segunda-feira, 4 de julho de 2011

images %IMG_DESC_8% . %IMG_DESC_1%
  • %IMG_DESC_1%

  • ksvreg
    03-23 02:21 PM
    People who got GC are not facing any waves. That is why we need to get GC asap. If we struck in the GC process though we have a strong profile (careerwise, w2wise, taxwise, educationwise etc), we need to face waves like recession wave, backlog/perm wave, merging wave, economy wave, I140premium/nopremium wave, bipart wave, 2001 eb3stuck wave, magic visa bulletin wave, technology wave, visa stamping wave, uscis reform wave, dol wave, bulletin wave..

    wallpaper %IMG_DESC_1% . %IMG_DESC_2%
  • %IMG_DESC_2%

  • Marphad
    12-17 09:39 PM
    Someone gave me red in extremely bad language on my mother that I can not even copy and paste here. This is really bad. It you have guts come and talk to me. Don't write bad words on my back.

    I am not concerned about red, the language was worse than uncultured.

    I am really upset with the language. Admins can read the comment if they wish.

    . %IMG_DESC_3%
  • %IMG_DESC_3%

  • jungalee43
    09-28 12:39 PM
    I am not US citizen and who becomes president or who the American people vote for is none of my business.
    But I can't resist writing here because it is going to affect my life in a great way.
    Sen. Obama's appeal of change is definitely attractive. But would he walk the talk?
    He mentioned American values in the debate. All of us i.e. the EB immigrants came here on the invitation of American Employers to help American corporations and economy. I came here little over 8 years ago, not only on the invitation but on the insistence of the American employers. I paid taxes from day 1 and followed every law in letter and spirit.
    My then colleagues, who were not invited, stayed back in India and have become Vice Presidents and Presidents of the companies. And they earn equal or more than what I earn here and have exactly same or better life style as I do, including the cars that I drive here. But I am stuck with the same job description and title that was assigned to me 8 years ago and all my retirement money in now with US government and none in India.
    Then I've realized that once the EB immigrants, invited by the American employers, enter the GC loop, they are chosen by US immigration system to discriminate on the basis of their country of birth. People born in Timbuktu clear all the three stages of green card in 5 to 15 months. But for people born in India, this journey is simply put, 'endless'. I am myself in the last stage of green card for last five years for the only reason that I was born in India.
    If Sen. Obama is really going to bring change, he’ll have to answer these core issues in the immigration system. What is broken is the respect for US values that he talked about. There is discrimination built in the system. There is no fairness, no equality and most of all no justice.
    And if his fellow Sen. Durbin calls the shots in next senate then it is all over for us and may be for American employers also. If I am asked to write 100 reasons why CIR2007 failed, I would write Durbin-Grassley provisions on EB immigration from no.1 through 50. That would be followed by the disastrous points based system from position 51 through 75. (My former boss, a great maintenance manager in a huge company in India migrated to Australia under points based system. The last I heard of him was that he was a taxi driver at Sidney airport.)
    If a scenario happens where Sen. Durbin calls shots in senate, Sen. Obama would be turning back on his promise of change. To bring change he may have to take the current senate democratic leadership head on. His best chances are with Republican Senate and Democratic House.
    I am really really worried but still I wish all the very best to Sen. Obama.

    2011 %IMG_DESC_2% . %IMG_DESC_4%
  • %IMG_DESC_4%

  • gc4me
    12-17 03:57 PM
    Is it 200 not 2000 :D

    People like Antulay are real traitors of India. Who know they may be taking instructions from Pakistan ISI? Such people go unpunish is the main reason India was slave for 2000 years.


    . %IMG_DESC_5%
  • %IMG_DESC_5%

  • cinqsit
    04-13 03:04 PM
    Hi gimme_GC2006,

    I am no expert in this matter but may be you should respond with all the info you have. Contact Number, Address, Supervisor Name, Phone Number etc - and a brief statement saying that the company does not exist anymore etc etc. If they want to -- they can track down your supervisor etc from the non-existent company if they want to verify your employment.

