Lobbying/Identifying the Last Successful Coalition

Right, but then the alien from the small country also has several years of experience, reputable degrees, taking masters from a top US university, etc as qualified as the ones from the large countries. If you don't even a give a chance for the guy from the small country to come here because most of the numbers are taken by the very large country, in the long run how would you know who is really more qualified in the first place. Don't forget there are personality traits and culture that are very important and important for a given organization and environment. Moreover, again is about diversity. Studies show that more diverse a group is, more efficient the group is. I don't see how the US would benefit by allowing the very large countries to take over the vast majority of Visa slots.



acmil said:
Immigration should depend on the skills that bring value to the country and not on the country where you were born. "Employment based visa" literally means based on the skills needed for employment. Moreover I dont think it is fair to give same number of visas to country with a population of 10million and 1billion. Certainly not if person from country A is more talented than person from country B.
Click to expand...
 
Sure, Nashdel. I would hire qualified people, and diverse as possible. Indians are not the only ones qualified in the world.

nashdel said:
Hey marlon, I feel cheap to answer this therefore I would say, My best wishes for you. May you go on Get you GC and then open a company with 100 employees each one from different country even if they do not have right skills.
Click to expand...
 
Lets put difference aside, focus on getting a pro immigration bill pass first

The McCain Kennedy bill has been out for over two month, however anybody know when it is going to be discussed on the floor?
 
I beg to differ from Marlon. Any quota undermines competitiveness.

It is unfair for someone to stand long in queue when somebody else just walks past and gets the Permenant Residency.

Though I agree on Diversity, I too want to point that there is no level playing field. Differential treatment for people from different country is not a fair play.

These are the days of open market and competition and talking of quota and reservation only pulls the country and its competitiveness down in the long run. Be it permanent residency or business or sports or anything for that matter.

No one can say, since Chinese have larger population, only limited Gold Medals for Chinese in Olympics or No chinese allowed to compete for Gold in any Olympics for next forseeable future.

Competition is the name of the game. Let us be sportive and accept the challenges and face the struggle together.

Thanks
 
Hey NewKidHere, I think Olympics competition is not a good analogy. When you are doing sports, you care for short-term results. I think diversity is more important in a long-term, collaborative environmnet.

For example, the other day I read that American companies are trying to hire South American executives, because that type of professionals are known to have a culture that can easily adapt to any environment. Yes, they are qualified as any in the world, but the personality trait here is as important as any of the attributes such as years of experience, education, communication skills, etc. Now if you just bring bodies from country Zillion-A or Billion-B, and you monopolize the market that way, you overhelm the folks from the small country and the host country and employers cannot take advantage of this critical qualification. Note that years of experience, number of degrees, number of language you speak at certain point is quantitative. There is more than that to be evaluated in a professional or immigrant in the long-term.

I think folks should focus to get the visa numbers increased to a point of getting them current. Asking to change this per country quota will just make the Worlwide folks like me to react and request the opposite to our good representatives. That's all.



newkidhere said:
I beg to differ from Marlon. Any quota undermines competitiveness.

It is unfair for someone to stand long in queue when somebody else just walks past and gets the Permenant Residency.

Though I agree on Diversity, I too want to point that there is no level playing field. Differential treatment for people from different country is not a fair play.

These are the days of open market and competition and talking of quota and reservation only pulls the country and its competitiveness down in the long run. Be it permanent residency or business or sports or anything for that matter.

No one can say, since Chinese have larger population, only limited Gold Medals for Chinese in Olympics or No chinese allowed to compete for Gold in any Olympics for next forseeable future.

Competition is the name of the game. Let us be sportive and accept the challenges and face the struggle together.

Thanks
Click to expand...
 
Competitiveness and Quotas

Marlon,

Don't you think that employment based visas should be based on skills and qualifications? If two people applied at the same time and both have employers who want to hire them, then they should get their green cards at the same time. What is going on right now is that there may be two people who applied at the same time, have the same skills, but one of them from the "right" country gets his greencard right away and the one from the "wrong" country might have to wait up to 7 years more.

That just seems wrong to me. The whole idea of employment based immigration is that those skills are needed in this country. Everyone who gets in line and has the skills should be treated the same way.

As for competitiveness, think of the consequences of employers knowing that a worker is not mobile -- cannot switch jobs, and needs the employer to keep refiling his H-1 -- you think that worker would be able to negotiate raises, or benefits comparable to others? How do you think that would affect the market for that type of worker?
 
No offence just trying to be logical.

There is no basis to use any of the used analogies.
In sport, it does not matter what size of you country is, you allowed to have only one team representing your country and the size of the team is not indefinite.

There is nothing about competition in immigration rules are established to serve interests of the country, it's not business, otherwise immigration benefits would be traded on NASDAQ. You may not agree that current rules are serving the country interests, but they're created by authorities elected by the people of this country.

newkidhere said:
I beg to differ from Marlon. Any quota undermines competitiveness.

