apahilaj
02-21 02:32 PM
Please note:PERM Audit very aggressive with EB2 since last couple of months. Just to keep in mind
Till how long can they audit the PERM once it's approved? Just curious.
Till how long can they audit the PERM once it's approved? Just curious.
wallpaper Birthday Love Poems Service -
nixstor
07-02 10:46 PM
Guys,
Below is what Rajiv Khanna thinks. You can find it on http://www.forclients.com/cmsd/node/81 . I am not trying to play spoil sport here. I feel that we should be working towards recapturing the unused visa numbers / being able to file for 485, instead of focusing on costly law suits, given that the chances of winning are slim. I hope that I will be proven wrong as Rajiv hopes. You might ask me about the chances of getting them recaptured. That might be slim as well, but that will get rid of the base problem which is retrogression, if at all we are successful. Just my thoughts. The last para of Rajiv's post summarizes very clearly why the court will dismiss the case, even if they find DOS & USCIS to be wrong. I can confidently tell you that USCIS is not going to give rejection notices to any one in the next 45 days. They know that the more they delay the rejection notices, the more the time it will take for plaintiffs to file a case. By that time the VB will come up with some dates instead of "U". As Rajiv said, there might have been many instances of these lawsuits in which USCIS got away. I doubt, if we can even touch the DOS on this because, CA/VO is just one part of DOS and DOS is too powerful to be touched
Q. Can we file a lawsuit?
A. Here is a legal answer as I see it. I hope I am proven wrong. I will elaborate further in our conference call. In my view, the lawsuit has a slim chance of succeess, but not in DC circuit. Our circuit is not likely to interfere with the exec easily. The strongest point is that govt. is changing a long standing practice, which requires rule-making under APA. The govt. will, of course, argue that they have issued amendments in the past and that this practice does not affect substantive rights. That would probably fly in the face of AC21 portability benefit which is, no doubt a substantive right.
Mootness is not a problem usually, because in a putative class action, we can always add more plaintiffs. Also, there are exceptions to mootness that could see a suit through.
I have not looked at the issues in great detail. Nevertheless, I think, the biggest problem is, if we dont get a hearing and an order within the month of July, the Court may have to dismiss the suit for inabaility to order relief (against the statute). This situation has occurred many, many times in the context of DV lottery cases.
Below is what Rajiv Khanna thinks. You can find it on http://www.forclients.com/cmsd/node/81 . I am not trying to play spoil sport here. I feel that we should be working towards recapturing the unused visa numbers / being able to file for 485, instead of focusing on costly law suits, given that the chances of winning are slim. I hope that I will be proven wrong as Rajiv hopes. You might ask me about the chances of getting them recaptured. That might be slim as well, but that will get rid of the base problem which is retrogression, if at all we are successful. Just my thoughts. The last para of Rajiv's post summarizes very clearly why the court will dismiss the case, even if they find DOS & USCIS to be wrong. I can confidently tell you that USCIS is not going to give rejection notices to any one in the next 45 days. They know that the more they delay the rejection notices, the more the time it will take for plaintiffs to file a case. By that time the VB will come up with some dates instead of "U". As Rajiv said, there might have been many instances of these lawsuits in which USCIS got away. I doubt, if we can even touch the DOS on this because, CA/VO is just one part of DOS and DOS is too powerful to be touched
Q. Can we file a lawsuit?
A. Here is a legal answer as I see it. I hope I am proven wrong. I will elaborate further in our conference call. In my view, the lawsuit has a slim chance of succeess, but not in DC circuit. Our circuit is not likely to interfere with the exec easily. The strongest point is that govt. is changing a long standing practice, which requires rule-making under APA. The govt. will, of course, argue that they have issued amendments in the past and that this practice does not affect substantive rights. That would probably fly in the face of AC21 portability benefit which is, no doubt a substantive right.
Mootness is not a problem usually, because in a putative class action, we can always add more plaintiffs. Also, there are exceptions to mootness that could see a suit through.