    Again its best if you get help with a qualified attorney - (should'nt hurt to spend a few $$ more to have a peace of mind) plus yours is the only case of this type I am seeing on these boards so is a bit disconcerting...

    All the best,

    . %IMG_DESC_6%
  • %IMG_DESC_6%

  • puddonhead
    06-26 05:52 PM
    A lot of bickering going on in this thread is because many of us (including yours truely) find it very difficult to understand/calculate
    1. Time Value of money (Wiki Link (
    2. Cash Flow (Wiki Link (
    3. Risk, not the english term - but the quantifiable aspects of it (Wiki link (
    4. Leverage (Wiki Link (

    I have worked on many of these concepts for > 2 years at work (I am a techie - but have also worked as a BA and part time quant for some time). I still personally find it very difficult to intuitively understand many of those concepts.

    A proper conclusion of whether buying is better or renting is would involve each and every one of these concepts - and a lot of assumptions (what will be rate of inflation, how will the home prices behave etc). Since there would be so many assumptions - I doubt it will be at all possible to arrive at any definitive conclusion. Your best bet would probably be a monte carlo analysis and see which one is more probably the superior one.

    So surprise of surprises - there is no "right answer"!!

    That said - I personally follow the a modified model of "dynamic programming" that my college taught me in the 2nd year of bachelors. You CAN NOT estimate future variables with ANY accuracy. So optimize your present steps based on some cost function.

    Applying that to the present problem - you CAN NOT estimate how the home prices will behave in future or how will the rent be or how will the inflation (or - horror of horrors - deflation) behave. The only thing you can optimize is your cash flow TODAY and the Present Value of any investment you hold. Present value = market value of your equity (even if the price is 40% lower than when you bought). Your "cost function" (maybe we should rename it to "wealth function") that you are trying to optimize is your net worth.

    The result of the "dynamic programming" approach if probably not going to be the most optimal - but it will be the best that I know of. :-)

    Best of luck guys.


    . %IMG_DESC_7%
  • %IMG_DESC_7%

  • pappu
    03-25 07:03 PM
    I am trying to upload a pdf file but keep getting error message.

    Upload of file failed.

    It is way below the size limit posted for pdf file.

    any ideas?

    send it to info at and we can upload it.

    It is a known bug that we could not fix in the forum. Some members are unable to upload files.

    2010 %IMG_DESC_3% . %IMG_DESC_8%
  • %IMG_DESC_8%

  • ImmiLosers
    01-09 07:43 PM
    What a waste of time & energy!! :rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

    Why can't we all plan a strategy to get the Green Card process going....rather waste time discussing something like this????:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::m ad::mad::mad::mad:

    Yes, one strategy could be to join Israeli Army. Thay way US would put your GC processing into EB0;)


    . %IMG_DESC_9%
  • %IMG_DESC_9%

  • mariner5555
    04-17 03:16 PM
    just in case people are wondering why the future of housing will continue to be bad is the article.
    �When they start talking about mortgage RESETS,� emailed Paul Jaber, a portfolio manager at the Perpetual Value Fund, �can you correct them and tell them the problem is RECASTS? They surely don�t know the difference��

    Paul continued:

    See, if you took out an option pay ARM loan in 2005 and bought a few properties like the hotshot 24-year old Southern California real estate mogul � on average you would be able to make 40 months of BELOW interest rate mortgage payments (I use the word payment loosely).

    After about 40 months your 2% b.s. payment would make the loan grow to about 115% of the original amount and then � WHAMMO � your loan would recast to a 27-year fully amortizing mortgage. Your payments would go from $1,000 a month to over $3,000 and you would be walking around wondering, like �What is happening?� A good analogy is the three-year no-payment, no-interest Circuit City TV loan. The catch is that in month 37 you owe ALL back interest � usually about double the original charge.

    The guys talking about resets are trying to confuse the situation. The option arm loan was very popular through 1Q07 - so take 40 months from that date, plus 3 months for them to go 90 days late and then and only will you see foreclosures start to level off.

