Tuesday, July 12, 2011

american idol casey abrams

images Casey Abrams proves too quirky american idol casey abrams. American Idol 2011 Top 11
  • American Idol 2011 Top 11



  • gcdreamer05
    03-23 02:02 PM
    my only problem is Work contracts.

    How am I supposed to get contracts of all clients.
    My employer doesnt share saying its private and confidential..I worked for a top 5 Indian IT in the past..no way I can get those details..duh :confused:

    hey buddy are they digging your case just because you worked for the top 5 indian IT and does it start with a "S*****" , just wondering are they digging up all those who worked for them?





    wallpaper American Idol 2011 Top 11 american idol casey abrams. Casey Abrams picture gallery
  • Casey Abrams picture gallery



  • ashkam
    04-15 02:59 PM
    Are people seriously arguing that a child will not be happier in a bigger home, everything else remaining constant? Seriously, is someone actually arguing this?

    And money can't buy happiness? Really? Are you saying everything else remaining constant if I gave you money it would make you sad? Seriously? Who is this person who would be sadder if I gave him money? I would like to meet him.

    You people need to stop reminiscing about your childhood days and how happy your childhood was even though you had no money. I have a feeling that your child doesn't really care. Sure, give your child lots of love, but for Christ's sake, if you can afford it, don't make him / her spend his / her childhood in a small cramped apartment just because you had to.





    american idol casey abrams. Casey Abrams_4772.jpg. LOS
  • Casey Abrams_4772.jpg. LOS



  • SunnySurya
    08-05 03:00 PM
    :D:D:D:D:D:D
    Seems to me he started the flood and left....I was going thru this thread, and after couple of pages Rolling_flood seems to have vanished. I think he got what he wanted...a pointless debate. It was funny though to read... :D





    2011 Casey Abrams picture gallery american idol casey abrams. Casey Abrams, who missed a
  • Casey Abrams, who missed a



  • hiralal
    06-23 10:17 PM
    I don't believe the housing market slump will last more than 3 years!

    --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Echo boomers a lifeline for embattled U.S. housing | Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/ousiv/idUSTRE55L0AO20090622)

    the slump may last 2 years atleast (i.e. prices falling) ...there maybe extended period of stagnant prices (2 - 3 more years)..every year that the prices don't rise is a loss ..when you take inflation into account (this is strictly from investment point of view).
    the article talks only about support to housing ..it does not say that there will be huge opposing factor of baby boomers selling their homes (and going for rentals -- this explains why builders are building more rental units) or going to their grave.
    Immigration is the unknown factor but quality of immigrants will matter too ...
    as for buying a house in california ..my friend who has a townhome in bay area says that his advice to anyone who wants to come to california is ..DON'T COME HERE ..let alone buy a house ..since state is almost bankrupt ..taxes are rising, school size increasing etc etc..it makes more sense to rent, make money and get out of california



    more...


    american idol casey abrams. American Idol contestant Casey
  • American Idol contestant Casey



  • Macaca
    05-02 05:45 PM
    Glass Half Full on Obama's New National Security Team (http://www.worldpoliticsreview.com/articles/8696/the-new-rules-glass-half-full-on-obamas-new-national-security-team) By THOMAS P.M. BARNETT | World Politics Review

    President Barack Obama reshuffled his national security team last week, and the reviews were overwhelmingly positive. The White House proclaimed that this was the "strongest possible team," leaving unanswered the question, "Toward what end?" Obama's choices represent the continued reduction of the role of security as an administration priority. That fits into his determined strategy to reduce America's overseas military commitments amid the country's ongoing fiscal distress. Obama foresees a smaller, increasingly background role for U.S. security in the world, and these selections feed that pattern.

    First, there is Leon Panetta's move from director of the Central Intelligence Agency to secretary of defense. When you're looking for $400 billion in future military cuts, Panetta's credentials apply nicely: former White House chief of staff and director of the Office of Management and Budget under President Bill Clinton, and 9-term congressman from defense-heavy California. But, truth be told, Panetta wasn't the president's first choice -- or his second, third, fourth or fifth.

