Nov2004
08-26 01:08 PM
Bump^^^^
can you please let us know some details. I am in the same situation.
Nov2004, eb3, i140 approved and i485 applied.
1. What happens to the present ead, after filing the new i140.
2.after i140 do we have to apply for new i485?
can you please let us know some details. I am in the same situation.
Nov2004, eb3, i140 approved and i485 applied.
1. What happens to the present ead, after filing the new i140.
2.after i140 do we have to apply for new i485?
wallpaper rbd wallpapers. Rbd
bostonian28
12-10 12:16 PM
Please look at the below links, it says that one can move jobs after 180 days even without 140 being approved.
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_yatmay.html
Any comments / suggestions ?
http://www.murthy.com/news/n_yatmay.html
Any comments / suggestions ?
GCNaseeb
08-08 04:47 PM
Employer not revoking your I-140 itself proves "employer intention" to hire him back on adjudication. You may have intention to work for sponsoring employer but if you are laid off its not in your control, right? Adjudicator always looks by law and there is no law which says if you are laid off within 180 days your I-485 can not be approved.
It sounds a cake walk from your response, What if there is an RFE after 180 days on your sponsor/employer? You missed the point that GC is for future employment with the sponsor. There are certain situations where employee can invoke AC21 and get the protection against employer initiated termination etc. If you do not work for extended period.. no matter whether it is with in 180 or not.. USCIS may anytime during adjudication, question your intention for GC.
It sounds a cake walk from your response, What if there is an RFE after 180 days on your sponsor/employer? You missed the point that GC is for future employment with the sponsor. There are certain situations where employee can invoke AC21 and get the protection against employer initiated termination etc. If you do not work for extended period.. no matter whether it is with in 180 or not.. USCIS may anytime during adjudication, question your intention for GC.
2011 RBD | Free Wallpapers Desktop,
PBECVictim
03-12 07:09 PM
Did you get second finger print notice before approval? When did you go for first fingerprint notice?
After a long 5 years I finally received 485 case approved letter for both my case and my spouse's case. However the online status still shows pending. Is this common?. How long would it take for the online case status to be updated.
EB2- PB Dec2003
485 Filed date: 08/02/07
Texas service center
After a long 5 years I finally received 485 case approved letter for both my case and my spouse's case. However the online status still shows pending. Is this common?. How long would it take for the online case status to be updated.
EB2- PB Dec2003
485 Filed date: 08/02/07
Texas service center
more...
dionysus
01-24 11:24 AM
My view is that IV must reassess and realign its goals. The goal of I-485 filing without a current PD is too ambitious to start with. Remember, I-485 is the most time-consuming and lengthy stage of a GC, what with security and background checks, tax records checks, prior legal stays in US and medical tests to name just a few. CIS is swamped with many I-485 applications as it is. If it opens the flood gates for 485 filing, its system will simply collapse under the stampede of estimated 1 million GC seekers. There is no chance in hell that CIS will throw open the gates of I-485 filing for all and sundry.
Moreover, there is this case of spouses becoming eligible for jobs after I-485 and EAD filing. No politician is going to stick his/her neck out on this. Remember, politicians are driven just by people�s mood, and average American simply despises any additions to his or her dreamland.
In the light of this revelation by me (hint - just kidding), IV must set realistic goals for itself. One of which is greater flexibility of movement between jobs for a GC seeker. In short, the GC stages that have been completed by a GC seeker should remain completed even if the GC aspirant moves between the similar profile jobs. So for example, if an applicant whose labor has been cleared leaves the job after this stage, at his/her new job he should be able to file I-140 at his/her new job without having to file a labor all over again. All that the applicant should be asked are the papers confirming the old labor approval and a supporting letter from the new employer that the new job matches the old job description.
Similarly, applicants with approved I-140 should be allowed to switch job while still retaining the validity of old I-140. At the new job they should not be required to go thru the first stages again. An employee should be able to attach his/her approved I-140 from a previous company at the time of filing I-485 in the new company instead of being required to obtain a new I-140 approval.