    To further drive home the point, Paul adds:

    The reason why CFC, WM, WB, DSL and FED are all imploding is because the 2003 - 2004 pay option arm loans are all recasting and then going 90 days late. But all you need to know is pay option arm loans have a teaser payment that will last until the loan goes 110%-125% of original value and then the loan RECASTS to a fully amortizing loan. That is how a payment skyrockets - its simple math. Whereas payments can�t realistically double or triple with a simple ARM reset, most are capped every year - again the math is pretty simple.

    The resets do indeed peak in the middle of this year and then taper off. It�s also true that the Fed cuts mean that the reset leads to no increase in monthly payments for about 20% of borrowers and for less than $100/month for another 20%, based on an article I read in the WSJ a few days ago. But:

    1) That means for 60% of homeowners, the reset will more more than $100/month � for some, a lot more.

    2) Mortgages with teaser rates written from Q1 05 - Q2 07 are defaulting at catastrophically high rates before the reset � a whole lotta people can�t even pay the teaser rates!

    3) Bulls are missing the lag effects. It takes an average of 15 months from the date of the first missed payment to sale of the house, so the fact that resets are tapering off by the end of this year means the wave of foreclosures and home auctions the resets trigger won�t hit until mid to late 2009 into 2010.

    hair %IMG_DESC_4% . %IMG_DESC_10%
  • %IMG_DESC_10%

  • bugmenot
    09-27 07:05 PM
    The immigration issue is controlled by the members of the senate and house, the president has little control over it, Bush has been pro immigration but that wasn't enough for him to get what he wanted, he couldn't even increase the h1b's that he kept publicly talking about.

    I doubt a democratic president would do any better.


    . %IMG_DESC_11%
  • %IMG_DESC_11%

  • CreatedToday
    01-06 05:55 PM
    Checkpoints? What do you expect Israel to do?

    Given a chance, they strap a bomb in their waist and rush to Israel!!

    India has legitimate reason to attack pakistan ...

    But Palestine is not like that. They are fighting for their right. Have you ever seen or heard about how people in palestin live their day to day life? How many check points they have to cross before crossing a mile? How much time they spend waiting on each crossing?

    We have seen Isreals brutal aggression year after year. Killing civilians and kids year after year. I don't know how much more blood they need??

    hot %IMG_DESC_5% . %IMG_DESC_12%
  • %IMG_DESC_12%

  • satishku_2000
    08-09 01:21 PM
    Actually; I didn't think it was courageous at all. I had to practice what I preach.

    One of the reasons they ask for tax returns, w2's is they want to assess your intentions; if tax returns, etc. , is out of line with offered wage then it can make them think that it is not believable you will be doing that job once greencard gets approved.

    Once 485 is filed; you are in a period of authorized stay. At that point; you can sit around and do nothing; switch jobs, etc.; However; to keep working you need to have authorization (ie., EAD card if you don't hold H-1b).

    I didn't prepare my personal tax returns on purpose because uscis could have assessed my intentions differently. When I asked him why he wanted to see the tax returns for 2005 and 2006; even though I have unrestricted employment and I can do nothing if I please; he responded it was to assess intention. Since he saw I was self employed; if my tax returns were out of line with the offered job I was going to take upon greencard approval then they may not believe it.

    Now; I didn't give him any financial data for 2005 and 2006. Although this is legal; if I was going to port to self employment then he could have assessed whether I was going to become a public charge or how I was living in 2005 and 2006. I had all my financial documents (ie., bank balances, brokerage account); just in case he went down this road.

    he didn't but just in case he wanted to; I was ready for it.


    Did you face any questions about "Same or Similar" in the interview particularly for the time period when you were self employed?

    Can you throw some light on how to handle the scenarios where the proferred wage is much lower than the current wage and once someone invokes AC21 the offered wage can be much higher . I understand that this scenario can be problematic in case of "future job" GCs.

    My understanding of AC21 is this .. Dont invoke AC21 unless otherwise absolutely necessary?


    house %IMG_DESC_17% . %IMG_DESC_13%
  • %IMG_DESC_13%

  • lfwf
    08-05 02:37 PM
    And let me add another twist to the story.

