowships on j1 visa go through some unscroplous lawyers and agencies and manage to get a waiver job by spending at least 20 to 25K.
What I want to say is, entire system is like this. Just not consulting companies
People finishing residencies and fellowships on j1 visa go through some unscroplous lawyers and agencies and manage to get a waiver job by spending at least 20 to 25K.
What I want to say is, entire system is like this. Just not consulting companies
hot Alex Pettyfer
EkAurAaya
11-04 12:22 PM
Feb 2003!
I feel this is too small a specimen to predict anything but so far about 25% are Jun 2003 or older...
Below is purely my speculation!
Assuming there are 400k applications pending (may be a bad assumption) > so about 100k with PD's Jun 2003 or less...
10k per year allotted so 10 years to reach June 2003 :confused:
I hope my calcs are wrong! God Bless us!
I feel this is too small a specimen to predict anything but so far about 25% are Jun 2003 or older...
Below is purely my speculation!
Assuming there are 400k applications pending (may be a bad assumption) > so about 100k with PD's Jun 2003 or less...
10k per year allotted so 10 years to reach June 2003 :confused:
I hope my calcs are wrong! God Bless us!
more...
house Alex-pettyfer-mobile-wallpaper
Macaca
12-17 07:01 PM
From pages 8-9 of Driving jobs and Innovation Offshore (http://www.nfap.com/pdf/071206study.pdf) The impact of high-skill Immigration Restrictions on America, National Foundation for American Policy (NFAP) Policy Brief, Dec 2007
India-based Patni Computer Systems agreed with the Department of Labor that the company paid 607 workers on H-1B visas less than the prevailing wage in 2004 and 2005. The Department of Labor did not oppose Patni�s contention that this was due to an accounting error, since the government did not assess any additional penalties and concluded Patni�s actions were not willful. Patni agreed to pay approximately $2.4 million to the 607 workers, which comes to slightly less than $4,000 each.
It is worth noting that $4,000 per worker is likely less than what the company paid in various legal and government fees to sponsor the workers ($5,000 to $6,000 in legal and government fees).
India-based Patni Computer Systems agreed with the Department of Labor that the company paid 607 workers on H-1B visas less than the prevailing wage in 2004 and 2005. The Department of Labor did not oppose Patni�s contention that this was due to an accounting error, since the government did not assess any additional penalties and concluded Patni�s actions were not willful. Patni agreed to pay approximately $2.4 million to the 607 workers, which comes to slightly less than $4,000 each.
It is worth noting that $4,000 per worker is likely less than what the company paid in various legal and government fees to sponsor the workers ($5,000 to $6,000 in legal and government fees).
tattoo Alex Pettyfer by ~9021o0o on
crystal
02-11 02:55 PM
This is tricky question . I am not sure what the right asnwer is, which i am also looking for.
Your 2011 I-94 is invalid once you came back with new parolee I-94. This much I am sure of.
I think you can work on h1 till ur current I-94 is valid (Here satus is parolee or H1b I am not sure) . After that you need to file an amendment to get another I-94 valid till 2011 again.
Or May be we need to file h1b amendement as soon as we come back to US on AP to get new I-94 till 2011.
Some body wrote that even with AP, at the POE if you show new h1B which is valid till 2011 they would issue I-94 till 2011, even though you dont have the valid h1b stamping on passport. Somebody else wrote that showing H1b papers would cause confusion to the POE officer with un-necessary side effcts
I am in a similar situation as my H1b is valid till 2010 and planning to go out.
Appreciate if anybody can comment on this.
AP i94 valid upto Mar 2009(After returning on AP)
H1 i94 valid upto June 2011
Can I still work on existing H1?
Which i94 valid(AP or H1)?
Your 2011 I-94 is invalid once you came back with new parolee I-94. This much I am sure of.
I think you can work on h1 till ur current I-94 is valid (Here satus is parolee or H1b I am not sure) . After that you need to file an amendment to get another I-94 valid till 2011 again.
Or May be we need to file h1b amendement as soon as we come back to US on AP to get new I-94 till 2011.
Some body wrote that even with AP, at the POE if you show new h1B which is valid till 2011 they would issue I-94 till 2011, even though you dont have the valid h1b stamping on passport. Somebody else wrote that showing H1b papers would cause confusion to the POE officer with un-necessary side effcts
I am in a similar situation as my H1b is valid till 2010 and planning to go out.
Appreciate if anybody can comment on this.
AP i94 valid upto Mar 2009(After returning on AP)
H1 i94 valid upto June 2011
Can I still work on existing H1?
