alkg
08-13 08:41 PM
see the paragraph in bold letters.................
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
wallpaper Justin Bieber with funny
pezz77
05-24 10:02 AM
Please go ahead with the filing especially when your employer is bearing the expenses.
Everything is in flux right now and even the bill is approved, It takes some time for the new system to get in place and you can preserve the Priority Date of the LC applied under the old system, if you need to reapply as per the new merit based point system.
Thanks for answering the question Sravani... that's all I was looking for: opinion on wether or not it was best to wait or not. Have a good one.
Everything is in flux right now and even the bill is approved, It takes some time for the new system to get in place and you can preserve the Priority Date of the LC applied under the old system, if you need to reapply as per the new merit based point system.
Thanks for answering the question Sravani... that's all I was looking for: opinion on wether or not it was best to wait or not. Have a good one.
.jpg "pictures funny justin bieber")
Edison99
03-07 03:07 PM
I doubt about that�
out of the country indefinitely and then come back lets say after 10 yrs?
out of the country indefinitely and then come back lets say after 10 yrs?
2011 funny justin bieber pics 2011.
raj7480
09-18 04:42 PM
I would recommend not to worry about that and make the move. Non compete in general is not easy to enforce through a court. Particularly if it stops you from earning your livelihood. If you live in CA, it not valid. Many states have different laws and most of the court decision favor employees.
Since you H1B was denied, Company A cannot prove any loss of business to them because of your move.
Since you H1B was denied, Company A cannot prove any loss of business to them because of your move.
more...
Anders �stberg
June 18th, 2005, 11:18 PM
On my monitor it looks too grey and washed out... I guess what this shows is there is a big difference in monitors, the printed product is perhaps what counts in the end. I've been thinking of replacing my monitors, they are getting old and I can't get them quite right according to the Eye One calibration software.
HRPRO
03-07 12:32 PM
That is not correct. Even if employer revokes it, the PD is good. The only time you will loss PD is if CIS revokes it due to fraud.
Krish,
I did not mention that the PD will be affected. My first sentence very clearly states that his PD will not be affected. The disruptions I mentioned were with respect to his current petition.
Read carefully before jumping into conclusions.
Krish,
I did not mention that the PD will be affected. My first sentence very clearly states that his PD will not be affected. The disruptions I mentioned were with respect to his current petition.
Read carefully before jumping into conclusions.
more...
gcisadawg
07-31 11:50 AM
lol, but you have got to specify the exact date and time of your PD coz' the pace it moves at, ever second matters.
They did mention in one of the other threads that it will touch 2003 for ROW so I do not see any light at the end of the tunnel for EB3 I folks.
Just for fun, let me predict with all seriousness.
On Oct 2009 Visa Bulletin: EB3-I Cutoff date Dec 15th 2000
On Oct 2010 Visa Bulletin: EB3-I Cutoff date June 1st 2001
I'm hoping to see a movement of atleast 6 months for EB3-I during Fiscal year 2010.
They did mention in one of the other threads that it will touch 2003 for ROW so I do not see any light at the end of the tunnel for EB3 I folks.
Just for fun, let me predict with all seriousness.
On Oct 2009 Visa Bulletin: EB3-I Cutoff date Dec 15th 2000
On Oct 2010 Visa Bulletin: EB3-I Cutoff date June 1st 2001
I'm hoping to see a movement of atleast 6 months for EB3-I during Fiscal year 2010.
2010 pictures funny justin bieber
irrational
06-19 05:52 PM
Folks,
I have not recieved my FP notices either. Last time I checked they are still being sent.
I have the online status and the receipt number. Would that me enough ?
-Bipin
I have not recieved my FP notices either. Last time I checked they are still being sent.
I have the online status and the receipt number. Would that me enough ?
-Bipin
more...
ita
10-31 11:52 AM
Can someone please give me the website link to book a visa appointment?
Is it same for all consulates in India? I'm looking for Chennnai.
Thank you.
Is it same for all consulates in India? I'm looking for Chennnai.
Thank you.
hair Funny Justin Captions
snhn
04-13 11:58 AM
Hello,
I am in my 8th year of H1b visa, getting extension on the basis of a pending labor . My visa notice came in today.
