nirenjoshi
01-17 08:53 AM
I had the same problem.. That you can file for ITIN only when filinf tax return. But the lady at the IRS office told me that if your spouse's name is added to an interest bearing account - say for example your savings bank account. Then IRS is required to assign an ITIN number to your spouse. There is a place to select the reason why you need the ITIN, on the form. You will need a letter from the bank that this person has an interst bearing account with us.. Thats all I sent and got the ITIN number for my wife.
wallpaper Anno 2004. Lancia musa 13
GCBy3000
05-18 09:24 AM
I'm using the service of Brikho & Kallabat...till now did not have any issue with my extension...currently on 8th year...as my employer pays my extension fee...not sure how much is the total cost...have asked them...will update as get info.
rgds,
lfgc
...recd info fm the attorney's office...
The H-1B processing fees are as follows: Attorney Fees $900, Filing Fees
$2,190 for companies with 26 or more employees and $1,440 for companies
with 25 or less employees, Office Expense $50.
so, for extension...it may still be $900.
I think employer should bear the full cost of H1B and H1B extension. It is illegal for the employer to get that money from employee.
rgds,
lfgc
...recd info fm the attorney's office...
The H-1B processing fees are as follows: Attorney Fees $900, Filing Fees
$2,190 for companies with 26 or more employees and $1,440 for companies
with 25 or less employees, Office Expense $50.
so, for extension...it may still be $900.
I think employer should bear the full cost of H1B and H1B extension. It is illegal for the employer to get that money from employee.
reddy77
04-13 02:36 PM
So did you answer the RFE ? ....
Thanks Guys ..... Nah, I am still waiting for that, will update you once I got it ....
Thanks Guys ..... Nah, I am still waiting for that, will update you once I got it ....
2011 Anno 2004. Lancia musa
pushkarw
12-21 01:50 PM
The omni-bus has come and gone! The MILLION dollar drive is a long term strategy. It aims to give IV enough funds to steamroll ahead. It will help IV become pro-active. Every time there is a ray of hope, IV has to come to us for money. A MILLION dollars will ensure that IV does not have to do that. We are nearly 30,000 members and not enough are contributing. The MILLION dollar drive was about one-time contributions of $250 (mind you all contributions are valuable) to reach the magic figure of a million dollars. IV needs the money to become more powerful.
What is that "Million $$$ drive". I did contrubute to omini bus 30K drive. But I havent heard of this drive?
What is that "Million $$$ drive". I did contrubute to omini bus 30K drive. But I havent heard of this drive?
more...
kaisersose
10-12 08:47 AM
Dear experts.. Need your advise..
I stayed in US for full 5 years on L1-B. After 5 years period I applied for H1-B and returned to Inida on 1-Jan-07. And I got H1-B in lottery. Below are my queries
1) My I-797 says that its valid for only one year till October 2008. What could be the reason. (Because I stayed 5 years in US? )
2) So is it advisable to go to stamping after 1-Jan-08? Or can I go for stamping now? I don't want to be in a situtation where I'll b given Visa till Jan'08?
3) Now my company wants to apply for L1-A. What happens to my current H1-B if L1 is applied?
Assuming applying L1 is not going to be invalidate my H1 papers,
4) If I go for L1 stamping, will it invalidate my H1-B papers?
5) If I come to US on L1, is it possible to change status to H1?
Any help will be greatly appreciated.
1) Possibly.
2) The visa wil lbe given for the validity of the petition. But for your clock to reset, do not enter the US until it is a full year after you left. .
3) Just applying will generally not do anything since you have not yet joined the H employer. You will have a choice at the port of entry to pick a visa. It is possible the other visa may be canceled at the port of entry.
4) Answered in 3
5) Yes. You can take your chances wth next year's lottery or you can travel outside and enter with your H visa. I would say do not get your H stamped yet. Save it for an emergency. That way there is no risk of it getting canceled because you used a L.
I stayed in US for full 5 years on L1-B. After 5 years period I applied for H1-B and returned to Inida on 1-Jan-07. And I got H1-B in lottery. Below are my queries
1) My I-797 says that its valid for only one year till October 2008. What could be the reason. (Because I stayed 5 years in US? )
2) So is it advisable to go to stamping after 1-Jan-08? Or can I go for stamping now? I don't want to be in a situtation where I'll b given Visa till Jan'08?
3) Now my company wants to apply for L1-A. What happens to my current H1-B if L1 is applied?
Assuming applying L1 is not going to be invalidate my H1 papers,
4) If I go for L1 stamping, will it invalidate my H1-B papers?
5) If I come to US on L1, is it possible to change status to H1?
Any help will be greatly appreciated.
1) Possibly.
2) The visa wil lbe given for the validity of the petition. But for your clock to reset, do not enter the US until it is a full year after you left. .