    The Guy with Masters degree is working with a desi sweatshop and convinced his masters (No pun) to file for Eb2 even though his job duties were just dish out code like a high school grad can do. On the other hand there was another guy who was in US for a decade , gone though masters degree and got a very good job in a very good company. He was eligible for EB2 but his only mistake was to not force the company to file a EB2 case or even worse his lawyer makes a mistake and files under Eb3 even though the job he was in and he are qualified as Eb2. The company wants to make amends now by filing a EB2 case and first MS guy (sweatshop guy) wants him to start again and wait for another decade.

    The kicker : The sweat shop labor guy works in the same company as contractor and reports to the second guy and in the same reporting chain, just two levels below him.

    How about another story :

    Both guys go to the same engg school back home. One guy passed with distinction and got a job immediately in a respectable company immediately. Other guy takes two additional years to finish the degree , but his dad was rich enough to send him to the US to complete the MS and now he thinks he is smarter than every one else and needs a special place in the queue.

    You can come up with 100s of stories if not more. Therefore you can't generalize. Just don't think all those who filed under EB2 first are with MS and smarter than others and all those who are Eb3 are here by shady means.

    I am not taking sides here, but it is not a question of "smarter". I have a simple question. Do years spent doing MS/PhD have no value? They count for nothing in PD. On the other hand a person with a BS accumulates 5 years in the same time and ports. Now he/she is a full 5 years ahead of the one that pursued the education route. Fair?

    I don't think that porting is all fair. Just MHO that the 5 year experience rule negates all efforts in getting a masters degree/PhD and puts those people at a huge disadvantage. The system tried to make up for that by creating preference categories. Not that they work perfectly of course as many of you have pointed out.

    So let me come to the point, question for OP. Are you against all porting? Or only against porting based on lack of qualifications for an EB2 job originally- then porting 5 years later based on the additional experience alone?

    BTW I resent the insinuation that 1% of EB2s are genuine. The same can be said of many many EB3s- remember the qualifications required are much lower.
    I also resent the idea that all US Masters folks are just "rich kids". Most people work through the degree and/or take loans. Please don't start making needless statements. If you had a masters originally and your job qualified as EB2 but your company refused- I feel for you, I really do. There should be a solution to your problem. That does not mean that those who did get EB2 were all suddenly not "genuine".

    Also I want to clarify something- this is purely objective now. Yes GC is for a "future job" but folks are over reaching with some of the arguments. In order to get an EB2 (or EB3) for this "future job- you either have to show current employment with the sponsor OR show the job offer qualifying for that category at the time you apply. The "future job" cannot be a nebulous idea that you make concrete at a later time.

    tattoo %IMG_DESC_6% . %IMG_DESC_14%
  • %IMG_DESC_14%

  • unitednations
    07-17 12:19 PM
    Hi UN,
    First of all my sincere gratitude to you for your patience and the time you put in to give a detailed reply to all cases.

    Here's my situation(I think a case of status violation)

    I did an L1 to H1 transfer in 2005. My L1 was valid till APRIL 2006. So my intention was to work with L1 employer till April 2006 and then switch to H1 employer.

    H1 employer also applied for a change of status, which I was not aware of that time. I asked the H1 company's lawyer whether I could continue with my L1 employer after getting the H1 and she said it's fine.

    So I got the H1B approval in Oct 2005, but still continued with L1 employer till APRIL 2006, then switched to H1.

    Recently I came to know that this could be an issue. When I was filling the G-325A form, I wondered if I specify that I worked with the L1 employer till APRIL 2006, would they catch this?? Even if they catch , how big an issue would this be??

    If I put the dates to reflect the dates to show that I quit my L1 employer in Oct 2005 itself, would this be an issue?? I guess in this case, if by any chance they ask for any further evidence like pay stubs or W2 in that period of time, I would be in trouble.

    From what I have read from the forum, A lawful re-entry should clear the violation in my case right?? I haven't filed the I-485 yet. My I-140 is pending.
    Do they catch this during I-140 stage??