It is unfair for someone to stand long in queue when somebody else just walks past and gets the Permenant Residency.

Though I agree on Diversity, I too want to point that there is no level playing field. Differential treatment for people from different country is not a fair play.

These are the days of open market and competition and talking of quota and reservation only pulls the country and its competitiveness down in the long run. Be it permanent residency or business or sports or anything for that matter.

No one can say, since Chinese have larger population, only limited Gold Medals for Chinese in Olympics or No chinese allowed to compete for Gold in any Olympics for next forseeable future.

Competition is the name of the game. Let us be sportive and accept the challenges and face the struggle together.

Thanks
Click to expand...
 
Hang on, do we have someone on this forum that is actually fine with the way things are? You don't want to change things -- since elected officials created the current mess?

Or do you only want the change the part of the law that affects you? ;-)

vvk01 said:
You may not agree that current rules are serving the country interests, but they're created by authorities elected by the people of this country.
Click to expand...
 
Diversity lottery????

Guys:

Why are we arguing? There is a diversity lottery to take care of the diversity that Marlon wants. This is employment visas we are talking about and YES there should be per country quotas....but the quotas should be in porportion to the size of the country or the contribution the talent from that country make.

Having said all this I am glad they are going to scrap the diversity lottery. I have seen a lot of people who have come here under diversity lottery...and having come here just "by chance", they do not have the adaptability, flexibility, and qualifications required to make it in the American culture and they form their own cliques and become clannish and spread their narrow-mindedness here. But I guess that is the price one should pay for "diversity" and Marlon would be OK with that. As they say, it takes all kind of people to make this world.....maybe the US government shoudl have a legal quota set aside for "illegal immigrants"...why not add them to the mix while we are at it....yes?? Variety is the spice of life...right??

And by the way, Olympics is not the right analogy for this....in Olympics we are talking about "equal representation" of all countries in a sporting event. Here we are talking about a capitalist country trying to sustain its economy with qualified imported labor while at the same time finding a strategy to manage the reaction of indigineous people to excessive strain from immigration.


Santosh
 
Participation in Olympics may not be the right analogy. However putting a quota on maximum number of gold medals that country can win can be an analogy. Imagine if there is a quota on the number of medals a country can win (in this case it would be USA) so that people from smaller countries can also win medals too and hence maintain diversity (and hence spirit of people from smaller countries).

Although I am not saying that getting a GC is equal to getting a medal. Winning a medal is much bigger achievement than getting a GC.
 
No, i just wanted to remind that there is a real world around and the reality is that immigration never was something particular country obligated to give to someone.



berkeleybee said:
Hang on, do we have someone on this forum that is actually fine with the way things are? You don't want to change things -- since elected officials created the current mess?

Or do you only want the change the part of the law that affects you? ;-)
Click to expand...
 
I agree no country is obligated to provide immigration. However you cannot have people come to your country and then make them go back once your purpose is solved. When we came to this country there were different sets of rules and we planned our life around those. Now all of the sudden the policies changed and entire planning is wasted.



vvk01 said:
No, i just wanted to remind that there is a real world around and the reality is that immigration never was something particular country obligated to give to someone.
Click to expand...
 
Stick to a discussion of lobbying groups please

All,

This thread is to discuss lobbying: identifying successful groups and discussing strategy. Lets stick to that.

You can start another thread to debate the merits of immigration -- whether any country is obliged to accept immigrants, whether it was policies that were changed or whether it was a broken system that has collapsed etc.

Thanks
 
Berkeybee, I think it should be based on qualifications. Now let's assume you are as qualified as I am. Therefore we are even on the qualifications. Honestly, most people applying for a greencard/H1B are at certain level of qualifications that are usually comparable, since it requires years of experience and background.

Now there are two ways for you to see this:you can say well, Marlon is from the "right country, not fair". Or you can say, darn, India is overpopulated and if we let them apply without quotas they would monopolize the slots and then Indians could become an *overrepresented* group in the US. I believe the latter is what makes this rule in place. Given individuals of comparable qualifications, very few managers or administrators would prefer to create a group of individuals of same ethnical background. I have been through an MBA program in the US, there are technical reasons why you wouldn't want to allow this to happen. Given individuals of comparable qualifications, what is the case here, the diversity is usually the best option and I think the quotas in this case are the "headcounts" control in place. I am sorry you guys have to wait all this long. We may never agree with this and that's fine. I will not post in this thread again. Send me a private e-mail if you would like. I hope we can fight together and support bills that can improve the situation. Cheers.

berkeleybee said:
Marlon,

Don't you think that employment based visas should be based on skills and qualifications? If two people applied at the same time and both have employers who want to hire them, then they should get their green cards at the same time. What is going on right now is that there may be two people who applied at the same time, have the same skills, but one of them from the "right" country gets his greencard right away and the one from the "wrong" country might have to wait up to 7 years more.