3) Just applying will generally not do anything since you have not yet joined the H employer. You will have a choice at the port of entry to pick a visa. It is possible the other visa may be canceled at the port of entry.
4) Answered in 3
5) Yes. You can take your chances wth next year's lottery or you can travel outside and enter with your H visa. I would say do not get your H stamped yet. Save it for an emergency. That way there is no risk of it getting canceled because you used a L.
sujan_vatrapu
10-27 11:17 AM
You probably know what you are getting, but there are others who believe all the lies that FOX spreads - don't always look through the prism of your problems...
At least on the other news outlets, they bring 2 sides of opinions, unlike FOX - which only shows one side of the issues 25% of the time, and the host spews his/her talking points for the rest of the 75% of the show!
Having said that, I would much prefer for the news outlets (ABC, CNN, NBC, CBS, NPR ..) to not only give 2 sides of the story, but actually do some investigative journalism and come to conclusions. Ask the tough questions and if all they get is talking points cut them off.........
Again you missed the point, main news media outlets have liberal views on issues, they don't bring conservative view but they say so, i watch CNN, CBS, listen to NPR, I am not saying FOX is the best but they are as good as the rest, agn my point is all the channels have left or right view (NONE have a centrist view), we should not discount FOX because they have conservative views,
in a recent survey more than half surveyed picked FOX as the most trusted new channel, if we think they are fools there is definitely something with us!
At least on the other news outlets, they bring 2 sides of opinions, unlike FOX - which only shows one side of the issues 25% of the time, and the host spews his/her talking points for the rest of the 75% of the show!
Having said that, I would much prefer for the news outlets (ABC, CNN, NBC, CBS, NPR ..) to not only give 2 sides of the story, but actually do some investigative journalism and come to conclusions. Ask the tough questions and if all they get is talking points cut them off.........
Again you missed the point, main news media outlets have liberal views on issues, they don't bring conservative view but they say so, i watch CNN, CBS, listen to NPR, I am not saying FOX is the best but they are as good as the rest, agn my point is all the channels have left or right view (NONE have a centrist view), we should not discount FOX because they have conservative views,
in a recent survey more than half surveyed picked FOX as the most trusted new channel, if we think they are fools there is definitely something with us!
more...
diptam
07-27 10:12 AM
Vikram Man,
You are awesome - Thanks for your help..
Diptam
You are awesome - Thanks for your help..
Diptam
2010 Anno 2004. Lancia musa 1 3
h1b_tristate
07-27 11:22 PM
^
more...
REEF�
06-06 11:44 AM
The girl looks too blurry but nice :).
And I thought RED means EVIL and BLUE means GOOD :puzzle:?
And I thought RED means EVIL and BLUE means GOOD :puzzle:?
hair Lancia MUSA
thomachan72
11-08 03:03 PM
regarding carrying older LCAs;
It might never be asked. However, the only time it is asked is when you dont have it with you.
Be prepared to carry a transparent plastic bag or so with all the documents. Its a pain but better to be careful.:(
It might never be asked. However, the only time it is asked is when you dont have it with you.
Be prepared to carry a transparent plastic bag or so with all the documents. Its a pain but better to be careful.:(
more...
kondur_007
03-28 10:16 PM
Was the extension with current employer applied before the expiry of your current I 94? Then only 240 days rule apply. Otherwise your are accumulating illegal presence.
You need help from a good competent attorney instead of advise from forum; your case is quite complicated. If not handled properly, you may be subject to 3/10 bar. In any case, you need a very good legal advise even before you leave US.
You need help from a good competent attorney instead of advise from forum; your case is quite complicated. If not handled properly, you may be subject to 3/10 bar. In any case, you need a very good legal advise even before you leave US.
hot Lancia musa 1 3 gasolio udine
alterego
12-12 07:03 PM
My guess is they retrogressed to basically stem demand completely as they felt they had used too many visas too soon, and that is where they decided they need to put the date to extinguish demand. Last month they tried Jan. 2002, but quite clearly that did not have the desired impact. Hence the further move backward.
This is not too hard to see once you realize you are speaking about 2800 visas for EB2 India, and that means 700 per quarter or about 250-300 primary beneficiaries. When they kept PD at Apr 2004 for the first 3 months, why is it hard to envision that they went through say about 500 primary applicants with such dates, between genuinely old petitions, substitute labor petitions and EB3 to EB2 jumpers, backlog center applicants etc? I mean the truth hurts but this is where it is at. My guess is they have almost certainly used up over 1/2 of the annual allotment for EB2 India, hence they mentioned last month they used up 38% and now they are warning about the possibility of unavailability in coming months preparing us for the inevitable.
