Friday, July 8, 2011

common sensibility

images makeup common sensibility. common sensibility. common sensibility. common
  • common sensibility. common

  • Macaca
    03-06 09:00 PM
    A Peek Into Corporate America (

    Not waiting for Congress to impose new disclosure laws, shareholder activists have persuaded some of the nation's largest companies to disclose their political spending on such things as issue campaigns. General Electric, Hewlett-Packard and American Electric Power recently agreed to report how much they give trade associations for politics and lobbying. Home Depot said it would report "soft money" gifts such as corporate donations to political advocacy groups.

    The decision was announced by the Center for Political Accountability, Trillium Asset Management and Green Century Capital Management. The four companies join 15 other major corporations that have adopted increased transparency policies since 2005.

    Separately, Aegon USA, a financial services firm, has begun to list on its campaign finance reports the events at which it gives money to politicians, a disclosure not required by law. It said its $5,000 donation to the leadership fund of Sen. Thomas R. Carper (D-Del.) was made during a "ski weekend." Anyone see a trend?

    wallpaper common sensibility. common common sensibility. dota common sensibility. MatsP
  • dota common sensibility. MatsP

  • SunnySurya
    12-18 10:22 AM
    Nobody went to Mohammed Atta's house to destoy his building. They were the ones who crashed into the world tower.
    Nobody came to Kasab's house and killed his brothers and sisters, yet he went on to become a terrorist. It is very easy to stop rational thought and breed hatred. It is loose thinking like yours that perpetuates terrorism. There are injustices all over the world, yet not everyone goes on a spree killing inncoent people.

    common sensibility. common sensibility.
  • common sensibility.

  • buehler
    07-18 07:09 AM
    hi Guys,
    I was thinking over this for quite some time. Why dont we hire one or two immigration attorneys on a full time basis. And lets start am immigration office where we can have all our immigration works (doubtful) but the future immigrant works ata marginally cheaper rates with high quality of service. If we keep a no profit no loss mantra, it would be helpful to everyone and also it will make this organization very strong.
    Lets discuss its relevance? What does the Core think about this.?


    I know how happy you when you came up with this idea, but do you really have to cross post it in so many different threads and forums? In what way is it relevant in this particular thread?

    2011 dota common sensibility. MatsP common sensibility. based on a common love for
  • based on a common love for

  • GCapplicant
    07-13 04:46 PM
    I am just losing confidence.Just wondering how they have moved only the second category -when there is someone highly retrogressed.
    To fail the bills so no one will work for that anymore or just because EB2 is superior than EB3 or am I confusing myself.So once if EB2I becomes C and then EB3row C will EB3 I atleast move.

    Its just a spillover,why cant they give it equally.Why no one is ready to question for us?


    common sensibility. wallpaper common sensibility
  • wallpaper common sensibility

  • Pagal
    06-20 07:29 AM

    Though housing market may still have room to fall and not rise again for next decade or so, there are some factors to consider in 2009 that could tilt the decision in favor of buying a house:

    1. Location - If you are not in bad markets like CA, NY, FL but in more stable ones like TX, you should evaluate
    2. Taxes - If you've AGI above 300k, buying house is one of the few options left to reduce your tax bill
    3. Affordability - If your monthly mortgage, interest and maintenance payments are comparable to current rent amount (as taxes are adjusted during tax filing) and affordable even when you move out of US, buying house should be an option
    4. Price - If you are looking at localities where prices are close to 1995-2000 levels and the particular property has held the value steady, then buying the house could be an option

    Just my 2 cents... :)

    common sensibility. John Prine - Common Sense
  • John Prine - Common Sense

  • Macaca
    05-01 05:56 PM
    In growing Chinese dominance, a wake-up call for America ( By Arvind Subramanian | The Washington Post

    The world’s two economic superpowers will meet soon for the third installment of their Strategic and Economic Dialogue. Beyond the specifics, the real issue for the United States and the world is China’s looming economic dominance. President Obama’s State of the Union address, after President Hu Jintao’s visit in January, showed the level of anxiety that policymakers feel about China as a potential rival and perhaps a threat, with growing economic, military and political power, including its bankrolling of American debt. But judging from the reaction to the president’s speech, that threat is not viewed as imminent. The same was said, some pointed out, of the rise of Russia and Japan, 40 and 20 years ago, respectively, and those threats turned out to be false alarms.