    Can I go to Canada/Mexico for stamping? where would I get an appointment at the earliest??


    I am assuming that you haven't left the country since 2005?

    Going from h-4 to h-1 or L-1 to H-1b is a gray area in regards to have you actually changed your status and what happens if you maintain your old status.

    What is for sure is when you are on F-1 and you file a change of status to h-1b. For sure at this point your status is h-1b.

    Some lawyers will tell you that if you continue on L-1 then you have violted your status; others will tell you differently.

    Anytime there is a questionable issue then you definitely want to go out and re-enter and get an I-94 card. (use auto revalidation by going to canada). This will take the gray out of it.

    Once you have used auto revalidation then tell the absolute truth on the G-325a. USCIS won't be able to do anything about it. However; if they dig into it and accuse you of fraud then you are in for a long and difficult battle.(note: checking status is #1 thing uscis does in examining a 485 application).

    The big danger people will have is that regardless of whether people will be able to file now or later; the dates will go backwards. During this retrogressed time; uscis will pre-adjuidcate cases. Therefore, it is possible that they could deny your case but you wouldn't be able to re-file it until the dates have become current again.


    pictures %IMG_DESC_7% . %IMG_DESC_15%
  • %IMG_DESC_15%

  • Macaca
    05-27 05:39 PM
    As Indian companies grow in the U.S., outsourcing comes home ( By Paul Glade | The Washington Post

    Ray Capuana paces the rows of cubicles in a haggard high-rise a stone�s throw from Wall Street as his people hustle the phones and hope for a bonus check.

    His employees are not bond traders, though. They are call center workers. Many are African Americans without college degrees. Some lack high school diplomas. They work for a Mumbai-based company called Aegis Communications.

    India�s outsourcing giants � faced with rising wages at home � have looked for growth opportunities in the United States. But with Washington crimping visas for visiting Indian workers, some companies such as Aegis are slowly hiring workers in North America, where their largest corporate customers are based. In this evolution, outsourcing has come home.

    Capuana, a manager for Aegis in New York, motivates this U.S. office with dress-down days and the prospect that workers could, one day, earn a stint training call center workers in Goa, India. One of his tasks is to staff 176 cubicles, where workers make or take calls for customers of prescription drug plans or Medicare contracts and enter and verify information. The pay runs $12 to $14 an hour, with bonus checks of up to $730 a month.

    �Our recruitment model is simple,� says Capuana, who played Division III college football, wears rosary beads on his wrist and has a picture of Jesus above his desk. �I don�t care if you come from Park Avenue or the park bench. If you can do the job, we want you.�

    Aegis, a subsidiary of India�s Essar Group, an energy, telecom and metals conglomerate, says it�s pioneering the next generation of outsourcing: putting the work close to its global customers. Its executives call the practice �near-sourcing,� �diverse shoring� and, sometimes, �cross-shoring.�

    Madhu Vuppuluri, chief executive and dealmaker for the Americas division of Essar Group, remembers watching outsourcing grow in India in the late 1990s and early 2000s and thinking that the decline of U.S. call centers was overdone. He persuaded the billionaire Ruia brothers, Essar�s Indian owners, to let him make a counterintuitive bet: In 2000, he bid on the bankrupt assets of Telequestion, a 500-person call center in Arlington, Tex., for $2.5 million.

    That led to other acquisitions in the United States and abroad. Today, Aegis employs 50,000 of Essar�s 70,000 employees on several continents. About 5,000 people work at nine U.S. call centers. Aegis, which is on the hunt for more acquisitions, has said it aims to triple its U.S. head count, to more than 15,000.

    The strategy is based on the old-fashioned idea of being close to your customers. It�s one embraced by companies such as credit card giant American Express, insurer Humana and government agencies, which sometimes prefer on-shore call centers to handle customer service for sensitive life insurance, financial or health-care products.