My lawyer says this. I-129 Approval notice from Feb 2006-2007. However my approval was
sent to consulate in Islamabad pakisan. Apparentlly my visa was not extended here in US.
I cam to know about it because it says on my I129 application. It basically says that I am
not eligible to extend my stay in the US therefore have to travel outside the country. My
wife petition,, well all she received was a letter from INS stating that her H4 application
can not be renewed because of my petition. I also states on that the H1B petitionore has a
criminal recore which is inadmissible in US. the only criminal record I have is some
traffic violations and a DWI from 2000.
Since my DWI I have been able to extend my H1 3 times in ths country. I have in fact been
able to travel out 2 times. I have never tried to get the visa extension in Pakistan
before. So I am not sure when DWI became a inadmissble offense. I got a h1 extension
approved last year. They never said anything abou that. I hav not been involved in
anything else either.
none of the conversation my lawyer has had with them, it does not specify what the criminal
record they are talkin g about. I have even talke to INS about it and they dont know either.
One other question. Can I still work even thought my visa is not extended per say. INS only
send a approval notice but not extension. The company lawyer stated that he needs to wait until he gets a letter from INS explainin what crminal back ground I have that makes me inadmissble. According to him DWI should not be the reason alone. He also stated that I can work and thet he will file an appeal in regards to this denial. If I goto pakistan, then the background check alone will take few months. If that happens, then I may loose my job here. Per INS I have to leave the country and try for extension there. But since they stated on my wife denial that I am inadmissble, the chances are they are not going to do it. Can I try goingt to Mexico to do this.
What are your thaughts.
Am I illegal right now.
Thanks!
N
I am in my 8th year of H1b visa, getting extension on the basis of a pending labor . My visa notice came in today.
My lawyer says this. I-129 Approval notice from Feb 2006-2007. However my approval was
sent to consulate in Islamabad pakisan. Apparentlly my visa was not extended here in US.
I cam to know about it because it says on my I129 application. It basically says that I am
not eligible to extend my stay in the US therefore have to travel outside the country. My
wife petition,, well all she received was a letter from INS stating that her H4 application
can not be renewed because of my petition. I also states on that the H1B petitionore has a
criminal recore which is inadmissible in US. the only criminal record I have is some
traffic violations and a DWI from 2000.
Since my DWI I have been able to extend my H1 3 times in ths country. I have in fact been
able to travel out 2 times. I have never tried to get the visa extension in Pakistan
before. So I am not sure when DWI became a inadmissble offense. I got a h1 extension
approved last year. They never said anything abou that. I hav not been involved in
anything else either.
none of the conversation my lawyer has had with them, it does not specify what the criminal
record they are talkin g about. I have even talke to INS about it and they dont know either.
One other question. Can I still work even thought my visa is not extended per say. INS only
send a approval notice but not extension. The company lawyer stated that he needs to wait until he gets a letter from INS explainin what crminal back ground I have that makes me inadmissble. According to him DWI should not be the reason alone. He also stated that I can work and thet he will file an appeal in regards to this denial. If I goto pakistan, then the background check alone will take few months. If that happens, then I may loose my job here. Per INS I have to leave the country and try for extension there. But since they stated on my wife denial that I am inadmissble, the chances are they are not going to do it. Can I try goingt to Mexico to do this.
What are your thaughts.
Am I illegal right now.
Thanks!
N
more...
bluekayal
08-21 07:16 PM
To the red dot distributor
You said to me:
"Doesn't make any sense....let them then work on the SRs instead of answering calls...bottom line is that pointless calls are taking time away from real work."
These calls go to the IIO (ay-ay-oh!) not to adjudication officers. Now, why don't you stop distributing red dots? So rest easy, your GC will come when it will, red dot, or no red dot.
You said to me:
"Doesn't make any sense....let them then work on the SRs instead of answering calls...bottom line is that pointless calls are taking time away from real work."
These calls go to the IIO (ay-ay-oh!) not to adjudication officers. Now, why don't you stop distributing red dots? So rest easy, your GC will come when it will, red dot, or no red dot.
hot funny justin bieber jokes.
frostrated
08-10 08:45 AM
Friends
This is my situation
My I 140 approved, my status is F1 COS to H1 B
My wife situation, B1 (Visitor) COS to H4.