    But what if the threat is actually greater than policymakers suppose?

    According to the International Monetary Fund, for example, total U.S. gross domestic product in 2010 was $14.7 trillion, more than twice China’s $5.8 trillion, making the average American about 11 times more affluent than the average Chinese. Goldman Sachs does not forecast the Chinese economy overtaking that of the United States until 2025 at the earliest. Americans also draw satisfaction from their unmatched strengths of an open society, an entrepreneurial culture, and world-class universities and research institutions.

    But these beliefs may be overly sanguine. The underlying numbers that contribute to them are a little misleading because they are based on converting the value of goods and services around the world into dollars at market exchange rates.

    It has long been recognized that using the market exchange rate to value goods and services is misleading about the real costs of living in different countries. Several goods and services that are not traded across borders (medical care, retail services, construction, etc.) are cheaper in poorer countries because labor is abundant. Using the market exchange rate to compare living standards across countries understates the benefits that citizens in poor countries enjoy from having access to these goods and services. Estimates of purchasing power parity take account of these differing costs and are an alternative, and for some purposes a better, way of computing and comparing standards of living and economic output across countries.

    My calculations (explained in greater detail on the Peterson Institute Web site) show that the Chinese economy in 2010, adjusted for purchasing power, was worth about $14.8 trillion, surpassing that of the United States. And, on this basis, the average American is “only” four times as wealthy as the average Chinese, not 11 times as rich, as the conventional numbers suggest.

    The different approaches to valuing economic output and resources are not just of theoretical interest. They have real-world significance, especially in the balance of power and economic dominance. The conventional numbers would suggest that the United States has three times the capability of China to mobilize real military resources in the event of a conflict. The numbers based on purchasing-power parity suggest that conventional estimates considerably exaggerate U.S. capability. To the extent that the service of soldiers and other domestically produced goods and services constitute real military resources, the purchasing-power parity numbers must also be taken into account.

    The economic advantage China is gaining will only widen in the future because China’s gross domestic product growth rate will be substantially and consistently greater than that of the United States for the near future. By 2030, I expect the Chinese economy to be twice as large as that of the United States (in purchasing-power parity dollars).

    Moreover, China’s lead will not be confined to GDP. China is already the world’s largest exporter of goods. By 2030, China’s trade volume will be twice that of the United States. And, of course, China is also a net creditor to the United States.

    The combination of economic size, trade and creditor status will confer on China a kind of economic dominance that the United States enjoyed for about five to six decades after World War II and that Britain enjoyed at the peak of empire in the late 19th century.

    This will matter in two important ways. America’s ability to influence China will be seriously diminished, which is already evident in China’s unwillingness to change its exchange rate policy despite U.S. urging. And the open trading and financial system that the United States fashioned after World War II will be increasingly China’s to sustain or undermine.

    The new numbers, the underlying realities they represent and the future they portend must serve as a wake-up call for America to get its fiscal house in order and quickly find new sources of economic dynamism if it is not to cede its preeminence to a rising, perhaps already risen, China.