Which i94 valid(AP or H1)?
more...
pictures alex pettyfer hot
abqguy
06-02 03:05 PM
They all took down the message, very friendly and said they will pass on the message to the House Reps.
dresses Alex-pettyfer-mobile-wallpaper
orangutan
10-03 08:36 PM
Hey, you lied to the American Immigration that you will return to the home country after Ph.d. And now you are talking about who should port and who not. Relax and think.
sure I am .. and guess what my dependents were already approved few weeks back on my EB2.
and yesterday my EB1 I-140 was approved :D:D:D:D
But my fight for what is fair is distinct from my own case and i am gonna keep going.
sure I am .. and guess what my dependents were already approved few weeks back on my EB2.
and yesterday my EB1 I-140 was approved :D:D:D:D
But my fight for what is fair is distinct from my own case and i am gonna keep going.
more...
makeup Alex Pettyfer iPhone Wallpaper
sledge_hammer
01-28 04:18 PM
I didn't find where in the PDF AILA is saying the definition is illegal!
They provide one example a court ruling where the EE definition was established in the case of an insurance agent. But such an issue has already been address by the EE memo by USCIS (Temporary/Occasional Off-Site Employment).
Is it your own interpretation that the EE definition in the memo is illegal or did you read it somewhere in AILA's response?
Re-read AILA memo once again. You haven't noticed the main point yet. Precedence is not their main point. Precedent just provides an additional support. E-E is the most controversial item in the USCIS memo which also is illegal.
They provide one example a court ruling where the EE definition was established in the case of an insurance agent. But such an issue has already been address by the EE memo by USCIS (Temporary/Occasional Off-Site Employment).
Is it your own interpretation that the EE definition in the memo is illegal or did you read it somewhere in AILA's response?
Re-read AILA memo once again. You haven't noticed the main point yet. Precedence is not their main point. Precedent just provides an additional support. E-E is the most controversial item in the USCIS memo which also is illegal.
girlfriend Tags: alex pettyfer, fanmix
rkgc
12-29 05:44 PM
done, thanks for the link
hairstyles Alex Pettyfer Wallpaper
gsc999
07-21 12:57 AM
gimmi green - Don't you see green around you. Let me tell you how to get green
1) Use your credit history to purchase additional home in Florida. House purchase in 150000 will be 250000 in year. The market was like that a year back. It takes 8 months to get a house. There is a big line.
2) Open your own e-business. File E visa. 1/4 million should be easy money if you have stayed here for 10 years.
3) House listing in only done by realtor. Give option to customer. For fun open a site for people to list their house for sale. Give them free service then charge. Live American way.
4) Make school in Village. I have made one. I enjoy supporting the school. Grow India.
5) Don't worry about GC. Do something. Registering a site takes some $35 or 40. Built you site. Use American brain.
Am I doing it? Yes.. Did I make money? Yes.
Ensoy.
---------
The current housing market condition are totally opposite to what you say about housing markets, especially in states like Florida, California etc. American economy is slowing because of cooling ( eventual bubble burst?) in the housing markets and because of high inflationery pressure. Most economists agree with this view only people still propogating the myth of house ownership as an investment are Realtors and "Flippers" looking to unload their houses on ignorant suckers. People made money, yes, but that was upto mid that is when housing market peaked. It has been on sequential monthly decline since than. Buying house as an investment in current economic conditions is bad advise. Save money and wait till late 2007 or early 2008.
1) Use your credit history to purchase additional home in Florida. House purchase in 150000 will be 250000 in year. The market was like that a year back. It takes 8 months to get a house. There is a big line.
2) Open your own e-business. File E visa. 1/4 million should be easy money if you have stayed here for 10 years.
3) House listing in only done by realtor. Give option to customer. For fun open a site for people to list their house for sale. Give them free service then charge. Live American way.
4) Make school in Village. I have made one. I enjoy supporting the school. Grow India.
5) Don't worry about GC. Do something. Registering a site takes some $35 or 40. Built you site. Use American brain.
Am I doing it? Yes.. Did I make money? Yes.
Ensoy.
---------
The current housing market condition are totally opposite to what you say about housing markets, especially in states like Florida, California etc. American economy is slowing because of cooling ( eventual bubble burst?) in the housing markets and because of high inflationery pressure. Most economists agree with this view only people still propogating the myth of house ownership as an investment are Realtors and "Flippers" looking to unload their houses on ignorant suckers. People made money, yes, but that was upto mid that is when housing market peaked. It has been on sequential monthly decline since than. Buying house as an investment in current economic conditions is bad advise. Save money and wait till late 2007 or early 2008.
starscream
09-17 12:51 PM
does anyone know if the Republican cosponsor of HR 5882 (the congressman who introduced it jointly with Congresswoman Zoe) - is he part of the judiciary commiteee?? if not - can he speak in support of the bill when they discuss this bill in the commitee -
hur11
03-16 10:20 PM
Hey,
I have Bachelor's computer's 3 years and MCA 2 years from IGNOU. I have over 7 years of Exp excluding frm my current company. Is EB2 possible in my case. My employer says its not cause of my education, can anybody let me know if they have done EB2 with this scenario. Appreciate your time. Thanks
I have Bachelor's computer's 3 years and MCA 2 years from IGNOU. I have over 7 years of Exp excluding frm my current company. Is EB2 possible in my case. My employer says its not cause of my education, can anybody let me know if they have done EB2 with this scenario. Appreciate your time. Thanks