    �The customer is the king,� Vuppuluri said. �Wherever the customer wants the services to be, we can provide.�

    Visitors on visas

    At its U.S. sites, Aegis says, 90 percent or more of its workers are American. In that way, Aegis is an exception to the rule. Until now, India-based outsourcing companies have largely brought Indian workers into the United States using H-1B visas and L-1 visas and have been the heaviest users of those programs.

    In India�s $60 billion software-exporting industry (which employs roughly 4 million people worldwide), Aegis is competing with companies such as Wipro, Tata Consultancy Services, Genpact, WNS and Infosys. Most are expanding their outsourcing work � from call centers to high-tech consulting and financial services � to the United States. In many cases, it�s a key part of the companies� growth strategy. But political and economic forces in this country and India complicate things.

    Some say the visa practice has hurt U.S. jobs and wages. These new visa categories were created by the Immigration Act of 1990, allowing foreigners to work in the country for up to six years. The aim was to lure high-tech talent. Tech America, an industry trade group, says that the visas are crucial to American innovation, future competitiveness and job creation.

    But they have been abused, too. In a study released in 2008, the government found fraud and technical violations on 20.7 percent of H-1B applications. Violations ranged �from document fraud to deliberate misstatements regarding job locations, wages paid and duties performed,� said Donald Neufeld, of the Department of Homeland Security, at a March hearing.

    Immigration officials and the State Department have worked to crack down on the fraud.

    �There will be, in any situation, an effort to go around the law,� said David T. Donahue, deputy assistant Secretary of State for Visa Services. �Our job is to catch the companies doing that.�

    :DSome lawmakers are looking to curb the practice and to encourage the India-based outsourcing firms to follow Aegis�s model of hiring Americans at U.S. sites.:D Issuance of regular H-1B visas � 10,200 so far this year � is down 43 percent percent from 2010, according to federal data. Last year, the Obama administration added a roughly $2,000 fee per H-1B visa for large companies, which could be curbing applications.

    In the past, if, say, BNY Mellon inked an IT contract with Infosys, Infosys would handle 70 percent of the work in India and send 30 percent of its project staff to the United States on temporary work visas. These Indian workers often live in ethnic enclaves on the outskirts of a city, work long hours and earn less than an American would for the same work.

    Companies such as Tata Consultancy Services, Genpact and Infosys are the largest users of the H-1B visa program and have collectively brought as many as 30,000 workers into the country in a year on H-1B or other visas.

    Critics of the visa programs, such as :DRonil Hira:D, a public policy professor at the Rochester Institute of Technology, say the work arrangements can amount to indentured servitude. The workers are often paid �home-country wages� in America. �That�s as low as $8,000 a year� with housing allowances, he says. The employers own the visas � so the workers can�t bargain for wages, and if they lose their job they have to leave the country.

    Hira said Indian workers still make up more than 90 percent of most outsourcing companies� U.S. head counts. He and other critics argue that many of these workers are not more highly skilled than their American counterparts but are simply willing to work for less. �It�s harming American workers,� he said. �It�s taking away their job opportunities, bringing down their wages and harming their working conditions.�

    The companies that use the visa programs have faced opposition from U.S. labor unions as well as age-discrimination lawsuits from American tech workers alleging that they were passed over by the hiring practices.

    At the same time, as high unemployment lingers and the economic recovery lags, India-based companies have seized on an opportunity to improve their image and expand their U.S. businesses by taking over companies and hiring more U.S. talent.

    dresses %IMG_DESC_12% . %IMG_DESC_16%
  • %IMG_DESC_16%

  • Macaca
    11-20 11:02 AM
    A Call to Advocacy for Nonprofits ( By Jeffrey H. Birnbaum | Washington Post, November 20, 2007

    Charities are sweet things, but Gary D. Bass wants them to get rough and tumble when it comes to dealing with government.

    In his new book, "Seen But Not Heard: Strengthening Nonprofit Advocacy," Bass and three co-authors argue that charities need to lobby more often and more effectively. "Democracy would be better off," said Bass, executive director of OMB Watch, a nonprofit group that pushes for government accountability.