    Arvind Subramanian is a senior fellow at the Peterson Institute and the author of a forthcoming book on China’s economic dominance

    America vs China: A reality check ( By Arvind Subramanian | Business Standard
    The Chinese Are Coming! ( By Douglas H. Paal | The Diploma
    Do American Students Study Too Hard?
    A new documentary argues that kids these days memorize too many facts. Go figure. (
    By JAMES FREEMAN | Wall Street Journal
    Eyeing the White House After Service in China ( By MICHAEL WINES | New York Times

    At Microsoft, future growth rides on research, innovation ( By G. ANANTHAKRISHNAN | Hindu
    Financial crisis? What financial crisis? ( By Steven Pearlstein | The Washington Post
    The free-trade trade ( The Washington Post Editorial
    Running in the red: How the U.S., on the road to surplus, detoured to massive debt ( By Lori Montgomery | The Washington Post


    common sensibility. common enough sensibility,
  • common enough sensibility,

  • chintu25
    08-05 11:55 AM
    I am requesting an amendment to the spelling of "mahaul".
    I think it would sound better if we spelled it as "mahole" :D

    Mohol --> :D

    2010 common sensibility. common sensibility. makeup common sensibility.
  • makeup common sensibility.

  • gapala
    06-05 07:12 PM
    Guys... Do not just look at individual rent vs. own comparision, have a bigger picture on the situation that we are in. I am tired of broker's "location..location...location" thing as well.. These things are way off the reality in this country..

    Historically, we all have seen that markets goes up and some times bubbles up, and goes down for a correction, some times south into recession.. .This is quiet natural to happen.. be it housing market or money market. We all know that Housing market needs a correction from those days where prices went up by $20,000 a month for several months without any control driven by easy credit, 0 down and stupid stated income policies.. Sure enough.. market started to correct itself after the credit become tight and lot of folks who jumped on to buy house at the top of peak went under water due to drop in the value of their homes... Here comes the obama housing rescue plan.. what are they trying to do here? trying to maintiain the bubble by encouraging more credit and spending.. working against natural correction of home prices towards south.

    Now lets look at whats happening around us and see if we will have returns on house as an investment.. (For those who are without GC, this becomes important).

    The gross domestic product (GDP) or gross domestic income (GDI) of US, a basic measure of an economy's economic performance, is about $13 Trillion per year as widely reported and boasted. Of that amount, approximately half, or $6.5 Trillion, is directly or indirectly related to government spending on the Federal, State, and Local levels.. :)

    Think about that for a second, about half of US current GDP is government spending? Does it sounds like developing nation? and due to job loss, loss of interest income, strained consumer keeps cutting back..the economy will contract further and eventually the goverment spending will be a major portion.

    US does not produce any consumer goods, its all China..if you don't produce you don't sell and if you don't sell you don't make an income, and if you don't make an income you don't pay taxes...plain and simple. So, what do we do, Borrow and spend.. but remember, the interest obligations will grow to suck the dollars away from goods and services that it purchases. (Folks are in China now :D)

    Due to a struggling economy, primarily driven by consumers credit crunch, lower sales means, less revenue for government and they must borrow more money to keep the government machine spending and the economy rolling despite lower tax revenues.

    It was all good when Consumers and Government borrowed, as long as they could find someone to lend and collectively could spend. During the bubble, banks lent to consumers freely and foreigners lent to Government until banks and foreigners realized we simply borrowed too much slowed lending as it became much more difficult to service the debt. Now banks are not lending to consumers with less than best rating and the government is forcing banks to lend to consumers by loaning banks TAXPAYER money at 1/4% and the banks loan it right back to us at 4.5 yo 5.5% now. How about that? :D:D

    Due to lack of credit for non-government sector, of US economy...private sector is becoming much poorer much faster creating an imbalance in the society. Mathematically private sector going south will continue due to the very high leverage on the Private Side as more and more dwindling dollars are simply allocated to paying interest due to less revenues. With time a greater and greater percentage of a troubled economy will be directly consumed by rising interest payments resulting in less
    government spending which might lead us to an inflation, wages will never keep up with exploding commodity prices. Then only option remains Tax increases on those who earn :)
    Because, Right now a huge portion of government spending is feeding the poor, housing assistance, and providing medical care to the poor and elderly. Once the government bailout dry up, fewer and fewer will be able to borrow, work on and pay taxes in private sector, fewer and fewer will be able to pay taxes and the burden will rest on the shoulders of those that have something to offer...all what they have will not be enough to sustain a $13 Trillion dollar economy.