    According to my Pentagon sources, the job was initially offered to Hillary Clinton, who would have been a compelling candidate for the real task at hand: working to get more help from our European allies for today's potpourri of security hotspots, while reaching out to the logical partners of tomorrow -- like rising China, India, Turkey, South Africa and Brazil, among others. She would have brought an international star power and bevy of personal connections to those delicate efforts that Panetta will never muster. But Clinton has had enough of nonstop globe-hopping and will be gone at the end of Obama's first term.

    Colin Powell, next offered the job, would have been another high-wattage selection, commanding respect in capitals around the world. But Powell demanded that his perennial wingman, Richard Armitage, be named deputy secretary, and that was apparently a no-go from the White House, most likely for fear that the general was set on creating his own little empire in the Pentagon. Again, too bad: Powell would have brought a deep concern for the future of U.S. national security that Panetta -- with the "green eye shades" mentality of a budget-crunching guy -- lacks.

    Three others were then offered the job: Rhode Island Sen. Jack Reed; former deputy secretary of defense and current Center for Strategic and International Studies boss John Hamre; and former Navy Secretary Richard Danzig, who was long rumored to be Obama's preferred brainiac to ultimately replace Gates. But Reed feared exchanging his Senate seat for a short stint in the Pentagon if Obama loses; Hamre had made too many commitments to CSIS as part of a recent fund-raising drive; and Danzig couldn't manage the timing on the current appointment for personal reasons.

    All of this is to suggest the following: Panetta has been picked to do the dirty work of budget cuts through the remainder of the first term and nothing more. If Obama wins a second term, we may still see a technocrat of Danzig's caliber, such as current Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Michelle Flournoy, or a major-league star of the Clinton/Powell variety. But for now, the SECDEF's job is not to build diplomatic bridges, but to quietly dismantle acquisition programs. And yes, the world will pick up on that "declinist" vibe.

    Moving Gen. David Petraeus from commander of coalition forces in Afghanistan to director of the CIA has puzzled many observers, and more than a few have worried that this represents a renewed militarization of the agency. But here the truth is more prosaic: Obama simply doesn't want Petraeus as chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, something conservatives have been pulling for. By shifting him to CIA, the White House neatly dead-ends his illustrious career.

    As Joint Chiefs chairman, Petraeus could have become an obstacle to Obama's plans to get us out of Afghanistan on schedule, wielding an effective political veto. He also would have presented more of a general political threat in the 2012 election, with the most plausible scenario being the vice-presidential slot for a GOP nominee looking to burnish his national security credentials. As far as candidate Obama is concerned, the Petraeus factor is much more easily managed now.

    Once the SECDEF selection process dropped down to Panetta, the White House saw a chance to kill two birds with one stone. Plus, Petraeus, with the Iraq and Afghanistan surges under his belt, is an unassailable choice for an administration that has deftly "symmetricized" Bush-Cheney's "war on terror," by fielding our special operations forces and CIA drones versus al-Qaida and its associated networks. If major military interventions are out and covert operations are in, then moving "King David" from ISAF to CIA ties off that pivot quite nicely.

    The other two major moves announced by the White House fit this general pattern of backburner-ing Afghanistan and prioritizing budget cuts. Ambassador Ryan Crocker, who partnered with Petraeus in Iraq during the surge, now takes over the same post in Afghanistan. Crocker is supremely experienced at negotiating withdrawals from delicate situations. Moving CENTCOM Deputy Commander Gen. John Allen over to replace Petraeus in Afghanistan is another comfort call: Allen likewise served with Petraeus in Iraq during the surge, when he was the key architect of the Sunni "awakening." Low-key and politically astute, Allen will be another quiet operator.

    Obama has shown by his handling to date of the NATO-led Libyan intervention that he is not to be deterred from his larger goal of dramatically reducing America's global security profile, putting it more realistically in line with the country's troubled finances. What the president has lacked so far in executing that delicate maneuver is some vision of how America plans to segue the international system from depending on America to play global policeman to policing itself.