This is the goal that will sit easy with the politician, because it does not add any new job seekers in the employment market. Also, it has the ring of more freedom for the workers, some of them are actually stuck in a quasi-slavery like situation in their companies in the hope of a GC. Words like these are going to have more impact on politicians rather than a clamoring for employment authorization documents.
Moreover, there is this case of spouses becoming eligible for jobs after I-485 and EAD filing. No politician is going to stick his/her neck out on this. Remember, politicians are driven just by people�s mood, and average American simply despises any additions to his or her dreamland.
In the light of this revelation by me (hint - just kidding), IV must set realistic goals for itself. One of which is greater flexibility of movement between jobs for a GC seeker. In short, the GC stages that have been completed by a GC seeker should remain completed even if the GC aspirant moves between the similar profile jobs. So for example, if an applicant whose labor has been cleared leaves the job after this stage, at his/her new job he should be able to file I-140 at his/her new job without having to file a labor all over again. All that the applicant should be asked are the papers confirming the old labor approval and a supporting letter from the new employer that the new job matches the old job description.
Similarly, applicants with approved I-140 should be allowed to switch job while still retaining the validity of old I-140. At the new job they should not be required to go thru the first stages again. An employee should be able to attach his/her approved I-140 from a previous company at the time of filing I-485 in the new company instead of being required to obtain a new I-140 approval.
This is the goal that will sit easy with the politician, because it does not add any new job seekers in the employment market. Also, it has the ring of more freedom for the workers, some of them are actually stuck in a quasi-slavery like situation in their companies in the hope of a GC. Words like these are going to have more impact on politicians rather than a clamoring for employment authorization documents.
vxb2004
11-24 08:09 PM
Hello,
I joined company B in April and prior to that I was working for company A. Fragoman was company A's attorney. Through company A I had my labor certified, I-140 approved and my 485 was pending for more than 180 days and hence I was able to switch my job using AC21. My job was in the same and similar job classification. The AC21 documents were sent to USCIS in early April by company B's attorney.
Last week of October, I received my finger printing notice as part of my I-485 process. When I contacted company B's attorney, they never received any courtesy copy for my finger printing notice. Today I called up USCIS customer service to find out the attorney on record for my file. They mentioned that it was still company A's and the courtesy copy was sent to them. I mentioned to the officer that AC21 was filed which had the change in attorney information. She said that they do not have any records of it. She advised me to send a copy of the AC21 forms again along with the G28 documents.
My question is if company B's attorney send the AC21 documents, will USCIS question why the documents are being sent after 8 months of switching jobs?
Will this trigger an RFE?
Please advise.
I joined company B in April and prior to that I was working for company A. Fragoman was company A's attorney. Through company A I had my labor certified, I-140 approved and my 485 was pending for more than 180 days and hence I was able to switch my job using AC21. My job was in the same and similar job classification. The AC21 documents were sent to USCIS in early April by company B's attorney.
Last week of October, I received my finger printing notice as part of my I-485 process. When I contacted company B's attorney, they never received any courtesy copy for my finger printing notice. Today I called up USCIS customer service to find out the attorney on record for my file. They mentioned that it was still company A's and the courtesy copy was sent to them. I mentioned to the officer that AC21 was filed which had the change in attorney information. She said that they do not have any records of it. She advised me to send a copy of the AC21 forms again along with the G28 documents.
My question is if company B's attorney send the AC21 documents, will USCIS question why the documents are being sent after 8 months of switching jobs?
Will this trigger an RFE?
Please advise.
more...
vinabath
03-26 11:09 AM
0%
2010 Anahi RBD WALLPAPER
H1InTrouble
09-21 09:31 AM
Hi
Thanks for the reply. My new employer is fine. He is sure that my current employer cannot do anything as he has failed to meet his obligation as an employer. He cannot provide me with a job at the moment. But my end client is hesitating now. They are a very big company and do not want to get into any legal issues.
If my end client says No then my new employer will also probably back out because of lack of project.
Regards
H1InTrouble.
Thanks for the reply. My new employer is fine. He is sure that my current employer cannot do anything as he has failed to meet his obligation as an employer. He cannot provide me with a job at the moment. But my end client is hesitating now. They are a very big company and do not want to get into any legal issues.