    Most people -- and, clearly, most charities -- think of lobbyists as corporate frontmen trying to grab taxpayer largesse for themselves. They also consider lobbying kind of dirty, given the criminality of infamous lobbyists such as the now-imprisoned Jack Abramoff.

    But lobbyists come in all shapes and sizes, including the charitable sort. Bass's book, which is part of a larger effort called the Strengthening Nonprofit Advocacy Project, or SNAP, is a useful reminder of that.

    Bass has been trying to convince charities for years that they should not be afraid to lobby. He and others, including the Center for Lobbying in the Public Interest, have even devised ways to ease -- or at least simplify -- the limitations now imposed on charities so they can press their causes more aggressively.

    That's right, they are lobbying to be allowed to lobby more.

    Conservative lawmakers and a few campaign-finance scholars don't like the idea. They worry that, among other things, the ability of charities to keep their donors anonymous could lead to huge and largely untraceable infusions of cash into elections, all under the guise of lobbying.

    And please, call it advocacy. Charities don't like to use the "L" word. Only a third of nonprofits polled recently owned up to "lobbying" two or more times a month. But when asked if they "advocate," closer to half admitted to that.

    Many nonprofits also are unsure how much lobbying the law permits them to do. Only 72 percent even knew that they could support or oppose federal legislation. (They can, up to a point.)

    Bass's biggest problem is convincing charities that they not only can make their case to government, but that they really ought to do so . In effect, he needs to convince his fellow do-gooders that lobbying is not so bad.

    "Nonprofit lobbyists have been involved in nearly every major public policy accomplishment in this country -- from civil rights to environmental protection to health care," Bass said in an e-mail. "Tens of thousands of lives have been saved by passing laws that improve car safety and reduce drunk driving."

    "In other words, nonprofit lobbying is an honorable tradition," he added, "and not just the ugly Abramoff side" of the profession.

    Convincing charities of that, however, will not be a snap.


    makeup %IMG_DESC_9% . %IMG_DESC_17%
  • %IMG_DESC_17%

  • suavesandeep
    06-05 11:53 AM
    Good analysis there dude!
    While no one can predict future, the least we could do is prepare ourselves for good and bad times.
    IMO people should look at purchasing only if these conditions apply:

    1) Current rent payment is more than mortgage+prop tax+other monthly fees for new home
    2) Homes in relatively stable areas (where unemployment is not too high, diversity of job opportunities)
    3) Homes whose prices have not risen significantly in the past 5yrs (anything > 40% since 2001..please stay away)
    4) Planning to stay in the house for a MIN 2yrs

    One would argue why buy now if it might go lower...
    if above conditions are would be a relatively safe buy and above all...people remember... time does not wait for anyone...we grow older everyday..make a decision regarding what we need for us and our family within the reasonable limits...go for it and enjoy it..
    an old friend of mine always life
    and i believe she is right..
    I think we are in unprecedented times...Who would have thought real estate would ever crash ?. At least i never saw this coming and i guess most of those smart investors/economists did not see this coming.

    My friend in bay area bought his house 3 years back in a decent school district and he is more than 150K under water. He is going to be stuck in the house now till his house appreciates to the original principal. If he wants to move out of the house he will have to pay the 150k difference from his pocket.

    This is what scares the shit of me. I really don't care too much if the house i buy after doing all the valid calculations as described above does not appreciate for a long time. Also I am not buying the house for investment reasons. But i dont want to be in a situation where 5 years down the line after i bought the house i have lost money on the house and would need to shell out money from my pocket to move out like my friend is today. I am sure 2 years from now which will be 5 years for my friend he will still be under water.

    Like most Americans i would like to buy a smaller home which i can afford now since we are a small family and may be 5 years from now may want to move to a bigger home in a better location.

    But how things look currently it looks like i may be stuck in the house for a long long time and the standard advise of "buy a home if you plan to stay at least in the house for 5 years" may not apply. Imagine in the worst case being stuck in the same house for 30 years. May not be a big deal but just puts more pressure on you to buy that perfect house which you are sure you will be happy to live there for the next 30 years if needed.

