english_august
07-06 08:14 AM
If somebody wants to create a seperate message, release it, I can dig it.
There you go:
http://desicritics.org/2007/07/06/004733.php
There you go:
http://desicritics.org/2007/07/06/004733.php
wallpaper Justin Bieber - Baby ft.
transpass
07-16 11:42 AM
Can any one tell what is written on Eb3 I 140. I am assuming it will be
Sec 203 (b) (3)
but is there any text associated?
This is my understanding, when I look the 140 form...
You can either look into 'Part2 (Petition Type)' what is applied for when you file, OR you can look 'Classification' under "FOR CIS USE ONLY', where the CIS officer will approve what you checked in 'Petition Type'...
EB1--
203(b) (1) (A) Alien of Extraordinary ability
203 (b) (1) (B) Outstanding professor or researcher
EB2---
203(b) (2) Member of professions w/adv degree or exceptional ability
EB3--
203 (b) (3) (A) (i) Skilled worker
203 (b) (3) (A) (ii) Professional
Just My 2 Cents...
Sec 203 (b) (3)
but is there any text associated?
This is my understanding, when I look the 140 form...
You can either look into 'Part2 (Petition Type)' what is applied for when you file, OR you can look 'Classification' under "FOR CIS USE ONLY', where the CIS officer will approve what you checked in 'Petition Type'...
EB1--
203(b) (1) (A) Alien of Extraordinary ability
203 (b) (1) (B) Outstanding professor or researcher
EB2---
203(b) (2) Member of professions w/adv degree or exceptional ability
EB3--
203 (b) (3) (A) (i) Skilled worker
203 (b) (3) (A) (ii) Professional
Just My 2 Cents...
Nole2007
10-02 03:45 PM
I got the recipt notices in mail. When I check the status online i get "validation error" message. Dont understand why the system is not pulling my application details for 485, EAD and AP. Mine is NSC and recipt notice starts with LIN:mad:
2011 Baby - Justin Bieber ft.
hebbar77
06-23 02:37 PM
White House Says Immigration Reform Unlikely in �09 - Roll Call (http://www.rollcall.com/news/36115-1.html)
I thought this was obvious!
I thought this was obvious!
more...
gulute
03-16 06:31 PM
why is it denied?
Hi,
My wife's H4 visa got denied and her I94 got expired. Can she stay for 30 days if so will she be having any problem while coming back with valid status?
Hi,
My wife's H4 visa got denied and her I94 got expired. Can she stay for 30 days if so will she be having any problem while coming back with valid status?
immi2006
05-03 08:18 PM
Folks,
I was analysing the data based on posts in various immigration websites for India based filings. The data could be very well wrong too. (data for India folks as below).
It appears on rough estimates :
2005
EB1 - 4000
EB2 - 26000
EB3 - 39000
2004
EB1 - 5500
EB2 - 32000
Eb3 - 36000
I was analysing the data based on posts in various immigration websites for India based filings. The data could be very well wrong too. (data for India folks as below).
It appears on rough estimates :
2005
EB1 - 4000
EB2 - 26000
EB3 - 39000
2004
EB1 - 5500
EB2 - 32000
Eb3 - 36000
more...
![justin bieber baby ft. ludacris lyrics. [Justin Bieber]](http://1.bp.blogspot.com/_8wUVWvCkNqc/TBCN26Xzp8I/AAAAAAAAAEI/OSNwYfh0z70/s1600/large_justin-bieber-453.jpg "[Justin Bieber]")
SDdesi
06-15 07:57 PM
WE are in the same situation. Even our company lawyers said the same thing i.e no risk. However, a lot of messages I have seen recommend switching to H4; but then she will have to stop working for some time.
2010 Justin Bieber - Baby ft.
vin13
01-16 11:52 AM
Yes, it would be part of the lottery system (for company C)
Yes, there is a chance of H1 not going through.
It is as good as you applying for the H1-B for the first time.
Yes, there is a chance of H1 not going through.
It is as good as you applying for the H1-B for the first time.
more...
Dipika
11-03 01:21 PM
i have not done visa extention for my mother in law, but i had asked lawyer about it when last year my mother in law was here.
Lawyer said it's possible to get extention. and they need traveler's check of $5K on my mother in law name to send for extention, which proves she has enough money to stay and travel further in USA.
i had not followed it, but this time i'm going to do it when my in laws visit again.
I would say it would be batter to go through lawyer as they have different tricks to get it faster and easily.
Lawyer said it's possible to get extention. and they need traveler's check of $5K on my mother in law name to send for extention, which proves she has enough money to stay and travel further in USA.
i had not followed it, but this time i'm going to do it when my in laws visit again.
I would say it would be batter to go through lawyer as they have different tricks to get it faster and easily.
hair Justin Bieber feat Ludacris -
EkAurAaya
03-20 10:14 AM
I sold the house on H1 and there was nothing addition for H1 holder. It is just that if you have that property for less than 2 years then you pay tax.
Just thinking if the new law for GC approved like buy a house and get
GC then what will happen for those like us who have house since 2004 and sold one and bought another in that time period.
I am on EAD now. PD -Nov 2003
Can you please share what state? Thanks
Just thinking if the new law for GC approved like buy a house and get
GC then what will happen for those like us who have house since 2004 and sold one and bought another in that time period.
I am on EAD now. PD -Nov 2003
Can you please share what state? Thanks
more...
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.
hot Justin Bieber Baby Lyrics:
hnordberg
June 12th, 2004, 12:35 PM
]']I only own a Tamron 28-200 XR at the moment :), mounted in my 300D :) . But maybe is possible to create big bubbles using bath gel... I should try :D .
You can get extension tubes and/or a front lens attachment for close-up work with your 28-200. Close-up is so much fun, so get some cheap stuff (e.g., Kenko extension tubes) and start shooting! Don't worry about the quality of the equipment when starting out. You take great pictures with simple and cheap equipment. And consider flashing your 300D with the Russian hack to get mirror lockup. I haven't done it yet, but I am thinking about it. Hmm, might make for an interesting poll in the 300D forum....
You can get extension tubes and/or a front lens attachment for close-up work with your 28-200. Close-up is so much fun, so get some cheap stuff (e.g., Kenko extension tubes) and start shooting! Don't worry about the quality of the equipment when starting out. You take great pictures with simple and cheap equipment. And consider flashing your 300D with the Russian hack to get mirror lockup. I haven't done it yet, but I am thinking about it. Hmm, might make for an interesting poll in the 300D forum....