If my end client says No then my new employer will also probably back out because of lack of project.
Regards
H1InTrouble.
more...
TheColonial
04-27 01:35 AM
SDL is not really that confusing at all.
I never said it was. What I am saying is that it's off topic considering what he wants to achieve.
And he will have to learn it at one time or another, and why limit a program to one OS.
He will? Why?
DirectX/OpenGL can be used in a windowed environment
Again, that's got nothing to do with the desire to learn Win32.
so even if you just want to do Win32 stuff DirectX can enhance it.
And so can using the WPF in .NET, but how does that help with learning Win32?
I never said it was. What I am saying is that it's off topic considering what he wants to achieve.
And he will have to learn it at one time or another, and why limit a program to one OS.
He will? Why?
DirectX/OpenGL can be used in a windowed environment
Again, that's got nothing to do with the desire to learn Win32.
so even if you just want to do Win32 stuff DirectX can enhance it.
And so can using the WPF in .NET, but how does that help with learning Win32?
hair wallpaper rbd Wallpapers
Pegasus503
07-13 03:35 AM
Damn I am going to be pissed off if he gets a green card before I do.
more...
dipu76
06-01 08:11 PM
its fine. Your salary should match the LCA salary. The LC salary is for 'future job'. the only place it might come into play is if your employer is very small, and there are ability-to-pay issues (here, if your current salary matches LC salary then its easier to say that employer has ability to pay).
Thank you all for your expert advice!!.. My I140 was approved about a year back.. I am working for one of the top 10 outsourcing co.. so it is very unlikely that they will do an error though we can't be certain..
Thank you all for your expert advice!!.. My I140 was approved about a year back.. I am working for one of the top 10 outsourcing co.. so it is very unlikely that they will do an error though we can't be certain..
hot rbd wallpapers. RBD Wallpaper
amitjoey
10-23 02:05 PM
-------------------------------------
I'm sorry, few details.
Yes, the lawyer said that he will file to Nebraska.
One small detail I did not understand: PD-priority date- is about the PD when I filled for LC or will be another PD for this I-140?
About the fees:
U.S. Government Fee: I-140- $475.00
U.S. Government Fee: I-485 (includes I-765 and I-131) �$1010.00
U.S. Government Fee: I-485 (includes I-765 and I-131) �$1010.00 - wife.
the lawyer's fees are very high but I'm stuck and afraid to make changes at this last stage. I'm wrong?
PD: Date when you filed your labor. Stays throughout untill 485 is adjudicated.
Untill you get GC.
Processing time of 140 is based on when you file it.
I-140 Should be filed with Lawyers help (My advice) since the intent is to show that the employer has the financial muscle to keep paying you and it is really the employers petition. I-485 is your application to adjust status, and a lot of people have done it on their own without lawyers help.
I'm sorry, few details.
Yes, the lawyer said that he will file to Nebraska.
One small detail I did not understand: PD-priority date- is about the PD when I filled for LC or will be another PD for this I-140?
About the fees:
U.S. Government Fee: I-140- $475.00
U.S. Government Fee: I-485 (includes I-765 and I-131) �$1010.00
U.S. Government Fee: I-485 (includes I-765 and I-131) �$1010.00 - wife.
the lawyer's fees are very high but I'm stuck and afraid to make changes at this last stage. I'm wrong?
PD: Date when you filed your labor. Stays throughout untill 485 is adjudicated.
Untill you get GC.
Processing time of 140 is based on when you file it.
I-140 Should be filed with Lawyers help (My advice) since the intent is to show that the employer has the financial muscle to keep paying you and it is really the employers petition. I-485 is your application to adjust status, and a lot of people have done it on their own without lawyers help.
more...
house -RBD
Leo07
07-21 10:02 AM
Taking the emotional quotient and any other 'angles' out of the issue. Fragomen is correct and so is your manager.
If it comes to that, it's not worth the risk for you, your manager and your company to do anything other than what's suggested by your attorney.(Fragomen)
Normally my wife is the one who is used to post or follow up on the latest here.