    With such a scenario, house prices cannot stay up at more than 4 times the desposible income of majority (middle class) population which remains at less than mere USD 30000. You can imagine now, what is going to happen if home prices does not correct itself due to government interfearance.

    Its an individual perspective to decide to buy home.. Do comment and throw out your ideas..

    You can find my analysis of housing market on link below (india vs. US)


    common sensibility. sensibility common to
  • sensibility common to

  • Macaca
    01-10 05:54 PM
    K Street Expects Thin '08 Agenda ( By Kate Ackley | ROLL CALL, Jan 7 2008

    Lobbyists expect 2008 to be a year of volatile partisan bickering from the campaign trail to the floor of the House and Senate, likely resulting in only a short list of legislative accomplishments that actually cross the finish line.

    "In the past 12 months Democrats and Republicans weren't playing very well together in the sandbox, and the next 12 months I predict it's going to be even worse in the sandbox," said GOP tax lobbyist Ken Kies of the Federal Policy Group.

    Don't expect comprehensive immigration or health care reform to pass; instead, lobbyists say they are urging Members to split off little pieces like increased visas for certain workers or a law mandating doctors to electronically prescribe medicines to their Medicare patients.

    Patent reform legislation could make it. Ditto for popular measures such as a tax credit for companies that do research and development, especially if Congress puts together an economic stimulus package that could also address the housing and lending crisis. However, trade agreements and the reauthorization of No Child Left Behind would be much heavier lifts.

    On the flip side, legislative gridlock easily could help lobbyists trying to fend off unwanted tax increases and sweeping climate-change legislation. "It's almost always easier to stop things, but it's going to be even easier this year with a very limited amount of time on the Congressional calendar and the politically charged atmosphere," said Democratic strategist Chris Jennings of Jennings Policy Strategies.

    Mark Merritt, president of the Pharmaceutical Care Management Association, said his group is taking cues from the White House contestants when it comes to health care.

    "The presidential campaigns provide a good bellwether as to the kind of issues that are going to resonate in Congress this year," Merritt said. "Issues that are new, involve change, issues that don't involve hobbling around with the status quo but doing things differently."

    Merritt said his group is pushing for the bill to mandate electronic prescriptions by doctors for Medicare patients. "It's compelling, it offers change plus safety for patients and savings for the government," he said. "I think these are the issues that are going to succeed this year."

    Even so, Merritt doesn't expect an easy road. He said PCMA plans to ramp up its e-prescribing lobbying effort with polling, blogging and TV and radio advertisements.

    Jennings, a health care consultant and former senior health care adviser to President Bill Clinton, said Congress will likely take up legislation this year to avoid Medicare physician payment cuts and to jump-start e-prescribing. But don't expect broader health care reforms to go anywhere this year beyond campaign discussions, he added.

    "I think you're going to see Congress dabbling in incremental reforms this year, but primarily it will be a year to lay the foundation for a broader debate on health care reform in 2009 and beyond," said Jennings, who counts PCMA among his clients.

    Despite long odds for the free-trade agenda, Bruce Josten, executive vice president at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, said his group will put a lot of effort into getting Congress to take up pending agreements with Colombia, Panama and South Korea.

    "A lot of people are going to tell you they're going to do nothing, but my hunch is they're going to move on some of them," he said. "Clearly the business community will put a lot of effort behind getting them to be taken up."

    John Castellani, president of Business Roundtable, agreed that his group will push for all three trade agreements - no matter how steep the odds. BRT also will urge Congress to mandate e-prescribing and call for a move to electronic medical records.

    Steve Elmendorf - the founder of Elmendorf Strategies, which represents the Coalition for Patent Fairness, which supports a House-passed patent reform bill and a version pending in the Senate - said he expects the Senate to take up the issue early this year, perhaps hitting the floor by February, where it will encounter fierce opposition by pharmaceutical companies in particular.