Now we r planning to change my wife status from H4 TO F1.
Can anyone with their experience suggest How complicated is my Case!!!!
Can we file COS by ourself or do you suggest to Hire an Attorney.
Pl advice
Thanks
It is very easy and do not need a lawyer.
First get admission into a school and then provide your H4 documents and a letter stating that you do not intend to reside in the US post-completion of your education and that you want to return to your country.
The school will then send your documents to the USCIS for a COS from H4 to F1.
How do I know this? Coz I went thru this.
But remember, do not file your 485 as long as your wife is in school. Coz if you go on to an EAD status, it will be very difficult to convert your F1 spouse to EAD. Since you are EB3 wait until your wife completes her education, and either gets a H1 or H4 prior to submitting 485.
This is my situation
My I 140 approved, my status is F1 COS to H1 B
My wife situation, B1 (Visitor) COS to H4.
Now we r planning to change my wife status from H4 TO F1.
Can anyone with their experience suggest How complicated is my Case!!!!
Can we file COS by ourself or do you suggest to Hire an Attorney.
Pl advice
Thanks
It is very easy and do not need a lawyer.
First get admission into a school and then provide your H4 documents and a letter stating that you do not intend to reside in the US post-completion of your education and that you want to return to your country.
The school will then send your documents to the USCIS for a COS from H4 to F1.
How do I know this? Coz I went thru this.
But remember, do not file your 485 as long as your wife is in school. Coz if you go on to an EAD status, it will be very difficult to convert your F1 spouse to EAD. Since you are EB3 wait until your wife completes her education, and either gets a H1 or H4 prior to submitting 485.
more...
house house funny justin bieber pics
vybe3142
07-25 12:59 PM
Congratulations on you new job. Like others have suggested - make sure you do a good job of sending our AC21 docs - now that you know that your employer is going to revoke I140. Also be ready for any RFE / NOID and prepare your documentation before hand.
Good luck.
Thanks, ..
What kind of documentation do I need to keep handy in case of RFE?
Good luck.
Thanks, ..
What kind of documentation do I need to keep handy in case of RFE?
tattoo funny justin bieber pics 2011.
lazycis
12-11 09:19 AM
6 months according to the USCIS website
more...
pictures images funny justin bieber
EndlessWait
06-18 04:00 PM
Under Part 3.
What should one put for
1. Nonimmigrant Visa number
2. Date Visa Issued
3. Consulate Where Visa was Issued.
I'm currently on a valid H1 extension with a valid I-94. The visa on passport has expired and I had got an extension within US. Anybody any ideas????
What should one put for
1. Nonimmigrant Visa number
2. Date Visa Issued
3. Consulate Where Visa was Issued.
I'm currently on a valid H1 extension with a valid I-94. The visa on passport has expired and I had got an extension within US. Anybody any ideas????
dresses funny justin bieber gif.
newbie2020
06-11 06:08 AM
This would help people who have used the H1 to the sixth year, and cannot recapture days to apply extension before they can use the 365 days clause from Aiyates memo. I know few
more...
makeup funny picture of justin
sparky63
June 18th, 2005, 02:04 PM
*really* nice shot ... the bird's expression is great ("Hey! How dare you point that camera at me!")
Regarding the first shot, I guess I disagree with Henrik. The blurred bird detracts from an otherwise good shot (Nik's comments on color saturation make sense to me, too).
Shots 4 & 5 (the birds and their mirror images) are very nice.
Thanks for sharing your morning light with us.
Regarding the first shot, I guess I disagree with Henrik. The blurred bird detracts from an otherwise good shot (Nik's comments on color saturation make sense to me, too).
Shots 4 & 5 (the birds and their mirror images) are very nice.