This came up a week ago. I have been working from home in a different state and we do not have any company office near my home. Nearest office location is about 3 hours. I had to move this far away due to personal reasons.
Now after working from home for 3 years (extending EAD, H1Bs etc) Fragomen (most of you know who they are) says I cannot do work from home anymore due to this conflict with uscis. it seems USCIS doesnt recognize your home as a Govt recognized work location. Hence I cannot work from home.
Now my manager wants me to only work from the office since folks reporting to me are also in that state. Now he is using Fragomen and HR emails as a reason for me to move back.
Anythoughts ? I am sure you all will agree that is the law. but why all this now ? even after working for 12 years.
One other point the fragomen lawyer said is - this is going to be the case for all thier clients.
If it comes to that, it's not worth the risk for you, your manager and your company to do anything other than what's suggested by your attorney.(Fragomen)
Normally my wife is the one who is used to post or follow up on the latest here.
This came up a week ago. I have been working from home in a different state and we do not have any company office near my home. Nearest office location is about 3 hours. I had to move this far away due to personal reasons.
Now after working from home for 3 years (extending EAD, H1Bs etc) Fragomen (most of you know who they are) says I cannot do work from home anymore due to this conflict with uscis. it seems USCIS doesnt recognize your home as a Govt recognized work location. Hence I cannot work from home.
Now my manager wants me to only work from the office since folks reporting to me are also in that state. Now he is using Fragomen and HR emails as a reason for me to move back.
Anythoughts ? I am sure you all will agree that is the law. but why all this now ? even after working for 12 years.
One other point the fragomen lawyer said is - this is going to be the case for all thier clients.
tattoo MORE RBD WALLPAPERS!
purgan
01-22 11:35 AM
http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/5585.html
The Immigrant Technologist:
Studying Technology Transfer with China
Q&A with: William Kerr and Michael Roberts
Published: January 22, 2007
Author: Michael Roberts
Executive Summary:
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain? Professor William Kerr discusses the phenomena of technology transfer and implications for U.S.-based businesses and policymakers.
The trend of Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs staying home rather than moving to the United States is a trend that potentially offers both harm and opportunity to U.S.-based interests.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S. and are strong contributors to American technology development. It is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group.
U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries, around 15 percent today. U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain?
Q: Describe your research and how it relates to what you observed in China.
A: My research focuses on technology transfer through ethnic scientific and entrepreneurial networks. Traditional models of technology diffusion suggest that if you have a great idea, people who are ten feet away from you will learn about that idea first, followed by people who are 100 miles away, and so forth in concentric circles. My research on ethnic networks suggests this channel facilitates faster knowledge transfer and faster adoption of foreign technologies. For example, if the Chinese have a strong presence in the U.S. computer industry, relative to other ethnic groups, then computer technologies diffuse faster to China than elsewhere. This is true even for computer advances made by Americans, as the U.S.-based Chinese increase awareness and tacit knowledge development regarding these advances in their home country.
Q: Is your research relevant to other countries as well?
China is at a tipping point for entrepreneurship on an international scale.A: Yes, I have extended my empirical work to include over thirty industries and nine ethnicities, including Indian, Japanese, Korean, and Hispanic. It is very important to develop a broad sample to quantify correctly the overall importance of these networks. The Silicon Valley Chinese are a very special case, and my work seeks to understand the larger benefit these networks provide throughout the global economy. These macroeconomic findings are important inputs to business and policy circles.
Q: What makes technology transfer happen? Is it entrepreneurial opportunity in the home country, a loyalty to the home country, or government policies that encourage or require people to come home?
A: It's all of those. Surveys of these diasporic communities suggest they aid their home countries through both formal business relationships and informal contacts. Formal mechanisms run the spectrum from direct financial investment in overseas businesses that pursue technology opportunities to facilitating contracts and market awareness. Informal contacts are more frequent�the evidence we have suggests they are at least twice as common�and even more diverse in nature. Ongoing research will allow us to better distinguish these channels. A Beijing scholar we met on the trip, Henry Wang, and I are currently surveying a large population of Chinese entrepreneurs to paint a more comprehensive picture of the micro-underpinnings of this phenomena.
