Retrogression: Doing Math part 2
- Thread starter akela
- Start date
GCstart,
your calculation has many flaws,
1.First we do not know that 50% of H1B are Indians in all years, In one year I saw the stat as 41% were Indian. If you have any figure or want to do some analysis look at the reply after you, maybe you will find the total figure.(I am not doing that right now, since for my case mid 2002, this analysis does not add value but it takes humongeos time, and I am slightly tight on time)
2.EB-2 to EB-3 ratio has been typically 29% to 71%. (near 1:2 that you are claiming but lets use the istorical average if we know that, this though does not tell us what is the Indian distribution, does it closely mirrior historical average or not).
3.You are assuming that the year the H1B came in, the same year they applied for GC. Typically that is incorrect. As you would see as of Sept 2005 9and not counting any PERM approvals), there were 73 K worldwide EB 485 pending in USCIS, and 350 K (including 100k to 250 k 245i, depending on who is telling the truth, my analysis says only 100k are 245 i filings, Murthy is throwing 250 k NUMBER). So total 485 pending and GC in backlog are (not counting 245i) 150k + 73k = 225k for all the world. How many Indians, typically till 2003 when no retrogression, not more than 25% were Indians. Can that number jump to 50% suddenly, I have my doubts. Remeber there is a myth (that 50% of H1B are Indians) and then there is reality. I have not seen a number to support this figure, if you have please show me, I will stand corrected.
4.The other wrong in your calculation is, you are assuming that when the visa limit was 190k , all visas were granted, I doubt that. Moreover you are not taking into account, multiple visa filling for the same person. I have no figures to predict any of these. But you have to factor that.
Bottomline there were as of Sept 2005 only 225k 485 and GC left (excluding perm). You can do the math from there. Remeber 485 includes EB1 where as Backlog labor does not.
Few historical averages are as such
1. EB1:EB2:EB3 (in 485 stage) = 20:20:60
2.EB2:EB3 (in labor) - 29:71
3.Indians: 25% of all approvals for year 2000,01,02,03 (and suprisingly each year it has been close to that figure, meaning standard deviation is close to 0)
3.For my distribution i.e. mid 2002, 20% of people in BEC are ahead of me.
(You can find your dist, from the reference that I have attached)
4.Remeber these are historical averages (and might not apply to present scenerio, I agree, I think more than 25% of H1B visa go to Indian any given year)
5. Distribution etc are worl daverages, you cannot blindly apply that to country average, maybe from other countries more masters come than bachelors or vice versa (compared to Indians), taht will greatly skew the ratio. But given the lack of country specific number, they are the best averages to use.
6.Distribution is also partly guess work....but again the best guess
rgds
your calculation has many flaws,
1.First we do not know that 50% of H1B are Indians in all years, In one year I saw the stat as 41% were Indian. If you have any figure or want to do some analysis look at the reply after you, maybe you will find the total figure.(I am not doing that right now, since for my case mid 2002, this analysis does not add value but it takes humongeos time, and I am slightly tight on time)
2.EB-2 to EB-3 ratio has been typically 29% to 71%. (near 1:2 that you are claiming but lets use the istorical average if we know that, this though does not tell us what is the Indian distribution, does it closely mirrior historical average or not).
3.You are assuming that the year the H1B came in, the same year they applied for GC. Typically that is incorrect. As you would see as of Sept 2005 9and not counting any PERM approvals), there were 73 K worldwide EB 485 pending in USCIS, and 350 K (including 100k to 250 k 245i, depending on who is telling the truth, my analysis says only 100k are 245 i filings, Murthy is throwing 250 k NUMBER). So total 485 pending and GC in backlog are (not counting 245i) 150k + 73k = 225k for all the world. How many Indians, typically till 2003 when no retrogression, not more than 25% were Indians. Can that number jump to 50% suddenly, I have my doubts. Remeber there is a myth (that 50% of H1B are Indians) and then there is reality. I have not seen a number to support this figure, if you have please show me, I will stand corrected.
4.The other wrong in your calculation is, you are assuming that when the visa limit was 190k , all visas were granted, I doubt that. Moreover you are not taking into account, multiple visa filling for the same person. I have no figures to predict any of these. But you have to factor that.
Bottomline there were as of Sept 2005 only 225k 485 and GC left (excluding perm). You can do the math from there. Remeber 485 includes EB1 where as Backlog labor does not.
Few historical averages are as such
1. EB1:EB2:EB3 (in 485 stage) = 20:20:60
2.EB2:EB3 (in labor) - 29:71
3.Indians: 25% of all approvals for year 2000,01,02,03 (and suprisingly each year it has been close to that figure, meaning standard deviation is close to 0)
3.For my distribution i.e. mid 2002, 20% of people in BEC are ahead of me.