EB3 won't be too far behind in my guesstimate since if they move dates by just a few months this will drive up demand and the fate of that PD will be the same as EB2. 2800 visas inclusive of family members for EB2 and EB3 India is like feeding a hungry lion a chicken wing.:)
The one possibility that might help us is if once again around the may-june-july time period they accelerate demand by moving EB India to use up visa numbers. If my memory serves me right they did end up using about 15K visas for EB2 India last year. There is no guarantee they will do that again this year however after last years VB fiasco for which they took a lot of heat, they may just let the visas go.
I see visa recapture as our only hope for temporary relief. Failing which we desperately need administrative fixes like 3yr EADs etc to ease our pain while we wait out the presidential elections next year. Lets hope for the best with the omnibus legislation.
This is not too hard to see once you realize you are speaking about 2800 visas for EB2 India, and that means 700 per quarter or about 250-300 primary beneficiaries. When they kept PD at Apr 2004 for the first 3 months, why is it hard to envision that they went through say about 500 primary applicants with such dates, between genuinely old petitions, substitute labor petitions and EB3 to EB2 jumpers, backlog center applicants etc? I mean the truth hurts but this is where it is at. My guess is they have almost certainly used up over 1/2 of the annual allotment for EB2 India, hence they mentioned last month they used up 38% and now they are warning about the possibility of unavailability in coming months preparing us for the inevitable.
EB3 won't be too far behind in my guesstimate since if they move dates by just a few months this will drive up demand and the fate of that PD will be the same as EB2. 2800 visas inclusive of family members for EB2 and EB3 India is like feeding a hungry lion a chicken wing.:)
The one possibility that might help us is if once again around the may-june-july time period they accelerate demand by moving EB India to use up visa numbers. If my memory serves me right they did end up using about 15K visas for EB2 India last year. There is no guarantee they will do that again this year however after last years VB fiasco for which they took a lot of heat, they may just let the visas go.
I see visa recapture as our only hope for temporary relief. Failing which we desperately need administrative fixes like 3yr EADs etc to ease our pain while we wait out the presidential elections next year. Lets hope for the best with the omnibus legislation.
more...
house Anno 2004. Lancia musa 1 v
MannyD
10-02 03:04 PM
But see that is exactly my question. Say u surrender All your I-94 copies. however on entering they still give you a BRAND new I-94 on the airplane (assuming you are crossing by airplane ofcourse). Now That has a totally new I-94 number than what your H1B I-94 had. That is where i get confused.
Crudely stated, I94 indicates the date by which you ought to leave US and is given to you when you land in the US - so you will have a new I94 number every time you enter US. I don't think you should bother about more than two I94s at any time. One will be the one on your passport and the other in your newest H1B approval in case you have an approval after your entry into US. Let's say you are one of the "happy" folks who have to extend H1B every year: So here, when you leave US you submit the I94 from the H1B approval document (I797) that you'd be using to get your visa stamped abroad. When you land you'd get a new I94 that's valid until the date in the I797 (= visa expiry date now in your passport).
Crudely stated, I94 indicates the date by which you ought to leave US and is given to you when you land in the US - so you will have a new I94 number every time you enter US. I don't think you should bother about more than two I94s at any time. One will be the one on your passport and the other in your newest H1B approval in case you have an approval after your entry into US. Let's say you are one of the "happy" folks who have to extend H1B every year: So here, when you leave US you submit the I94 from the H1B approval document (I797) that you'd be using to get your visa stamped abroad. When you land you'd get a new I94 that's valid until the date in the I797 (= visa expiry date now in your passport).
tattoo Nowa strona 24
dionysus
01-24 11:37 AM
Filing for I-485 is better as after six months, the employers can not do much. Disagree with this post altogether.
Of course it is better. I am not denying that. But is it an achievable goal? Is this goal likely to be reached in next one year?
Asking for greater job flexibility is the goal that IV can reach within this session of the house itself. This is what it should focus upon. This will mean that within a couple of months EB based GC seekers will start getting offers with better salaries and better benefits.
Of course it is better. I am not denying that. But is it an achievable goal? Is this goal likely to be reached in next one year?
Asking for greater job flexibility is the goal that IV can reach within this session of the house itself. This is what it should focus upon. This will mean that within a couple of months EB based GC seekers will start getting offers with better salaries and better benefits.
more...
pictures De Lancia Musa 2004
ups
07-12 09:27 AM
yes you can. I my self did that. Only difference is that we both are on h1b(industry)
dresses wallpaper of Lancia NuovaMusa
gsc999
01-18 01:35 PM
Needhelp, new year greetings!
Its a team effort, nandakumar, abhijit and few others are behind this new effort. You will see, as the day progresses.
Wonderful news!
And gsc is back with a bang!
Its a team effort, nandakumar, abhijit and few others are behind this new effort. You will see, as the day progresses.
Wonderful news!