Q: What about multinational corporations? How do they fit into this scenario?
A: One of the strongest trends of globalization is that U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries. About 5 percent of U.S.-sponsored R&D was done in foreign countries in the 1980s, and that number is around 15 percent today. We visited Microsoft's R&D center in Beijing to learn more about its R&D efforts and interactions with the U.S. parent. This facility was founded in the late 1990s, and it has already grown to house a third of Microsoft's basic-science R&D researchers. More broadly, HBS assistant professor Fritz Foley and I are working on a research project that has found that U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals like Microsoft help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Q: Does your research have implications for U.S. policy?
A: One implication concerns immigration levels. It is interesting to note that while immigrants account for about 15 percent of the U.S. working population, they account for almost half of our Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers. Even within the Ph.D. ranks, foreign-born individuals have a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes, elections to the National Academy of Sciences, patent citations, and so forth. They are a very strong contributor to U.S. technology development, so it is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group. It is one of the easiest policy levers we have to influence our nation's rate of innovation.
Q: Are countries that send their scholars to the United States losing their best and brightest?
A: My research shows that having these immigrant scientists, entrepreneurs, and engineers in the United States helps facilitate faster technology transfer from the United States, which in turn aids economic growth and development. This is certainly a positive benefit diasporas bring to their home countries. It is important to note, however, that a number of factors should be considered in the "brain drain" versus "brain gain" debate, for which I do not think there is a clear answer today.
Q: Where does China stand in relation to some of the classic tiger economies that we've seen in the past in terms of technology transfer?
A: Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and similar smaller economies have achieved a full transition from agriculture-based economies to industrialized economies. In those situations, technology transfer increases labor productivity and wages directly. The interesting thing about China and also India is that about half of their populations are still employed in the agricultural sector. In this scenario, technology transfer may lead to faster sector reallocation�workers moving from agriculture to industry�which can weaken wage growth compared with the classic tiger economy example. This is an interesting dynamic we see in China today.
Q: The export growth that technology may engender is only one prong of the mechanism that helps economic development. Does technology also make purely domestic industries more productive?
A: Absolutely. My research shows that countries do increase their exports in industries that receive large technology infusions, but non-exporting industries also benefit from technology gains. Moreover, the technology transfer can raise wages in sectors that do not rely on technology to the extent there is labor mobility across sectors. A hairdresser in the United States, for example, makes more money than a hairdresser in China, and that is due in large part to the wage equilibrium that occurs across occupations and skill categories within an economy. Technology transfer may alter the wage premiums assigned to certain skill sets, for example, increasing the wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers, but the wage shifts can feed across sectors through labor mobility.
Q: What are the implications for the future?
A: Historically, the United States has been very successful at the retention of foreign-born, Ph.D.-level scientists, inventors, and entrepreneurs. As China and India continue to develop, they will become more attractive places to live and to start companies. The returnee pattern may accelerate as foreign infrastructures become more developed for entrepreneurship. This is not going to happen over the next three years, but it is quite likely over the next thirty to fifty years. My current research is exploring how this reverse migration would impact the United States' rate of progress.
About the author
Michael Roberts is a senior lecturer in the Entrepreneurial Management unit at Harvard Business School.
The Immigrant Technologist:
Studying Technology Transfer with China
Q&A with: William Kerr and Michael Roberts
Published: January 22, 2007
Author: Michael Roberts
Executive Summary:
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain? Professor William Kerr discusses the phenomena of technology transfer and implications for U.S.-based businesses and policymakers.
The trend of Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs staying home rather than moving to the United States is a trend that potentially offers both harm and opportunity to U.S.-based interests.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S. and are strong contributors to American technology development. It is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group.
U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries, around 15 percent today. U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain?
Q: Describe your research and how it relates to what you observed in China.