I have not looked at the issues in great detail. Nevertheless, I think, the biggest problem is, if we dont get a hearing and an order within the month of July, the Court may have to dismiss the suit for inabaility to order relief (against the statute). This situation has occurred many, many times in the context of DV lottery cases.
abcdefgh
01-18 12:27 PM
http://www..com/discussion-forums/dallas-backlog/1171607/#post-6787022
This is what I found from other web site when I tried to get more membership to IV. These are the comments I received for the IV. How can we make people aware of our good faith effort. This is another road block we are facing. Many people will not believe that our efforts in full good faith. IV needs to put more emphasis on these issues also.
Just opinions.
Thanks
This is what I found from other web site when I tried to get more membership to IV. These are the comments I received for the IV. How can we make people aware of our good faith effort. This is another road block we are facing. Many people will not believe that our efforts in full good faith. IV needs to put more emphasis on these issues also.
Just opinions.
Thanks
2011 happy birthday my love poems.
Dhundhun
07-12 08:02 PM
I feel this move is to benefit EB-2 China, Since the EB1 and EB2 overflow are evenly distributed across china and india, ...
As I understand overflow is not supposed to be evenly distributed. It is supposed to be distributed based on PD. So overflow make PD of all the countries taking benefit of overflow same.
As I understand overflow is not supposed to be evenly distributed. It is supposed to be distributed based on PD. So overflow make PD of all the countries taking benefit of overflow same.
more...
.soulty
03-09 08:00 PM
just enter whatever you have on the date and then fix it up after.. no drama, you can always use this piece for a portfolio or something and you can showcase it later.
maddipati1
03-12 07:20 AM
ur and some others optimism amazes me.. :D
seems like u r already planning for getting ready for next visa bull(shit)etin ... and after parties... :D
now looks like dates would move only after july..
seems like u r already planning for getting ready for next visa bull(shit)etin ... and after parties... :D
now looks like dates would move only after july..
more...
rayoflight
05-26 11:54 PM
Here is the link on CNN on the new rules being implemented..
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TRAVEL/05/26/canada.passport.requirement/index.html
http://www.cnn.com/2009/TRAVEL/05/26/canada.passport.requirement/index.html
2010 Funny poems - Love poems
nitlsu
06-12 08:45 AM
Done for me and spouse. We also had ~20 other people in my neighborhood including citizens/GC send this.
more...
chanduv23
09-10 03:59 PM
Andy Garciaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa is coming to the rallyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy
hair love poems in spanish for him.
willwin
03-17 03:12 PM
Right. But here USCIS plays its villain role. What happens is USCIS moves clock ahead depending upon last month's "demand." We always think stramline logic.. USCIS does not work that way. It will kick PD to x date for an example Dec 2002. Now at the same time it will keep RD at say for example july 2001..Now it will keep some files eating dust in Name check so end effect is "Some" will get their gC. So next month, seeing this "demand" USCIS will kick PD further.. same game.. I believe at some level it decides seeing it reaching to "3500" limit put a break. So in reality what happen is even though USCIS kicks PD ahead not "all applicants with valid PD" get their GC. If they are unlucky enough to stuck in name check or RD is not being current, they will again wait for years for next kicking cycle start from April 2001.
But when that happens, I guess, guys in CP wil get their interview scheduled (as long as their PD is current; no RD date concept there) as the queue in CP is not as long. Correct?
But when that happens, I guess, guys in CP wil get their interview scheduled (as long as their PD is current; no RD date concept there) as the queue in CP is not as long. Correct?
more...
Macaca
09-26 10:46 AM
About us (http://mediamatters.org/about_us/)
Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.
Launched in May 2004, Media Matters for America put in place, for the first time, the means to systematically monitor a cross section of print, broadcast, cable, radio, and Internet media outlets for conservative misinformation � news or commentary that is not accurate, reliable, or credible and that forwards the conservative agenda � every day, in real time.
Using the website www.mediamatters.org as the principal vehicle for disseminating research and information, Media Matters posts rapid-response items as well as longer research and analytic reports documenting conservative misinformation throughout the media. Additionally, Media Matters works daily to notify activists, journalists, pundits, and the general public about instances of misinformation, providing them with the resources to rebut false claims and to take direct action against offending media institutions. Contact Us (http://mediamatters.org/contact_us): mm-tips@mediametters.org
Media Matters for America is a Web-based, not-for-profit, 501(c)(3) progressive research and information center dedicated to comprehensively monitoring, analyzing, and correcting conservative misinformation in the U.S. media.