That just seems wrong to me. The whole idea of employment based immigration is that those skills are needed in this country. Everyone who gets in line and has the skills should be treated the same way.

As for competitiveness, think of the consequences of employers knowing that a worker is not mobile -- cannot switch jobs, and needs the employer to keep refiling his H-1 -- you think that worker would be able to negotiate raises, or benefits comparable to others? How do you think that would affect the market for that type of worker?
Click to expand...
 
More importantly , a GC applicant should have the knowledge as to what to expect while planning for the future. After say 3-4 years of time invested in this process suddenly they say ok now the rules have changed or visas are not available that is not fair.

I would say that all bright and talented students/professionals in India think million times before planning to settle in US !
 
Yeah my comment is on the same lines of what "ACMIL" mentioned above but this thing is going over and over in my mind ever since this retro issue has come up.Sorry berkleybee for not keeping to the topic.



retro_unjust said:
More importantly , a GC applicant should have the knowledge as to what to expect while planning for the future. After say 3-4 years of time invested in this process suddenly they say ok now the rules have changed or visas are not available that is not fair.

I would say that all bright and talented students/professionals in India think
million times before planning to settle in US !
Click to expand...
 
Profound Fallacy

This fallacy is *so* profound I have to respond. Any more and I'm going to start a new thread. If you'd like to respond please start a new thread, maybe called "Why Per-Country Limits on Employment Categories Should be Preserved"

Marlon says "Or you can say, darn, India is overpopulated and if we let them apply without quotas they would monopolize the slots and then Indians could become an *overrepresented* group in the US. I believe the latter is what makes this rule in place. Given individuals of comparable qualifications, very few managers or administrators would prefer to create a group of individuals of same ethnical background."

I have to remind you that it is *employers* who sponsor these labor certification applications. If Microsoft has a thousands of Indian and Chinese EB labor certification applicants pending it is because they find them useful; if they wanted people from any other country absolutely nothing is stopping them from going and getting them, especially since they get to keep them far more easily than an Indian or Chinese person. I can only conclude that they have picked the most qualified people, and satisfied whatever goals they have for diversity etc.

Check out the list of firms that are affiliated with Compete America -- over 200 American firms, even the US Chamber of Commerce -- and they are not fans of this quota system for employment based greencards.

Also, employment based greencard applicants are a small fraction (apparently between 12-16%) of all greencards. Doing the logical thing and removing per-country limits from this category isn't going to create an all Indian/Chinese America.

As for technical reasons learnt at MBA schools for why per-country limits should be preserved.... I taught at a rather well known MBA program and frankly I'm mystified.

I wish you the best. May we all come out of this mess with our optimism and sanity intact.


marlon2006 said:
Berkeybee, I think it should be based on qualifications. Now let's assume you are as qualified as I am. Therefore we are even on the qualifications. Honestly, most people applying for a greencard/H1B are at certain level of qualifications that are usually comparable, since it requires years of experience and background.

Now there are two ways for you to see this:you can say well, Marlon is from the "right country, not fair". Or you can say, darn, India is overpopulated and if we let them apply without quotas they would monopolize the slots and then Indians could become an *overrepresented* group in the US. I believe the latter is what makes this rule in place. Given individuals of comparable qualifications, very few managers or administrators would prefer to create a group of individuals of same ethnical background. I have been through an MBA program in the US, there are technical reasons why you wouldn't want to allow this to happen. Given individuals of comparable qualifications, what is the case here, the diversity is usually the best option and I think the quotas in this case are the "headcounts" control in place. I am sorry you guys have to wait all this long. We may never agree with this and that's fine. I will not post in this thread again. Send me a private e-mail if you would like. I hope we can fight together and support bills that can improve the situation. Cheers.
Click to expand...
 
Applying4GC,

I saw the list of the organizations that you mentioned in your message that are supporting Kennedy-McCain act.

It is very unfortunate that there are no organizations of Indian origin. May be some of the Immigration lawyers of Indian origin are part of the AILA. But where are the Indian American organizations. They will be very active in arranging Bollywood night, Ganesh puja and so on. when it comes to helping their own community, no one cares.

We may need to contact the influential Indians in both the Democratic and Republican parties. when they can arrange fund raising events for the Presidential elections why cant they support us.
 
marlon2006
I agree with you. US needs people from all over the world who have right skills, talents and are willing to contribute to the country. This a land of immigrants and it is the immigrants that brought diversity in many ways.
 
marlon2006

I clicked send by accident before completing the message.

I do agree with you that we need diversity but at the same time we should keep in mind that we are talking about the "Employement Based" green cards. There are various categories for permenant residency like, Family based, Lottery based and so on. Why people of Indian origin are not allowed to participate in the the GC lottery??
Isnt it discriminatory. Let us stop arguing on this. The US Congress can decide what to do. What ever we exchange on this fourm, it is not going to be heard in the Congress -:)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top