And gsc is back with a bang!
more...
makeup Anno 2004. Lancia musa 1 4 16v
shan74
10-23 07:20 AM
There is a chance that i might get laid off. I have a pending I485 filed on July 2. My I-140 was approved in June 06. Would like to know if i get laid off within how many days do i have to find a job.
really need to know this based on the market situation.
really need to know this based on the market situation.
girlfriend lancia musa 1.4 16v platino
chem2
06-01 06:36 PM
labor certificate for gc application and LCA for H1 are two different things. labor certificate for gc application is for a future job and employer is certifying that they will pay you per gc labor certificate once you get your gc and has nothing to do with h1 LCA.
hairstyles 2005 Lancia Musa Platino+
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.
sanju
08-02 11:46 PM
Thanks for the information. VB dates were stuck around April 2001 date because a large number of applications were filed to meet the deadline for
245i.
The dates were �current� until 2005 because of the availability of unused visa numbers that were recaptured by AC-21 bill - passed in 2000-2001. So countries with larger applicant pool got (a lot) more than the otherwise allowed ~3000 green cards in each category. Since 2005, there are no recaptured visa numbers are available, so applicants in a category from any specific country cannot get more than ~ 3000 green cards. Pls. see the distribution of green card numbers in 2006 in his document:
http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY06AnnualReportTableV-Part2.pdf
Most people on the forum are busy tracking their 485 receipt, of encashment of bank checks, IO comments etc. Most people will learn that all this is tracking is of no use other than helping everybody to have higher BP. If more green card numbers are not allocated, the wait time for applicants with priority date 2006 could possibly be more than a decade. The past trends were driven by positive events like visa recapture etc. So these trends are not reflective of what to expect in the future. But looking at 2006 numbers, one thing is for sure, the wait times could be a many more that what we would expect.
There is only thing that can prevent wait times of more than 10-15 years - change in the law to increase the number of EB GCs.
245i.
The dates were �current� until 2005 because of the availability of unused visa numbers that were recaptured by AC-21 bill - passed in 2000-2001. So countries with larger applicant pool got (a lot) more than the otherwise allowed ~3000 green cards in each category. Since 2005, there are no recaptured visa numbers are available, so applicants in a category from any specific country cannot get more than ~ 3000 green cards. Pls. see the distribution of green card numbers in 2006 in his document:
http://travel.state.gov/pdf/FY06AnnualReportTableV-Part2.pdf
Most people on the forum are busy tracking their 485 receipt, of encashment of bank checks, IO comments etc. Most people will learn that all this is tracking is of no use other than helping everybody to have higher BP. If more green card numbers are not allocated, the wait time for applicants with priority date 2006 could possibly be more than a decade. The past trends were driven by positive events like visa recapture etc. So these trends are not reflective of what to expect in the future. But looking at 2006 numbers, one thing is for sure, the wait times could be a many more that what we would expect.
There is only thing that can prevent wait times of more than 10-15 years - change in the law to increase the number of EB GCs.
backtoschool
12-28 12:32 PM
I spoke to some one and he has told me the following:
(1) Yes, you can take off of education outside US . Make sure that employer does not revoke I-140. And uey, ofcourse you will be returning for a similar job.. ( Yeh right I will do the same job after investing in MBA. LOL. I wont.. its on paper)
(2) EAD and AP can be applied on one;s behalf in his or her abscence from the US. The catch is that one must return tothe US before the AP that you used to exit before it expires. So the plan would be apply for new AP in your abscence as soon as it is approved return to US for a day or two pick the new one and exit again.
(3) 485/GC is for future jobs.
(4) Looks like it is possible.. this is :"similar to a situation where in yoru co decides to send you to a mission outside US for extended period.
Other questions for folks who asked me:
My stats
EB3 - india
PD Jul 2002
No, i am not stuck in the name check stuff. Just the BS wait!!!
SO, guys who else is moving outside US for education?
(1) Yes, you can take off of education outside US . Make sure that employer does not revoke I-140. And uey, ofcourse you will be returning for a similar job.. ( Yeh right I will do the same job after investing in MBA. LOL. I wont.. its on paper)
(2) EAD and AP can be applied on one;s behalf in his or her abscence from the US. The catch is that one must return tothe US before the AP that you used to exit before it expires. So the plan would be apply for new AP in your abscence as soon as it is approved return to US for a day or two pick the new one and exit again.
(3) 485/GC is for future jobs.
(4) Looks like it is possible.. this is :"similar to a situation where in yoru co decides to send you to a mission outside US for extended period.
Other questions for folks who asked me:
My stats
EB3 - india
PD Jul 2002
No, i am not stuck in the name check stuff. Just the BS wait!!!
SO, guys who else is moving outside US for education?
0 comments:
Post a Comment