Launched in May 2004, Media Matters for America put in place, for the first time, the means to systematically monitor a cross section of print, broadcast, cable, radio, and Internet media outlets for conservative misinformation � news or commentary that is not accurate, reliable, or credible and that forwards the conservative agenda � every day, in real time.
Using the website www.mediamatters.org as the principal vehicle for disseminating research and information, Media Matters posts rapid-response items as well as longer research and analytic reports documenting conservative misinformation throughout the media. Additionally, Media Matters works daily to notify activists, journalists, pundits, and the general public about instances of misinformation, providing them with the resources to rebut false claims and to take direct action against offending media institutions. Contact Us (http://mediamatters.org/contact_us): mm-tips@mediametters.org
hot Love Poems of all Time
gc_on_demand
02-12 02:47 PM
Waste of time : So many people and so many minutes.
Waste of space on site : IV lost some space because of this thread.
Marketing gain : That immi business So many people visited their site when they came on IV and saw this sizzling thread about visa wastage.
Decide yourself who won and who lost...
Waste of space on site : IV lost some space because of this thread.
Marketing gain : That immi business So many people visited their site when they came on IV and saw this sizzling thread about visa wastage.
Decide yourself who won and who lost...
more...
house love poems sad. sad love poems
immi2006
02-22 07:26 PM
Hi,
I called USCIS today, i was asked to take infopass to get a status update on my case, as it was pending in local office. I am not sure why.
My PD is 2001 March, from Dallas BEC - LC cleared on June 2007. Filed 140+485 on July 2. In my company atleast 400 - 500 number of EB2 cases came thru in June 2007, there were a few hundred lcs from BEC for EB3 too..from 2000-2001 time frame, based on some of the threads I have seen. We are one of the largest networking company in San Jose, here. I am sure there are other companoies that have good number of folks, also depends on how many stuck on..
Filed my 10 th year H1 extension,
PD March 2001
EB2 - Category - Adv Degree
Country - India
Degree - Research IIT/IISc Bangalore.
Following advice of 'Googler' i skimmed through the USCIS OMbud's report. So USCIS is not able to accurately 'count' the cases because old cases at local offices are not accounted in system (?) . Otherwise it would have been a quick data base query to obtain whatever statistics.
And i was interested in knowing how many India EB2 pending till Oct.2002 ;-)
I called USCIS today, i was asked to take infopass to get a status update on my case, as it was pending in local office. I am not sure why.
My PD is 2001 March, from Dallas BEC - LC cleared on June 2007. Filed 140+485 on July 2. In my company atleast 400 - 500 number of EB2 cases came thru in June 2007, there were a few hundred lcs from BEC for EB3 too..from 2000-2001 time frame, based on some of the threads I have seen. We are one of the largest networking company in San Jose, here. I am sure there are other companoies that have good number of folks, also depends on how many stuck on..
Filed my 10 th year H1 extension,
PD March 2001
EB2 - Category - Adv Degree
Country - India
Degree - Research IIT/IISc Bangalore.
Following advice of 'Googler' i skimmed through the USCIS OMbud's report. So USCIS is not able to accurately 'count' the cases because old cases at local offices are not accounted in system (?) . Otherwise it would have been a quick data base query to obtain whatever statistics.
And i was interested in knowing how many India EB2 pending till Oct.2002 ;-)
tattoo love poems about blue eyes.
immi_2006
09-26 10:29 AM
Check this
http://morejazzbythebay.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/cnn-misreports-purpose-of-immigrationvoice-rally/
Lets spread the message....
http://morejazzbythebay.wordpress.com/2007/09/26/cnn-misreports-purpose-of-immigrationvoice-rally/
Lets spread the message....
more...
pictures the best love poems for a
McLuvin
03-12 01:55 PM
finally the bulletin has been posted in the DOS website...