    Our latest -- and possibly last -- "hurrah" with NATO notwithstanding, Obama has made no headway on reaching out to the world's rising powers, preferring to dream whimsically of a "world without nuclear weapons." In the most prominent case, he seems completely satisfied with letting our strategic relationship with China deteriorate dramatically while America funnels arms to all of Beijing's neighbors. And on future nuclear power Iran? Same solution.

    It's one thing to right-size America's global security profile, but quite another to prepare the global security environment for that change. Obama's recent national security selections tell us he remains firmly committed to the former and completely uninterested in the latter. That sort of "apr�s moi, le deluge" mindset may get him re-elected, but eventually either he or America will be forced into far harder international adjustments.





    american idol casey abrams. Previous. Casey Abrams at the
  • Previous. Casey Abrams at the



  • rinku1112
    12-28 03:24 PM
    While I would love India to retaliate in some fashion on Paki soil to show them that there are going to be consequences for messing on Indian soil, I think this is not the time to strike overtly on Pakistan however.

    Why now is not the right time?

    Because this whole War hysteria is mostly being whipped by one side - Pakistan. Immediately after Mumbai atrocities there were street protests organized by Islamic fundoos like Jamat-ud-Dawa, JeM, etc in major cities in Pak to protest against India. They were supposedly protesting because India is going to attack Pakistan! Most Indians were amused at that time as they were busy attacking their own politicians at that time for their Intelligence failures. This shows to some extent that something else is going on here and Pakistan army or elements within it want tensions on Indian border.

    Why will they want that on Indian border in case it boils over into a war that they will never win? Because the Americans on Pak's western border are putting a lot of pressure on Paki Army to attack the Taliban and other Islamic fundamentalist nut cases that their own Intelligence arm - ISI - has helped train and arm. These nut cases are their assets for all the covert attacks on India to keep it tied down in Kashmir and elsewhere.

    Besides they know that India will never attack and even if they did the International community will be pissing in their pants (including US) about the prospects of Nuclear armageddon and come to Pakis' rescue with a ceasefire call. Zardari and his Civilian Govt. Institutions will take the blame in Pakistan for succumbing to international pressure and stopping the brave Paki army from decimating kafir/powerless Indians. Army will announce a coup promising more security against India and overthrow Zardari/Gilani or whoever and entrench themselves again back in power for another decade.

    What will America do?

    US and rest of the world while shaking with fear about the nuclear war that was averted will start focusing foolishly (or maybe for their own clandestine gain) on Kashmir as the core issue and pressure India to give it freedom! What more does Paki army need? India-Pak hypenation is back so that Pakis feel important in International circles again. Tensions alive on their Eastern border to keep the army as center of focus and power internally in Pakistan. Covert terrorism in Kashmir will again resume with all the international attention on it, and Indian army and diplomacy is tied down there, and all the Taliban and other Islamic nut cases that they trained and armed have a cause to give up their worthless lives and not be fighting the Paki army for achieving their goal of going to heaven for quality time with some virgins.

    Besides Americans dont care if Kashmir is blowing up - infact they would love to see an independant state their to get a leg firmly in South Asia.

    So what should India do?

    Not go to war overtly now. Start covert operations inside Pakistan on war footing and start funding and support for Balochi, Sindi, Mohajir, Pushtun, Baltistan freedom movements inside Pakistan. If there is any other terrorist attack in India, activate these people inside Pakistan to blow up their prime targets - Muridke headquarters of Jaamat-ud-Dawa for instance. Assinations of ISI officers, encourage suicide attacks on their army camps, cantonments. In other words make them feel the cost of any further attacks inside India, but covertly. And also take the covert proxy war to their soil.

    For now, India should not attack Pakistan and give their army an excuse to squirm away from fighting their own created Franenstein monster - Islamic Jehadists on Western border. Indian army should sit back, relax and let the Paki army take their own creation on their Western front.