    "There aren't many bills that are around that have passed the House with a bipartisan majority," Elmendorf said. "We believe if we got to the floor it would get more than 60 votes. The other side is going to aggressively try and kill it. It's going to be a hard fight."

    The entertainment industry is hoping to get traction for one of its long-running issues. It has pushed for new laws to protect copyrighted materials, and the Chamber's Josten said the larger business community and some unions are getting on board because they are worried about the impact that counterfeiting has on jobs and sectors beyond Hollywood, including pharmaceuticals.

    "We're starting to turn a corner with Congress on this," Josten said. "I think we're going to see legislation this year come out of Congress."

    Business groups will look to fend off increased taxes on hedge funds and private equity partnerships and prevent massive carbon-curving climate-change legislation. "It's going to be a big fight," Josten said.

    hair based on a common love for common sensibility. common sensibility. common
  • common sensibility. common

  • satishku_2000
    08-02 06:12 PM

    A simple question here ... I know that if an I 140 gets rejected 485 results in automatic denial as well as denial of all associated benifits. Is there any use with the labor? Can it be used to file for 140 again or can it be used to extend the H1B after 6 years.


    common sensibility. common rapper sensibility.
  • common rapper sensibility.

  • Macaca
    09-27 12:06 PM
    In defense of lobbying ( This country�s Founders actually set up a system to encourage the petitioning of government. And yes, like it or not, that means lobbyists have the same claims to the First Amendment as our free press does By Ross K. Baker | USA Today, sep 27, 2007

    Ross K. Baker is a political science professor at Rutgers University. He also is a member of USA TODAY's board of contributors.

    There was a moment in one of the recent Democratic debates in which former senator John Edwards practically accused Sen. Hillary Clinton of being in league with the devil. For some time, he had been attacking her for accepting contributions from lobbyists. Now, using the occasion of a just-passed lobbying reform bill awaiting the signature of a skeptical president, he exceeded even his previous needling of her by suggesting guilt-by-association. Turning to the audience, he charged that lobbyists, such as those who contribute to Clinton, "rig the system against all of you ("

    Edwards' accusations deftly played into a belief common even among well-educated Americans that lobbying, if not actually illegal, is a blot on American politics. The problem with this belief is that it is misinformed.

    It might come as a surprise to most people that lobbying is a constitutionally protected activity ( under the hallowed First Amendment. After the Founding Fathers cast the cloak of protection over freedom of religion, the press and the right to peacefully assemble, they added a category that could not be infringed upon by the federal government: "to petition the government for a redress of grievances ("

    Few contemporary efforts to influence government action come by way of a formal petition. But the idea of giving citizens access to government was seen by the writers of the Constitution as something worth safeguarding. And it is, indeed, worth safeguarding because every group in America, at one time or another, has got a gripe and turns to Congress or the federal bureaucracy.

    Groups engaged in activities that might seem wholly unconnected with politics, such as the American Automobile Association ( (the folks who get your car started on cold mornings), maintain a presence in Washington to monitor what goes on in Congress. When lawmakers and congressional staffers return from their summer recess, the army of lobbyists storms Washington alongside them.

    Religious and military organizations, despite the apolitical nature of our armed forces and the Jeffersonian wall of separation between church and state, stick very close to Congress. So close are the Methodists ( 20Church%20and%20Society&qc=%28All%29%20Places%20Of%20Worship) and the Reserve Officers Association ( that their Washington offices literally overlook the Senate office buildings.

    To be sure, the vast bulk of the roughly 35,000 lobbyists in town represent businesses and industries. Nonetheless, as citizens of a commercial republic, should this really surprise us?

    A vision of dueling interests

    James Madison recognized the tendency of Americans to advance their own economic self-interest at the expense of the general good and pondered what to do about it. He dismissed ( the possibility of banning these "factions," arguing that they are a byproduct of our freedom.

    His solution was just to allow them to multiply and, as the country expanded, no single interest would dominate. Free to struggle for influence, they would checkmate each other.