Visa Bulletin for April 2010 (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4747.html)
They have given a brief description about "BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS"
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, a significant amount of demand is received each month for applicants who have priority dates which are significantly earlier than the applicable cut-off dates. In addition, fluctuations in demand can cause cut-off date movement to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed. Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however.
Applicability of Section 202(a)(5): INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act, removed the per-country limit on Employment-based immigrants in any calendar quarter in which applicant demand for numbers in one or more Employment-based preferences is less than the total of such numbers available. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5) has allowed countries such as China � mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused. Such numbers are provided strictly in priority date order without regard to the foreign state chargeability, and the same cut-off date applies to any country benefiting from this provision.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by documentarily qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation, that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may require the establishment of an earlier cut-off date than that which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, �2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.� The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state�s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.
Visa Bulletin for April 2010 (http://www.travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/bulletin/bulletin_4747.html)
They have given a brief description about "BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON FREQUENTLY MISUNDERSTOOD POINTS"
Applicants entitled to immigrant status become documentarily qualified at their own initiative and convenience. By no means has every applicant with a priority date earlier than a prevailing cut-off date been processed for final visa action. On the contrary, a significant amount of demand is received each month for applicants who have priority dates which are significantly earlier than the applicable cut-off dates. In addition, fluctuations in demand can cause cut-off date movement to slow, stop, or even retrogress. Retrogression is particularly possible near the end of the fiscal year as visa issuance approaches the annual limitations.
Per-country limit: The annual per-country limitation of 7% is a cap which visa issuances to any single country may not exceed. Applicants compete for visas primarily on a worldwide basis. The country limitation serves to avoid monopolization of virtually all the annual limitation by applicants from only a few countries. This limitation is not a quota to which any particular country is entitled, however.
Applicability of Section 202(a)(5): INA Section 202(a)(5), added by the American Competitiveness in the 21st Century Act, removed the per-country limit on Employment-based immigrants in any calendar quarter in which applicant demand for numbers in one or more Employment-based preferences is less than the total of such numbers available. In recent years, the application of Section 202(a)(5) has allowed countries such as China � mainland born and India to utilize large amounts of Employment First and Second preference numbers which would have otherwise gone unused. Such numbers are provided strictly in priority date order without regard to the foreign state chargeability, and the same cut-off date applies to any country benefiting from this provision.
Applicability of Section 202(e): When visa demand by documentarily qualified applicants from a particular country exceeds the amount of numbers available under the annual numerical limitation, that country is considered to be oversubscribed. Oversubscription may require the establishment of an earlier cut-off date than that which applies to a particular visa category on a worldwide basis. The prorating of numbers for an oversubscribed country follows the same percentages specified for the division of the worldwide annual limitation among the preferences. (Note that visa availability cut-off dates for oversubscribed areas may not be later than worldwide cut-off dates, if any, for the respective preferences.)
Furthermore, Section 202(a)(2) reads, �2) Per country levels for family-sponsored and employment-based immigrants. Subject to paragraphs (3), (4), and (5), the total number of immigrant visas made available to natives of any single foreign state or dependent area under subsections (a) and (b) of section 203 in any fiscal year may not exceed seven percent (in the case of a single foreign state) or two percent (in the case of a dependent area) of the total number of such visas made available under such subsections in that fiscal year.� The seven percent per-country limit specified in INA 202(a)(2) is considered to be for both Family-sponsored and Employment-based numbers combined.
Allocation of visa numbers under Section 202(e) is accomplished as follows:
If based on historical patterns or current demand it appears that during a fiscal year number use by aliens chargeable to a particular country will exceed the per-country numerical limit for both the Family and Employment preferences combined, that country would be considered oversubscribed. Both the Family and Employment preferences would be subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1).
Sometimes during a fiscal year it may become apparent that because of a lack of demand in the Family preferences, number use by aliens chargeable to an oversubscribed country will be well within the per-country numerical limit. In such case the excess Family numbers would be made available to the Employment preferences subject to the prorating provisions of INA 202(e)(1). Each of the first three Employment categories would receive 28.6% of the excess numbers, and each of the Fourth and Fifth preference categories 7.1%. (Fall-across would likewise apply if an oversubscribed country lacked sufficient demand in the Employment preferences but had excess demand in the Family preferences.)