    I hope the internal politics inside India dont come in the way of the above goal.



    more...


    american idol casey abrams. Filed in: American Idol
  • Filed in: American Idol



  • radhay
    04-08 04:16 PM
    As many have already suggested, location and time frame you have is the key. If you are in an area where there are more jobs being created and population is growing (parts of TX, NC) you should seriously consider buying if you plan to stay there for atleast 3 yrs.
    We are in a period of stagnant income growth for most of the population and increased inflation and hence there is little money left to pay for inflated houses.





    2010 Casey Abrams_4772.jpg. LOS american idol casey abrams. Casey Abrams proves too quirky
  • Casey Abrams proves too quirky



  • texcan
    08-05 04:09 PM
    ROLLING_FLOOD HAS STARTED THE 'FLOOD' AND HE 'ROLLED' OUT....He is probably laughing his as* off....

    Don't worry too much about GC...it would ruin your life if you think a lot about it.

    We all (at least most of us) came to this country with 2 big suitcases and a carry-on bag (with lots of pickels and masalas and clothes and many other stuff) and maybe couple of thousand $$.

    So, if you look back you all have achieved something more then that for sure...if we don't get GC, then lets pack those 2 suitcases and head home...no big deal !!!! keep a positive attitude and everything would be fine.

    just my thoughts :)

    good stuff,
    thanks



    more...


    american idol casey abrams. Idol finalist casey abrams
  • Idol finalist casey abrams



  • puddonhead
    06-26 01:48 PM
    If you spend the rest of your life renting, the risk is 100%�you end up with nothing. I will take my chances investing my money in buying a home because its certainly better than losing 100%.

    If you buy - and take a mortgate - you end up losing (the same way you "lose" your rent)
    1. Interest you pay
    2. Property taxes you will pay forever.
    3. Maintenance you will pay forever.

    On the other hand - if you rent and,
    A. IF you pay less in rent than #1 + #2 + #3,
    B. IF you invest the remainder plus your mortgage principal amount in some other investment vehicle with superior investment returns than real estate.
    .... Then you will come out ahead renting.

    The tipping point is whether your rent equals interest + property taxes + maintenance. Based on which side is higher - either renting or buying could be good for you. I don't think there is a clear cut answer. This does not take into account the flexibility associated with renting - which is important for non-GC holders. If you assign a non-zero dollar value of $X with that flexibility, then your rent needs to be interest + tax + maintanance + $X to get to the tipping point. On the other hand, if you are not forced to save (in the form of mortgage principal payment every month) - you may just spend that money instead of investing that. If you assign a dollar value of $Y with that (probability multiplied by actual dollar value) - then the tipping point is at
    $rent = $interest + $tax + $maintenance + $X(dollar value for flexibility) - $Y(dollar value for probability of spending money instead of saving).

    Now as soon as you plug in the numbers in this equation - it will give you your tipping point and will tell you whether it is right for you to rent or to buy.

    Think about it. It is not as clear cut as you think it is. :-) Based on your earlier posts - you got an absolutely faboulous deal on your house (maybe because of your timing) and the tipping point equation would probably highly favor buying in your case. For many other (specially for those without a GC) - it may not be so clear cut.





    hair Casey Abrams, who missed a american idol casey abrams. American Idol Casey Abrams
  • American Idol Casey Abrams



  • Winner
    03-25 11:01 AM
    Thanks for contributing to IV with meaningful discussions. Would you all consider making a monetary contribution to IV?



    more...


    american idol casey abrams. Casey Abrams American Idol
  • Casey Abrams American Idol



  • chintu25
    08-22 11:23 AM
    :D


    "Some good news for the economy. President went on a month-long vacation." �Jay Leno

    "The federal government announced today that the recession ended back in November of 2001. It ended two years ago! Be sure to pass that on to all your unemployed friends. So you know what that means? The past twenty months of job layoffs, corporate bankruptcies and declining stocks, those were the good times. We should have been living it up." �Jay Leno