A: My research focuses on technology transfer through ethnic scientific and entrepreneurial networks. Traditional models of technology diffusion suggest that if you have a great idea, people who are ten feet away from you will learn about that idea first, followed by people who are 100 miles away, and so forth in concentric circles. My research on ethnic networks suggests this channel facilitates faster knowledge transfer and faster adoption of foreign technologies. For example, if the Chinese have a strong presence in the U.S. computer industry, relative to other ethnic groups, then computer technologies diffuse faster to China than elsewhere. This is true even for computer advances made by Americans, as the U.S.-based Chinese increase awareness and tacit knowledge development regarding these advances in their home country.
Q: Is your research relevant to other countries as well?
China is at a tipping point for entrepreneurship on an international scale.A: Yes, I have extended my empirical work to include over thirty industries and nine ethnicities, including Indian, Japanese, Korean, and Hispanic. It is very important to develop a broad sample to quantify correctly the overall importance of these networks. The Silicon Valley Chinese are a very special case, and my work seeks to understand the larger benefit these networks provide throughout the global economy. These macroeconomic findings are important inputs to business and policy circles.
Q: What makes technology transfer happen? Is it entrepreneurial opportunity in the home country, a loyalty to the home country, or government policies that encourage or require people to come home?
A: It's all of those. Surveys of these diasporic communities suggest they aid their home countries through both formal business relationships and informal contacts. Formal mechanisms run the spectrum from direct financial investment in overseas businesses that pursue technology opportunities to facilitating contracts and market awareness. Informal contacts are more frequent�the evidence we have suggests they are at least twice as common�and even more diverse in nature. Ongoing research will allow us to better distinguish these channels. A Beijing scholar we met on the trip, Henry Wang, and I are currently surveying a large population of Chinese entrepreneurs to paint a more comprehensive picture of the micro-underpinnings of this phenomena.
Q: What about multinational corporations? How do they fit into this scenario?
A: One of the strongest trends of globalization is that U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries. About 5 percent of U.S.-sponsored R&D was done in foreign countries in the 1980s, and that number is around 15 percent today. We visited Microsoft's R&D center in Beijing to learn more about its R&D efforts and interactions with the U.S. parent. This facility was founded in the late 1990s, and it has already grown to house a third of Microsoft's basic-science R&D researchers. More broadly, HBS assistant professor Fritz Foley and I are working on a research project that has found that U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals like Microsoft help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Q: Does your research have implications for U.S. policy?
A: One implication concerns immigration levels. It is interesting to note that while immigrants account for about 15 percent of the U.S. working population, they account for almost half of our Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers. Even within the Ph.D. ranks, foreign-born individuals have a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes, elections to the National Academy of Sciences, patent citations, and so forth. They are a very strong contributor to U.S. technology development, so it is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group. It is one of the easiest policy levers we have to influence our nation's rate of innovation.
Q: Are countries that send their scholars to the United States losing their best and brightest?
A: My research shows that having these immigrant scientists, entrepreneurs, and engineers in the United States helps facilitate faster technology transfer from the United States, which in turn aids economic growth and development. This is certainly a positive benefit diasporas bring to their home countries. It is important to note, however, that a number of factors should be considered in the "brain drain" versus "brain gain" debate, for which I do not think there is a clear answer today.
Q: Where does China stand in relation to some of the classic tiger economies that we've seen in the past in terms of technology transfer?
A: Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and similar smaller economies have achieved a full transition from agriculture-based economies to industrialized economies. In those situations, technology transfer increases labor productivity and wages directly. The interesting thing about China and also India is that about half of their populations are still employed in the agricultural sector. In this scenario, technology transfer may lead to faster sector reallocation�workers moving from agriculture to industry�which can weaken wage growth compared with the classic tiger economy example. This is an interesting dynamic we see in China today.
Q: The export growth that technology may engender is only one prong of the mechanism that helps economic development. Does technology also make purely domestic industries more productive?
A: Absolutely. My research shows that countries do increase their exports in industries that receive large technology infusions, but non-exporting industries also benefit from technology gains. Moreover, the technology transfer can raise wages in sectors that do not rely on technology to the extent there is labor mobility across sectors. A hairdresser in the United States, for example, makes more money than a hairdresser in China, and that is due in large part to the wage equilibrium that occurs across occupations and skill categories within an economy. Technology transfer may alter the wage premiums assigned to certain skill sets, for example, increasing the wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers, but the wage shifts can feed across sectors through labor mobility.