If a foreign state other than an oversubscribed country has little Family preference demand but considerable Employment preference demand, the otherwise unused Family numbers fall across to Employment (and vice versa) for purposes of that foreign state�s annual numerical limit. For example, in FY-2009 South Korea used a grand total of 15,899 Family and Employment preference numbers, of which 1,688 were Family numbers and 14,211 were Employment numbers. This grand total was well within the FY-2009 per-country numerical limit of 25,620 Family and Employment numbers combined, so South Korea was not oversubscribed. The unused Family numbers were distributed within the Employment categories, allowing South Korea to be considerably over the 9,800 Employment limit which would have been in effect had it been an oversubscribed country.
dresses love poems in tamil
gunabcd
07-13 10:57 PM
http://www.murthy.com/chertoff_murthy.html
July 12, 2007
VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS
Michael Chertoff, Esq.
Secretary
Department of Homeland Security
RE: USCIS Decision to Reject I-485 Filings
Dear Mr. Chertoff:
continue
Looks like "Jbpvisa" wanted to win the race of posting this article first, and he/she mis-spelled "Murthy" as Murphy. recently somebody came up with a "Secret News.." which was actually his own far fetched fantasy. I don't understand why some people are so thrilled about throwing around sensational sounding posts ? Isn't that similar to creating a chain email hoax?
July 12, 2007
VIA FEDERAL EXPRESS
Michael Chertoff, Esq.
Secretary
Department of Homeland Security
RE: USCIS Decision to Reject I-485 Filings
Dear Mr. Chertoff:
continue
Looks like "Jbpvisa" wanted to win the race of posting this article first, and he/she mis-spelled "Murthy" as Murphy. recently somebody came up with a "Secret News.." which was actually his own far fetched fantasy. I don't understand why some people are so thrilled about throwing around sensational sounding posts ? Isn't that similar to creating a chain email hoax?
more...
makeup poems for. love poems for
priderock
04-10 04:12 PM
How about sending back all H1Bs ? If there is no cheap labor around , the salaries for all others (Citizens and GC holders) go up. I so want to see 250 an hour rates.
Applying your logic , you should get a job in your home country if you are smart enough.
If you want a good discussion on a topic stop generalizing things and do not use rants like racist engineers etc. When you make an assumption please be clear about. You have assumed most people work for consulting companies and most people are frustrated with it. Not so. I don't work for them and I am not frustrated with them. My only concern with them is they are exploiting the system to their advantage and at my cost. This has two fold affect not only the take cut from your salary but also put a bad name to H1B visa program in general. Whoever wrote the bill or whatever are the consequences there is definitely some good things in that bill. Let me list out how some provisions are good:
1. If you are employable in US and you have the skills you will get the job with or without these middlemen. They come into picture only because they can start a corporation and then start the exploitation game. If a bill is taking these guys out what's wrong with it ? This will allow genuine corporations to hire the right candidates.
2. Putting 30 days of ad. to hire US citizens first ? What's wrong with it ? If their skills are really outdated and you are the best and the brightest you will get the job.
If you need more evidence of why H1B program needs reform look no further than H1B cap used up on first day. This has put good undue hard ship for good candidates while Infosys/Wipro etc will once again take the lion's share of H1B numbers. Why do you want them to win at your cost ? Stop calling people affected by this mess as "Racist Engineers". Try to put yourself in their shoes and some of these practices are affecting both the H1B visa holders (with indentured servitude) and citizens with wage depression. No body wins in the end but the people who are exploiting the system.
Applying your logic , you should get a job in your home country if you are smart enough.
If you want a good discussion on a topic stop generalizing things and do not use rants like racist engineers etc. When you make an assumption please be clear about. You have assumed most people work for consulting companies and most people are frustrated with it. Not so. I don't work for them and I am not frustrated with them. My only concern with them is they are exploiting the system to their advantage and at my cost. This has two fold affect not only the take cut from your salary but also put a bad name to H1B visa program in general. Whoever wrote the bill or whatever are the consequences there is definitely some good things in that bill. Let me list out how some provisions are good:
1. If you are employable in US and you have the skills you will get the job with or without these middlemen. They come into picture only because they can start a corporation and then start the exploitation game. If a bill is taking these guys out what's wrong with it ? This will allow genuine corporations to hire the right candidates.