    "Yesterday Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said he would be willing to serve another term. Greenspan said, 'Where else would I get a job in this economy?'" �Conan O'Brien

    "Democrats were quick to point out that President 's budget creates a 1 trillion dollar deficit. The White House quickly responded with 'Hey, look over there, it's Saddam Hussein.'" �Craig Kilborn


    "President unveiled his new economic stimulus plan this week. It was reported that if the plan passes, the president himself would save $44,000 in taxes, Dick Cheney would save $327,000, and you could afford to take the whole family down to Burger King to pick up job applications." �Tina Fey, on Saturday Night Live's "Weekend Update"

    "President 's economic plan will create 2.5 million new jobs. The bad news, they are all for Iraqi soldiers." �Craig Kilborn

    "According to a new study, bad economic times can actually be good for you because people tend to exercise more and eat better. This is not a recession, this is the President�s Health Care Plan." �Jay Leno

    "The big story here tonight comes from Washington, D.C. where President announced his new economic plans. The centerpiece was a proposed repeal of the dividends tax on stocks, a boon that could be worth millions of dollars to average Americans. Well, average stock owning Americans. Technically, Americans who own a significant amount of shares in dividend dealing companies. Well, rich people, that's what I'm trying to say. They're going to do really well with this." �Jon Stewart

    "Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neal has resigned. He didn't want to resign, but there wasn't any money left in the treasury so he's got nothing to do." �Jay Leno

    " Presidents advisers have long been worried that a lagging economy could hamper the president's re-election chances. They hope that the Cabinet shake-up will provide a needed jolt. If that doesn't work, North Korea has to go." �Jon Stewart

    "Al Gore says President�s economic plan has zero chance of working. Now, this raises on important question: President has an economic plan?" �David Letterman

    "President said today that it is our job to vote. That's what he called it, a job. And considering how the way economy is going, that may be the only job we have." �Jay Leno

    "The same week the administration slashed pay raises for all federal workers, they announced they are going to provide bonuses to political appointees who do a good job. You know, that guy who cut everyone else's pay, he gets the bonus." �Jay Leno

    "The Stock Market was down today. Two major businesses declared bankruptcy, consumer spending is at an all time low � in other words, president is back on the job." �Jay Leno

    "President hosted something called the President's Economic Forum down in Waco, Texas today. Waco. Apparently Jonestown and Guyana were booked up. When I think of government policy that works, Waco is the place to go. He invited members of small business to the summit. He was going to invite big business, but they're all in jail." �Jay Leno

    "President told the attendees (at his economic forum) that he wants to simplify the numbers on Wall Street so that people can understand what they are looking at. Simplify the numbers? We are already looking at single digits!" �Jay Leno

    "In a speech yesterday in Milwaukee, President vowed to do whatever it takes to keep the economy strong. In fact he said that if he needs to, he will take vacation for another three months." �Jay Leno

    "There's now speculation in Washington that President is now planning to increase the economic sanctions on Iraq. And let me tell you if they are half as tough as the economic sanctions he has imposed on this country, they are screwed." �Jay Leno

    "President is leaving the White House for a vacation. He's taking a month off. Yeah, take a break, you deserve it. But aides say that while on vacation, will continue to make two or three speeches a week to make sure that the market keeps crashing." �Jay Leno

    "Boy, another bad day on Wall Street. Things are getting ugly. Dow Jones is starting to look more like Paula Jones." �Jay Leno

    "Do you have any idea how cheap stocks are now? Wall Street is now being called Wal-Mart Street." �Jay Leno

    "The United States has developed a new weapon that destroys people but it leaves buildings standing. It's called the stock market." �Jay Leno


    "The economy is in big trouble. Yesterday in a big speech, President said the economy was still getting over the hangover from the 90's. And then, the president admitted he was still getting over his hangover from the 80's." �Conan O'Brien





    hot American Idol contestant Casey american idol casey abrams. #39;American Idol#39;: Casey Abrams
  • #39;American Idol#39;: Casey Abrams



  • GCwaitforever
    07-09 07:18 AM
    Employers dont just go around spending thousands of dollars on H1B fees and greencard fees to hire a guy with foreign accent if a native citizen was available. And they do not underpay them, because they HAVE to pay prevailing wages based on the wages determined by the Department of labor.