    What Madison had not reckoned on was the vast expansion in the scope of activities of the federal government over the next 200 years.

    As the government expanded, it has affected the lives and livelihoods of more people. They, in turn, want to ensure that government action does not harm them. Even better, they look to an expansive government to benefit them. So if the federal government gets into the business of building dams, they want to supply the cement. If Washington decides to prop up farm prices with subsidies, as it first did in the 1930s (, you want to make sure your commodity gets its share.

    People of the revolutionary generation probably imagined that individuals would make their way to Washington to personally make their case for government help. They could not have imagined the hordes of surrogates, many of them receiving princely sums, who would take up residence in the nation's capital and subsist on pressing the cases of others. The idea that a professional advocate such as Jack Abramoff would be corruptly influencing the federal government would have been altogether inconceivable to James Madison.

    The good with the bad

    The defect in Madison's architecture is not that interest groups would proliferate, but that there would be such an imbalance between those seeking to get or maintain private gain and those advocating for the needs of humbler people. There are, of course, multitudes of lobbyists who advocate the needs of the handicapped, the elderly and endangered species, but they are often out-gunned by trade associations and industry lobbyists.

    The defeat in the House of the recent effort to require U.S. automakers to boost the fuel economy ( of their cars is eloquent testimony to the clout of business. On the other hand, the high rollers who pushed for the elimination of the inheritance tax ( received a stinging rebuke when the repeal that they favored was defeated in the Senate. The big boys don't always get what they want, especially when the focus of the media puts the issue out in the open.

    There are in lobbying, as in other enterprises, noble and degraded examples. So you have the Children's Defense Fund pushing for an expansion ( of the State Children's Health Insurance Plan and a smug and arrogant Abramoff manipulating the Bureau of Indian Affairs ( on behalf of his well-heeled clients.

    Both are lobbying. Even so, it would be as unfair to assume that all lobbyists are like Jack Abramoff as it would be to liken all physicians to Jack Kevorkian.

    hot wallpaper common sensibility common sensibility. If common sense is so sensible
  • If common sense is so sensible

  • riva2005
    05-16 01:37 PM
    How wonderful that congress is finally introducing constructive bills to prevent 'consultants' mainly (but not only) from India from clogging up the H-1B visa system for honest skilled workers. The H-1B program is clearly intended for people WHO HAVE A SOLID FULL-TIME JOB OFFER AT THE TIME OF FILING THE APPLICATION. The whole body-shopping/visa abuse phenomenon is just disgusting. I wouldn't cry if any and all kinds of 'consultancy' activity were banned from the H-1B program. Someone stated that then they 'might as well lower the cap to 10.000/year'. Obviously not true. This bill clears out the infested issues of people illegally taking up visas on false premises. Good work!

    Part of the title of this thread reads 'even H-1 renewal will be impossible'. That is just priceless. No, H-1B renewal will be impossible IF YOU ARE NOT HERE BASED ON HONEST CIRCUMSTANCES. Anyone with trouble renewing H-1Bs after this bill should get a real job or leave if they are not up to that task.

    There are certain members who are intransigent about their support for the Durbin-Grassley bill.

    Majority of them are supporting Durbin-Grassley not because they believe that consulting a lower kind of work compared to full-time employment but because they have themselves never felt the need for consulting companies.

    Now, if in the future, the H1 quota were to go up significantly and if the economy would go into recession like in 2001 and 2002, then a lot of these folks who think that consulting is not "Honest" work would actually get laid off due to downsizing and they will be the first ones trolling to get a H1 quickely. And in those times, only the consulting companies will do an H1 transfer and save their asses from getting out of status and out of country. At such a point in time, the highly elite people here on this forum who think that consulting is not "honest and hard work" and only full-time employees are the real workers will have a very very different view of Durbin-Grassley bill.

    The good times and good economy offers us luxury of slinging mud on the lesser mortals in consulting jobs but bad times in economy can put you right at the place where you are slinging mud.