Q: What are the implications for the future?
A: Historically, the United States has been very successful at the retention of foreign-born, Ph.D.-level scientists, inventors, and entrepreneurs. As China and India continue to develop, they will become more attractive places to live and to start companies. The returnee pattern may accelerate as foreign infrastructures become more developed for entrepreneurship. This is not going to happen over the next three years, but it is quite likely over the next thirty to fifty years. My current research is exploring how this reverse migration would impact the United States' rate of progress.
About the author
Michael Roberts is a senior lecturer in the Entrepreneurial Management unit at Harvard Business School.
more...
pictures user posted image
madaram
08-09 11:25 AM
pls read what sensenbrenner has to say.
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2006/08/09/EDGOBIQ0KA1.DTL
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2006/08/09/EDGOBIQ0KA1.DTL
dresses rbd wallpapers. Anahi+rbd+wallpaper; Anahi+rbd+wallpaper. villamonte6100
nlssubbu
12-17 04:00 PM
I have an offer from a great company as a program manager that involves management and coordination of teams. There will be a little programming involved. This is in the software industry
The labor was filed as software engineer whose description says that this was java focussed intense programming position.
I am EB2, india, dec 2003 with more that 180 days and 140 approved, also have my ead and AP done.
I plan to move on EAD. Would this qualify as "same or similar". The industry is the same and the job is similar (it just shows normal career progression)
what do you think?
The other option is start a fresh labor with PERM and followed by another I-140. You can then port your existing I-485 with the new offer and continue your GC process where you left. You may need to check with your future employer that they are willing to do this for you. If not, then it will be a risk.
Thanks
The labor was filed as software engineer whose description says that this was java focussed intense programming position.
I am EB2, india, dec 2003 with more that 180 days and 140 approved, also have my ead and AP done.
I plan to move on EAD. Would this qualify as "same or similar". The industry is the same and the job is similar (it just shows normal career progression)
what do you think?
The other option is start a fresh labor with PERM and followed by another I-140. You can then port your existing I-485 with the new offer and continue your GC process where you left. You may need to check with your future employer that they are willing to do this for you. If not, then it will be a risk.
Thanks
more...
makeup Wallpaper Rbd
acecupid
06-26 10:01 AM
I jst got an update on my and my wife I-485; i am not sure what it is about as i have not received the RFE yet.....but i think they are asking for our BC as we did not provide them when we applied for I-485;
I want to know that is it OK if i provide USCIS with the 2 AFFIDEVITS, one for me and one for my wife stating all the information such as Name, Date of Birth, City of Birth, Country of Birth, Mothers Name and Fathers Name.
Gettign the birth certificate is a very long procedure and i dont think i would have them soon. So i was wondering will it be OK if i provide them with the Affidevits. Will USCIS accept it!!!!
Lastly, i would appreciate if some one can give me the template that what text should be included in the affedevit !!!!
Thanks in advance !!!!!
My dear friend from Pakistan,
why were you waiting for so long since you applied for I-485 to arrange for birth certificate ? Now you have to scramble due to the RFE end date. Anyways, here is the solution. You can provide 2 affidavits from your parents for each of you (i.e. you and wife) and also a birth certificate from pakistani consulate in US. I am not sure if the pakistani consulate issues birth certificates, but you can try. Keep in mind that the BC issued by the consulate is not sufficient by itself. You can just provide that as secondary/additional proof. You will still need the affidavits. Below is a format for father's affidavit. You can use similar wording for mother. I hope that helps you... Good luck!
================================================== ====
I, <fathers name>, aged XXyears, son of <grandfathers name>, residing at <address> do hereby state that the following is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge:
1. I am a citizen of <country>
2. I am the father of <your name>
3. I was born on <birthdate> in <location>
4. I was living in <your birth place> in <month and year of your birth>
5. I personally know that <your name> was born on <birth date> in <location, state, country> at <hospital name> from the valid wedlock of me and my wife <mothers name> and I know the fact of his birth because of my relationship to him.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true and correct.