    Just wanted to let you know that the employer has to pay at least the prevailing wage for a starter to qualify the petition. The employer also has to pay a median wage to the H-1B holder that is commensurate with similarly qualified employees in the company. Otherwise the employer could be prosecuted for wage violations.

    Norm Matloff's figures are faulty because he measures only the prevailing wage as a yardstick which is the bare minimum for qualification. And then he claims H-1Bs are undercutting American employees. No wonder, if you make calculations with lower figures, on the average, H-1Bs look as if they are getting paid less than American employees. To get the actual picture, Norm needs to know actual wages of H-1B employees, which is not possible because not all employers divulge employee pay. As long as the figures can be taken to one's advantage, we always will have these critics running around with distorted graphs and figures.

    One reform Zazona.com should support and fight for in EB Greencards is making the application employee-centric, not employer-centric. Current procedure is in a way bondage to the employer, especially when USCIS takes a long time with multiple stages (read delays) that too not bothering about how long the application has been pending. If USCIS processing improves and they try to reach out to their customers, then a wait of one or two years for Greencard should not be an issue. Infact, I support instant GC proposal in that case.

    Regarding the claims of stealing jobs, I see tons of job advertisements weekly. Many of these ads specifically exclude non-sponsorship candidates (read H-1Bs). US citizens have a bigger market and better opportunities than H-1Bs. I am not sure how it is not possible for them to get jobs. As Logiclife mentioned, the unemployment rate is 2% in IT field. Perhaps people are not prepared to move to areas where jobs are growing. I can not specukate any more on that.



    more...


    house quot;American Idolquot; finalist Casey american idol casey abrams. Casey Abrams_4771.jpg. LOS
  • Casey Abrams_4771.jpg. LOS



  • zshakyaz
    03-25 11:43 PM
    ok..People its been more than 6 months since some adventure in my case :D

    OK..today morning I got a call from a lady voice saying she is from Immigration services..

    The call ended by the time I realized my senses..here is the short story

    Immig: We are verifying your details and need from information to process
    Me: sure.

    Immig: WHo do you work for
    Me: Blah Blah employer

    Immig : Where do you work and who is your client
    Me: Blah Blah

    Immig: When did you first came to US. Where is Port of entry..
    Me: blah blah

    Immig: Do you have all of your IT contracts details.
    Me: COntracts? Since they are property of my employer..I dont have.

    Immig: We need to see your contracts with the clients..
    Me: hmm...I can try but I dont know if I can get them

    Immig: Well...It will help process your application..How fast we can process depends on how fast you can get those..
    Me: OK..I will try..

    Immig: Give me your email..I will drop in email with all info..you can reply back with copy of contracts
    Me: Ok..blah..blah email

    Immig: I need All phone numbers and all supervisors of all clients you worked with in US
    Me: I gave all of the details..told her that I cannot vouch for the validity of phone numbers or emails, as I dont know if they work for the same company

    Immig: Ok..done..I will send email..
    Me: thank you


    I this power play, I forgot to tell her that I already went through interview in aug08 and officer found everything correct. :confused:
    Nevertheles..does anyone know what this is all about?
    Why would they need this kind of information..I am not worried as such since I was never on bench or anything and have all LCAs all blah blah details.

    Just curious :confused::confused:

    (:this is all true regarding Immigration Services calling then)
    Hey guys I also got a call from Immigration Services today on March 25 2009 .
    this is what happened
    First he started confiming he was talking to the right person
    And told My g-28 hasn't been properly signed and completed.
    Caller didn't ask me for my personal i nformation
    he confirmed my name, dob ,my last entry . address, wifes name address dob
    my parents name , my in laws name. He even told g28 it was signed by my HR manager.
    He had all the information, he didn't ask for any personal information.
    He asked if there was any other names used.
    He joked about me not smiling on the picture, he confirmed when the finger prints were completed
    After about 10 minutes of conversation he congratualed me on the approval and my wifes approval said the card should be mailed from kentucky with a week and even mentioned that USCIS online system isn't working.