    So if you get your GC without ever needing to beg a consulting shop to quickely get you an H1 transfer to change your status during layoff season and economic recession, then good for you. You will have a luxury of sticking to your position in opposing Durbin-Grassley. Otherwise, I am pretty sure the Durbin-Grassley will look like a very bad deal to you too and you will flip-flop in your position.

    So enjoy the good times and take potshots at consultants while you can afford to.


    house 2010 common sensibility trish common sensibility. common sensibility. common
  • common sensibility. common

  • Ramba
    09-26 03:24 PM
    Employment based GC will exist whoever wins. CIR or any other reform that increses number of immigrants per year (legal/illegal/ammnisity/point system/high skilled/low skilled) may not be possible in new administration (BO/Mcsamebush), unless economy bounce back. Immigration is tiny bit of the big problem facing this country. If the current economny lead to depression/recession what is the use of having GC/USC?

    Both are politicans their first ambittion is the office. Country first is simply bull. However, I think BO, is the right choice at this momnet. as atleast he is having professional approch in every problem. He is having little bit socialism. I think economy will boucnce back in BO admin, which is the important issue at this point.

    tattoo John Prine - Common Sense common sensibility. sense and sensibility
  • sense and sensibility

  • unitednations
    08-02 06:09 PM
    Thanks for the quick reply. I never overstayed my I-94 either before leaving US or re-entering US. But just a thought... Do you mean if somebody covered by 245(i) and never left US after filing the labor before April 2001, still be eligible to adjust status?


    A little unknown thing is that even if you get married to someone who is eligible for 245i; you also get that benefit. Even if someone divorced a person who was eligible for 245i; they still get the benefit.

    Therefore, someone who has overstayed, out of status and marries someone who had a labor or 130 pending before april 30, 2001 (even though this person was never out of status or overstayed); then spouse can claim 245i benefit.


    pictures common enough sensibility, common sensibility. common sensibility. common
  • common sensibility. common

  • Refugee_New
    01-07 02:40 PM
    All Muslims are NOT terrorists, but all terrorists ARE muslims.

    I didn't know Narendra Modi is a muslim. I didn't know those are committing genocide in Palestine are muslims. I didn't know those who attacked Iraq and commited war-crime under the pretex of WMD are muslims. I didn't know that these people are muslims.

    May be Narendra Modi was born to a Moghul Emperor. Others are born to ottaman emperors. What about you vghc? Are you a product of muslim?

    dresses If common sense is so sensible common sensibility. common sensibility. mark
  • common sensibility. mark

  • vactorboy29
    08-26 10:34 PM
    This is hilarious........


    makeup sensibility common to common sensibility. 2010 common sensibility trish
  • 2010 common sensibility trish

  • sledge_hammer
    06-05 04:33 PM
    You are right about #8. I should not have included that under "expense". But going with the spirit of my original post, in the long run, the equity you build (15K/yr) will far out weigh the yearly savings you get by renting.

    >> Savings on tax deductions/yr: $ 4,050 (30% bracket, $13.5K interest)

    This assumption may not be correct. You can take tax deduction for mortgage only if you forego standard deduction. Assuming it is a 3 people household (Mr., Missus and Master) - you would forego the standard deduction of around 10k. So the marginal tax saving would only be around 1k assuming 30% bracket.

    In case you itemize anyway (small business owners typically have to do this) - then your calculation of $4k in net tax saving is correct.

    My calculation would be:

    Situation Own:
    Your expense is
    item# 4 +
    item# 5
    - Corrected item# 9

    Item #8 is NOT a mitigating factor to your monthly expenses. To earn the quity - you have to make the same amount of cash payment - cash which you could have used in any other form of investment.

    So the total would be
    13k + 9k - 1k ~ 20-21k.

    So - in this example - renting would come out quite a bit ahead.