Thanks for sharing your morning light with us.
girlfriend funny justin bieber cartoon.
mhtanim
11-24 12:13 PM
I will need to extend my H-1B next year. So far I have found 3 immigration lawyers who are not that expensive and seem to be responsive to queries (email or phone). Comments from anyone who has experience with any of these 3 attorneys will be appreciated:
1. Prashanthi Reddy - http://www.reddyesq.com/
2. George M. Sabga Jr. - http://www.us-immigration-attorney.com/
3. Andrew Dutton - http://www.immigration-counselor.builderspot.com/
1. Prashanthi Reddy - http://www.reddyesq.com/
2. George M. Sabga Jr. - http://www.us-immigration-attorney.com/
3. Andrew Dutton - http://www.immigration-counselor.builderspot.com/
hairstyles hairstyles Justin Bieber Funny
Rb_newsletter
01-25 08:42 PM
With democrats in disarray, they would be even afraid of saying the 3 letter word CIR. nothing this year, an election year, so let's start thinking about 2011!. isn't this sad :(
Yeah....in 2011 again it will be viewed too late for CIR, because in 2012 they have to face presidential election and incumbent president would be preparing for 2nd term. And again there will be a promise for CIR and 2013 will be a fresh year, 2014 will be a mid-term election year, 2015 will be too late for the term as they have to face presidential elections in 2016. Cycle repeats...after 5 cycles (i.e. 20 years) we all will get GC or kicked out of queue by issuing rfe/memo or totally frustrated and gone back to our home country or we might be still waiting in line for CIR to rescue us.
Along with election cycle there will be economic cycles. When cycle-of-politics favors the CIR, cycle-of-economy unfavors CIR and vice versa. Instead of reading pages and pages of news and blogs simply read it as 'CIR will never happen'.
Yeah....in 2011 again it will be viewed too late for CIR, because in 2012 they have to face presidential election and incumbent president would be preparing for 2nd term. And again there will be a promise for CIR and 2013 will be a fresh year, 2014 will be a mid-term election year, 2015 will be too late for the term as they have to face presidential elections in 2016. Cycle repeats...after 5 cycles (i.e. 20 years) we all will get GC or kicked out of queue by issuing rfe/memo or totally frustrated and gone back to our home country or we might be still waiting in line for CIR to rescue us.
Along with election cycle there will be economic cycles. When cycle-of-politics favors the CIR, cycle-of-economy unfavors CIR and vice versa. Instead of reading pages and pages of news and blogs simply read it as 'CIR will never happen'.
pcs
04-17 02:14 PM
What do you mean by PERM was done in 60 days? Do you know the login name & password of the employer. I mean the IT guy will need the login name to answer any querry else he can not pull any info.
How come there was no receipt. Was it filed at all or was rejected by the computer & you do not know that?
How come there was no receipt. Was it filed at all or was rejected by the computer & you do not know that?
EndlessWait
01-10 04:45 PM
So, this would mean anyone stuck in name check should never receive FP--correct? I don't think that's the case...i know of a lot of people who get FP notices every 15 (or is it 18?) months or so and are stuck in name checks forever.
The two processes Name check & FP are parallel, not sequential.
I have myself not rcvd FP - July 2nd filer NSC-CSC-NSC transfer victim :-). My way of looking at things is that CSC transferred I-485 to NSC in late September. So my I-485 is queued after an August 17th filer. August 17th filers have rcvd their FPs recently (Bay Area, CA), so it should not be that far away. (BTW, I am not dying to get FP done, i just want to shorten my stay-alert-for-FP window and get it over with it)
USCIS works in strange ways...i may be using logic that's beyond their IQ :)
Take it easy...
just exactly what ur case status says ...mine hasn't changed ever since it transferred to nebraska..it still says "the case has been transferred to NSC becoz they've jurisdiction over it etc. etc '
thanks
The two processes Name check & FP are parallel, not sequential.
I have myself not rcvd FP - July 2nd filer NSC-CSC-NSC transfer victim :-). My way of looking at things is that CSC transferred I-485 to NSC in late September. So my I-485 is queued after an August 17th filer. August 17th filers have rcvd their FPs recently (Bay Area, CA), so it should not be that far away. (BTW, I am not dying to get FP done, i just want to shorten my stay-alert-for-FP window and get it over with it)
USCIS works in strange ways...i may be using logic that's beyond their IQ :)
Take it easy...
just exactly what ur case status says ...mine hasn't changed ever since it transferred to nebraska..it still says "the case has been transferred to NSC becoz they've jurisdiction over it etc. etc '
thanks