    I am taking infopass tommorrow and confirming and if true I am going have it stamped

    I hope this is all true.





    tattoo Previous. Casey Abrams at the american idol casey abrams. american idol casey abrams
  • american idol casey abrams



  • unitednations
    03-24 04:08 PM
    Your posts are arguably best on this forum. I have religiously read all your posts and will do in future. Your posts always make sense. I just wish we could get more insight and perspective from you. Great work. Keep them coming.

    What are your thoughts on h1bs/GC sponsored by universities. Do you forsee any problems with them? Also any insight on long time it takes for visa stamping?


    No problems with Universities. I was surprised to see how many h-1b's are actually held by universities.



    more...


    pictures Filed in: American Idol american idol casey abrams. Idol finalist Casey Abrams
  • Idol finalist Casey Abrams



  • 485Mbe4001
    08-06 01:41 PM
    Lets petition USCIS to scrap EB3 and send them home. Rolling_flood needs his GC real bad... We are unavailable today and will be U in 2010. you can have our 3k visa for your category.

    Have you never jumped a line in your life, i bet you have.

    We see it all the time, people will find ways to move ahead and so will you..nothing wrong with that. What is wrong is demeaning or ridiculing a group for you selfish needs...good luck with the law suit.. the least it will do is highlight problem our to a greater audience (Y).





    dresses #39;American Idol#39;: Casey Abrams american idol casey abrams. it to the American Idol
  • it to the American Idol



  • jkays94
    05-24 01:59 PM
    http://mediamatters.org/issues_topics/shows/loudobbstonight



    more...


    makeup Idol finalist casey abrams american idol casey abrams. quot;American Idolquot; finalist Casey
  • quot;American Idolquot; finalist Casey



  • Blessing&Lifeisbeautiful
    08-08 05:48 PM
    Actually; I didn't think it was courageous at all. I had to practice what I preach.

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

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

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

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

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

    bump





    girlfriend american idol casey abrams american idol casey abrams. American Idol: Jennifer Lopez
  • American Idol: Jennifer Lopez



  • sanju
    05-16 11:26 PM
    Looks like, the letter sent out to India based business houses by the US senators has surprised the Commerce minister of India, Kamalnath. He is going take this up with US in the global trade meet at Brussels.

    http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Kamal_Nath_surprised_on_H1-B_visa_issue/articleshow/2055323.cms


    Kamalnath will do us all and the 9 companies a great service by staying out of this debate. He has already contributed by making "ignorant" statements like 'H-1B is a outsource visa". This guy has no clue about the issue at hand and he simply talks in broad strokes. If he jumps into the debate, that could be the last straw to break the camel's back. We will all be better off without him.





    hairstyles Casey Abrams American Idol american idol casey abrams. Casey Abrams
  • Casey Abrams



  • rimzhim
    02-02 01:23 PM
    this info is for lou dobbs and he can search for this information in Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (for all the middle-class that can get free information, most likey coded by an H1B)

    [edit] Taxation status of H-1B workers
    H-1B workers are legally required to pay the same taxes as any other US resident, including Social Security and Medicare.[2] Any person who spends more than 183 days in the US in a calendar year is a tax resident and is required to pay US taxes on their worldwide income. From the IRS perspective, it doesn't matter if that income is paid in the US or elsewhere. If an H-1B worker is given a living allowance, it is treated the same by the IRS as any other US resident. In some cases, H-1B workers pay higher taxes than a US citizen because they are not entitled to certain deductions (eg. head of household deduction amongst many others). Some H-1B workers are not eligible to receive any Social Security or Medicare benefits unless they are able to adjust status to that of permanent resident.[3] However, if their country of citizenship has a tax agreement with the United States, they are able to collect the Social Security they've earned even if they don't gain permanent residency there. Such agreements are negotiated between the United States and other countries, typically those which have comparable standards of living and public retirement systems
    Lou knows it all; he knows it is the L-1 visa holders and not the H1B visa holders. But his viewers know what H1b is and have never heard of L1. So it helps him to cite H1B. He has shown "figures with 0 tax returns" on his show at times; they are from ppl who are now on H1B but were on L-1 in the past when they submitted the 0-tax returns.