2. Putting 30 days of ad. to hire US citizens first ? What's wrong with it ? If their skills are really outdated and you are the best and the brightest you will get the job.
If you need more evidence of why H1B program needs reform look no further than H1B cap used up on first day. This has put good undue hard ship for good candidates while Infosys/Wipro etc will once again take the lion's share of H1B numbers. Why do you want them to win at your cost ? Stop calling people affected by this mess as "Racist Engineers". Try to put yourself in their shoes and some of these practices are affecting both the H1B visa holders (with indentured servitude) and citizens with wage depression. No body wins in the end but the people who are exploiting the system.
girlfriend free ecards love poems
sri1309
01-25 09:18 AM
For my part, I send an email everyday to the white house and the state dept. This is probably not enough.....but may be some day it will work.
BTW, my apologies if the members thought that this thread was accusatory. Still the question remains, what next?
Ok, I understand, no use bringing it up again, sorry, let me go back and read other interesting threads on "investments" and "buying houses"...
The issue is like a BIG bus where we all are together travelling to the same destination. And the bus is stuck in a pit. You and I can push, .. will it help?. What else do you do. You make others also come and push. So, how many people were you able to convince to do what you did.. Dont just convince them, make them also spread the message.
If you want content to be passed, there are many threads here. One is mine, which is "chain reaction..). Its now buried somewhere :(.
I know some people do realize things only when they loose their jobs or when its too late. If realization happens only that way, I wish all of you those not participating actively loose their jobs and hence comes realization that will help you and us all. Hope that happens very fast..
"Agar booth lathon se hi soon sakthe hai, tho lathon hi sahi..".. How my quote on 10..
BTW, my apologies if the members thought that this thread was accusatory. Still the question remains, what next?
Ok, I understand, no use bringing it up again, sorry, let me go back and read other interesting threads on "investments" and "buying houses"...
The issue is like a BIG bus where we all are together travelling to the same destination. And the bus is stuck in a pit. You and I can push, .. will it help?. What else do you do. You make others also come and push. So, how many people were you able to convince to do what you did.. Dont just convince them, make them also spread the message.
If you want content to be passed, there are many threads here. One is mine, which is "chain reaction..). Its now buried somewhere :(.
I know some people do realize things only when they loose their jobs or when its too late. If realization happens only that way, I wish all of you those not participating actively loose their jobs and hence comes realization that will help you and us all. Hope that happens very fast..
"Agar booth lathon se hi soon sakthe hai, tho lathon hi sahi..".. How my quote on 10..
hairstyles love poems for lovers. to
vkrishn
07-13 06:57 PM
I thought it will not be of much use since my PD wasn'tcurrent. Can you let me know the procedure to open a SR?
NH123
05-15 04:58 PM
Read my friend read! "Assuming a Harvard M.B.A graduate on a average make $120k out-of-school if would take 15 years for him to break-even even with all the increments and bonuses.". Do everyone who graduate from MIT Sloan make $200k after 3 years of graduation? Think about it. What do you think average salary of a ISB graduates is when you were hearing students getting offers of Rs. 1 crore? It was only 15Lacs.
I did read my friend where you were assuming Bonuses and increments does not make significant part of the salaries! But i think you are comparing apple with the oranges when you compare MIT sloan with ISB.However i agree with you 100% and the other fellow that the reson to do MBA is for personal career goals rather than calculating ROI.
I did read my friend where you were assuming Bonuses and increments does not make significant part of the salaries! But i think you are comparing apple with the oranges when you compare MIT sloan with ISB.However i agree with you 100% and the other fellow that the reson to do MBA is for personal career goals rather than calculating ROI.
ramus
07-02 10:31 PM
Thank you.. I see you just joined last month.. Happy to see new member contributing.. Please update our main thread and ask others to contribute..
Here is my contribution Google Order #920441777988850
Here is my contribution Google Order #920441777988850