    However, in ValidIV's example buying would be superior to renting.

    girlfriend sense and sensibility common sensibility. common sensibility
  • common sensibility

  • santb1975
    10-01 01:41 AM
    I wonder how many $$$ GWB Sr. had to donate to Yale for GWB to get in ...I better stop my rant..:rolleyes:

    Just to clarify GWB is a Yale graduate.
    With a democratic controlled congress and Obama being a president, CIR is bound to happen. If high-skilled community doesn't unite and get our voices heard then we might come up empty. Remember the last time an immigration bill was passed by the Democratic president (AC21). They flashed few carrots (2-yr recapture, portability and H1 extension beyond 6 yr) and threw us under the bus with flood of 245i applicants. EB3 queue is still suffering from those backlogs.

    In the near term only democrats will be in a position to provide us with some relief because they control the congress.

    hairstyles common rapper sensibility. common sensibility. dresses a common sensibility.
  • dresses a common sensibility.

  • ssa
    06-23 05:16 PM
    in agreement.....there is definately pleasure in living in your own house....

    Ask current underwater home owners how much pleasure are they deriving from their owned home. Day to day pleasure of living may come from the size and the quality/amenities of the house you stay in, whether you own it or rent it is immaterial. If you can rent the same house for 50% of your monthly mortgage and on top of it never have to worry about declining home prices why would you be more happy owning it? Plus "owned" house is a little bit of misnomer here. Unless you have paid it off 100% it's not really your own. Rental property is owned by landlords and your "owned" home is in reality owned by your bank. Miss couple of payments and net results are very similar.

    Don't get me wrong. In rational market owning home is the easiest way to build up wealth but I can't stress the "rational" part of it enough. Although in most areas the excesses of housing bubble are washed away by now in some areas (like good school districts in Bay Area) the prices are still not aligned with the fundamentals like rents for similar properties and average annual incomes. Also renting has one huge advantage right now in this era of rapidly rising unemployment. You are mobile. You can easily move wherever you can find your next job.

    In long run it is always better (IMHO) to own than to rent. But in the short term - for next 1-2 years - I see no compelling argument to buy home unless you land a steal somehow. Sentimental red herrings like "pride and joy" of ownership is definitely not a way to go about making the biggest financial decision of your life. The fact that realtors use this exact phase so often should give you a clue!

    03-25 04:05 PM
    Go back and read each and every line of what UN posted and you would understand.

    Should something bad happen (Which I dont understand why it would), .

    I do not understand either...OP says he/she does not want to spend a grand (not sure if it costs that much) in attorney fees while he is willing to spend time/money trying to immigrate to Alberta. Taking a fatalistic approach and hoping for the best seems to be the idea. Again good luck to OP.

    It is always good to utilize services of a good Attorney for complex situations. But anyways good luck.

    03-24 12:44 PM
    can you kindly enlighten me on what you exactly mean by "suspicious" original poster?

    Yeah..even I went to local office..without attorney..they didnt ask me to sign a statement..just sworn

    USCIS adjudicators follow a manual and very specific set of procedures as laid out by their headquarters. Sometimes in the gray areas or areas of interpretation they are given wide latitude in how to interpret those rules.

    However; document list and procedure for getting them is very prescribed. When person posts of their experience with USCIS and it is very different then what their policies, procedures are then it makes it very suspicious...

    Everything you have posted falls in line with department of labor audit and not local uscis office interviews or requests for information from local office interviews.

    If what you are saying is accurate then you and your company should have consulted with your attornies and specifically asked for this in a request for evidence and assessed the legality of this request and pulled the officer back and sent in only what was required by law.

    California service center back in 2004/2005 was denying 140's due to "temporary job" issue. Lawyer stupidly in replying to ability to pay part of rfe sent in contracts like you do in H-1b and put it in front of uscis that the contracts were temporary. USCIS had no choice but to deny the 140's and this was one of those issues (one of the people actually had their approved 140 reopened and denied for this issue). That particular company had 35 straight denials over this issue.

    No comments:

    Post a Comment