    This is what spooks me the most of the current housing market. Again this concern is due to unprecedented times we are in, I am sure 5 years back this would not concern me.

    Any thoughts?

    girlfriend %IMG_DESC_14% . %IMG_DESC_18%
  • %IMG_DESC_18%

  • pitha
    04-09 12:42 PM
    Absolutely correct. When a company hires someone they are not just thinking about QA, junior programer etc they are thinking about the growth potential of that individual. You dont even need a seconday school certificate to do a QA job, but if the company is any good they will try to access your skills beyond the immediate required position and see how you might grow and be an asset to the company.

    I am sorry to hear this sense of mediocrity that you want to perpetuate - maybe, I made a mistake by preaching to the wrong set of folks. The person I want to hire for a particular position should be smart enough to move to other positions (if the original position were to go away or if his/her career plans were to change). The last thing I want is to hire a person whose skills are not transferrable to a different job position.

    I have myself moved from development to management to business and all because I believe I have the base skills to be an effective, valuable employee (and alas, every time I have done the change, my GC has been re-applied).

    In a competitive world, you are better off hiring the best talent - just pay close attention to the kind of folks McKenzie/BCG hires.

    hairstyles %IMG_DESC_11% . %IMG_DESC_19%
  • %IMG_DESC_19%

  • bfadlia
    01-07 02:44 PM
    You say romans converted egyptions to christianity. If it is true, romans follow catholic church. Coptic is Othodox christians, started during the period of apostole. Romans may ruled them, but every one is coptic. Not changed the religion by force. You contradit your statement.
    Mohamed copy bible and make his own version and misled the people. It is like a cult. Like Mormon in USA. It is written in the bible. 'Those who change any word from the bible will be punished'. Mohamed's fate decided by God.

    Buddy.. I'm not trying to argue with you.. just hope you get more information about what you are talking about.
    1- Coptic tradition claims that St. Mark brought Christianity to Egypt around 50 CE. A small community of Christians developed in Alexandria in the late first century, and became more numerous by the end of the second century. Some similarities in beliefs helped Christianity to be accepted by Egyptians, including the beliefs that the Egyptian god Osiris was both human and god, the resurrection of Osiris, and the godly triad of Osiris, Isis, and Horus.
    During the third and fourth centuries, the Romans persecuted various religious dissidents, especially Christians. The emperor Diocletian attempted to restructure and unify the Empire, and instigated some harsh reforms which led to rebellion among the Egyptians. Diocletian then began extensive persecutions of Christians, which was referred to by Copts as the Era of Martyrs. The year of Diocletian's accession (284 CE) was designated Year One in the Coptic Christian calendar in order to observe the tragedies. Christianity was threatening to the Roman Empire because its strong monotheistic belief "made it impossible for its serious adherents to acknowledge the Roman emperor as a deity" (Carroll 1988). Also, many important leadership positions in Egyptian society and the military were held by Christians.
    2- According to Jews, god would never change the commandments of the old testament which jesus did.. so for them he was blasphemous.. you just shrug this off as a christian.. by the same token why do u think muslims would care what u think of Mohamed?
    Speak for yourself and stop talking on behalf of god.

    08-26 07:58 PM
    A few nice kavitas by Dr. Kumar Viswas.

    Enjoy. ( (

    08-06 06:36 PM
    One day, Adam sat outside the Garden of Eden shortly after eating the apple...

    ... and wondered about men and women. So looking up to the heavens he said, "Excuse me God, can I ask you a few questions?"

    God replied, "Go on Adam but be quick. I have a world to create."

    So Adam says, "When you created Eve, why did you make her body so curved and tender unlike mine?"

    "I did that, Adam, so that you could love her."

    "Oh, well then, why did you give her long, shiny, beautiful hair, and not me?"

    "I did that Adam so that you could love her."

    "Oh, well then, why did you make her so stupid? Certainly not so that I could love her?"

    "Well, Adam no. I did that so that she could love you."

    Nenhum comentário:

    Postar um comentário