I want to know that is it OK if i provide USCIS with the 2 AFFIDEVITS, one for me and one for my wife stating all the information such as Name, Date of Birth, City of Birth, Country of Birth, Mothers Name and Fathers Name.
Gettign the birth certificate is a very long procedure and i dont think i would have them soon. So i was wondering will it be OK if i provide them with the Affidevits. Will USCIS accept it!!!!
Lastly, i would appreciate if some one can give me the template that what text should be included in the affedevit !!!!
Thanks in advance !!!!!
My dear friend from Pakistan,
why were you waiting for so long since you applied for I-485 to arrange for birth certificate ? Now you have to scramble due to the RFE end date. Anyways, here is the solution. You can provide 2 affidavits from your parents for each of you (i.e. you and wife) and also a birth certificate from pakistani consulate in US. I am not sure if the pakistani consulate issues birth certificates, but you can try. Keep in mind that the BC issued by the consulate is not sufficient by itself. You can just provide that as secondary/additional proof. You will still need the affidavits. Below is a format for father's affidavit. You can use similar wording for mother. I hope that helps you... Good luck!
================================================== ====
I, <fathers name>, aged XXyears, son of <grandfathers name>, residing at <address> do hereby state that the following is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge:
1. I am a citizen of <country>
2. I am the father of <your name>
3. I was born on <birthdate> in <location>
4. I was living in <your birth place> in <month and year of your birth>
5. I personally know that <your name> was born on <birth date> in <location, state, country> at <hospital name> from the valid wedlock of me and my wife <mothers name> and I know the fact of his birth because of my relationship to him.
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States that the foregoing is true and correct.
girlfriend images wallpapers rbd.
GotGC??
05-29 07:47 PM
Many people with PD current are hesitating to apply for 485 as they want to wait for I140 approval to save 485 fees. This is very wrong and in case the dates retrogress again (there is a good chance), you will actually end up losing several thousands of dollars because you tried to save one thousand dollars.
Could you please clarify:
- what's the logic for not applying for 485 (when 140 is pending)? how can that save you any money?
- did you mean premium processing 140?
Could you please clarify:
- what's the logic for not applying for 485 (when 140 is pending)? how can that save you any money?
- did you mean premium processing 140?
hairstyles llena de amor ultimo capitulo.
kaisersose
11-30 03:40 PM
They will not approve a derivative case without approving the principal. USCIS does not follow FIFO, so though it is possible they picked up a 485 application from July, the second problem of having a PD available kicks in.
So for this approval to be valid, some IO should have
1. Picked up a July application for processing
2. Ignored the PD requirement
3. Approved the derivative without bothering to first approve the primary.
Three mistakes together is impossible. It is just a data entry error.
So for this approval to be valid, some IO should have
1. Picked up a July application for processing
2. Ignored the PD requirement
3. Approved the derivative without bothering to first approve the primary.
Three mistakes together is impossible. It is just a data entry error.
cool_guy_onnet1
12-20 03:48 PM
how can I get a copy of my approved I-140?....my lawyer won't give it to me...heck he won't even give me the case#
please help
All rite, SO I read this thread mistakenly- I guess it's your luck or my stupidity.
My lawyer was also Anal to give me my EAC, This is what I did, On the back of the Check that was submitted for 140 will be a stamp from Immigration authorities- You should also see an EAC # if you got that check back or if you can makeup a story saying you need it as part of the documentation.
Then you can go online and ensure that it's valid and the dates match.
Good Luck,
please help
All rite, SO I read this thread mistakenly- I guess it's your luck or my stupidity.
My lawyer was also Anal to give me my EAC, This is what I did, On the back of the Check that was submitted for 140 will be a stamp from Immigration authorities- You should also see an EAC # if you got that check back or if you can makeup a story saying you need it as part of the documentation.
Then you can go online and ensure that it's valid and the dates match.
Good Luck,
supers789
07-14 04:18 PM
huh! looks like either not many ppl received audits.. or not many received response back ??
No comments:
Post a Comment