    mirage
    08-05 07:34 AM
    You mean to say EB-2 is only meant for first time EB-2 filers, and if a person ever filed under EB-3 should not be considered to file under EB-2 again ? Are yo a 'Jamindaar' ? What you are trying to convince people is only those people who are were born rich should be allowed to live in big houses and people who were ever middle should not be allowed in big houses...Wah Wah what a idea...





    abracadabra102
    12-27 12:24 PM
    Alisa,

    Thanks for your posts. I'm glad to have a decent exchange of thoughts with you. I agree with you partly that 'non-state' actors are responsible and not Zardari Govt.. But Who created the non-state actors in the first place? Instead of paying unemployment benefits, who offered them job portability to Kashmir? Their H1B shouldnt have been renewed at all after they came on bench. How can a parent not be responsible for the errant child? The world wants to neutralize the errant child....but for the parent a child is a child after all and that too the one that served its interests once. If this child is abandoned, can future child ( with same objective) be created with the same ease?

    Those are the questions that are haunting many Indians on the forums.

    But I salute you and other folks for keeping this conversation civil.

    Kudos,
    GCisaDawg

    Nice job and you and Alisa started a good thoughtful conversation.

    I agree that war is not the best option but should not be discounted outright.
    We are thinking too much of Pakistani nuclear weapons (and to some extent India's nuclear weapons as well). When Pakistan and India last tested these (1998), many experts thought these were fizzles. I could dig up one article that hints that 1998 tests are a possible fizzles.
    1. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/newsnight/6037992.stm

    2. N. Korea tested nukes in 2006 and are definitely fizzles and these are built using the same techniques used by pakistan (AQ Khan actively involved).

    3. The other important aspect of nukes is the delivery. Pakistan's capability is suspect here as well. It is not sufficient just to have warheads and missiles (made in China), they should be tied together with proper trigger mechanism and it is uncertain if China delivered this technology to Pakistan or not.

    With points 1, 2 and 3, it is reasonable to assume Pakistan can not take out India even with first strike and with nuclear weapons. I definitely think India's nukes are more potent. Assuming Indian nukes are just as bad as Pakistani nukes, finally it boils down to conventional war, and Pakistan can never beat India in a long drawn out war. The simple reason is that, India has a robust manufacturing base and much more robust economy and can continue to produce weapons and support war, where as Pakistan has to stop the moment it runs out of the weapons it bought fron US and China. Pakistan can not expect military supplies from any country once the war starts.

    The only way Pakistan can win over India is to destroy India completely with nuclear first strike and it would have done that already if it had the capability.

    If there is a war between India and Pakistan, India wins that war with or without nukes, period. So nukes should not be a deterrent for India going to war with Pakistan.

    The other point every one is making is that wars can damage India economically. Not necessarily. Look at history and you will see that many countries prospered after wars (eg. US, UK, Germany, Japan etc. post WW-II).

    There is one more good reason for India-Pakistan war. The major reason for failed democracy in Pakistan is its military. A war between India and Pakistan has one outcome, India's victory and destruction/weakening of Pakistan army. With weakened military, Pakistan has a chance to develop as a democratic nation, and that is good for the entire region. Proof? look at what happened after Indo-Pak war of 1971 and Indira Gandhi created Bangladesh. There was resurgence of democracy, with Bhutto becoming prime minister until that crook Zia-ul-Huq murdered him.

    But I doubt any of this will happen now. I wish Indira Gandhi is Prime minister and leading India now.



    No comments:

    Post a Comment