(You can find your dist, from the reference that I have attached)
4.Remeber these are historical averages (and might not apply to present scenerio, I agree, I think more than 25% of H1B visa go to Indian any given year)
5. Distribution etc are worl daverages, you cannot blindly apply that to country average, maybe from other countries more masters come than bachelors or vice versa (compared to Indians), taht will greatly skew the ratio. But given the lack of country specific number, they are the best averages to use.
6.Distribution is also partly guess work....but again the best guess
rgds
I am going to fine tune my calculations and also highlight assumptions I made
Yes, You have made valid points - some of those were in my mind but I wanted to do a quick back-of-envelope calculations.
I am going to fine tune these calculations and estimate a few scenrios, hopefully, over the weekend. I will keep your inputs in mind.
Any other inputs is also appreciated.
Regards
GCStrat
Yes, You have made valid points - some of those were in my mind but I wanted to do a quick back-of-envelope calculations.
I am going to fine tune these calculations and estimate a few scenrios, hopefully, over the weekend. I will keep your inputs in mind.
Any other inputs is also appreciated.
Regards
GCStrat
smart guys
Dear Akela and the other guys in the forum,
You guys seem to be pretty smart with nos. and analysis and seem to be spending a lot of time doing so. I would request you guys (if you have not done it already) to please join immigrationvoice.org
With all your enthusiasm and positive energy you could steer us out of this retrogression by being a part of immigrationvoice.org
Dear Akela and the other guys in the forum,
You guys seem to be pretty smart with nos. and analysis and seem to be spending a lot of time doing so. I would request you guys (if you have not done it already) to please join immigrationvoice.org
With all your enthusiasm and positive energy you could steer us out of this retrogression by being a part of immigrationvoice.org
Some more numbers
http://boards.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?p=1335129#post1335129
By region, these were the 245i case loads in Jan 2002:
San Francisco - 62,950
New York - 59,523
Atlanta - 27,209
Philadelphia - 26,230
Boston - 18,205
Dallas - 17,198
Chicago - 16,503
Make some assumptions of the ethnicities that settle down in those areas.
__________________
LC State: New York PD: 11/14/2001
DISCLAIMER: Just my opinions, so act accordingly
http://boards.immigrationportal.com/showthread.php?p=1335129#post1335129
By region, these were the 245i case loads in Jan 2002:
San Francisco - 62,950
New York - 59,523
Atlanta - 27,209
Philadelphia - 26,230
Boston - 18,205
Dallas - 17,198
Chicago - 16,503
Make some assumptions of the ethnicities that settle down in those areas.
__________________
LC State: New York PD: 11/14/2001
DISCLAIMER: Just my opinions, so act accordingly
EB2_091505
Registered Users (C)
other factors for gcstart to consider..
out of 225K assume 25K might have gone back /screwed by stupid companies/ got labor denied AKA they are back to square one.
so wehave 80-100K indians waiting inline...
if we consider 100K for calculation simplicities...
100KX2.25= 225K total indians in all categories...
using 20:25:55 distribution...
45K : 55K : remaining...
but i know lot of these people may have got their GC alredy...
MY optimism says... 1 Yr for EB1, 18 Months for EB2 and 120K + 60K (10 % of 245I) = 4 yrs. for eb3 but this is assuming there is no additional spillover or new law canges.. and we keep getting 40K GC's per year per cat..
(stats say Indians have recieved 40K GC every year in every category)
suggestions welcome..
out of 225K assume 25K might have gone back /screwed by stupid companies/ got labor denied AKA they are back to square one.
so wehave 80-100K indians waiting inline...
if we consider 100K for calculation simplicities...
100KX2.25= 225K total indians in all categories...
using 20:25:55 distribution...
45K : 55K : remaining...
but i know lot of these people may have got their GC alredy...
MY optimism says... 1 Yr for EB1, 18 Months for EB2 and 120K + 60K (10 % of 245I) = 4 yrs. for eb3 but this is assuming there is no additional spillover or new law canges.. and we keep getting 40K GC's per year per cat..
(stats say Indians have recieved 40K GC every year in every category)
suggestions welcome..
akela said:
Actual EB GC approved by USCIS - 1999 to 2004
Guys and Gals
From the Yearly Immigration Statsitics published by the USCIS/ Department of Homeland Security:
Actual Employment based GCs (LPRs) approved by USCIS for people of Indian origin:
Year EB based - I-485 approved for India (LPRs)
Data source Dept of Homeland Security
1999 5,362
2000 15,557
2001 39,010
2002 42,885
2003 20,526
2004 38,443
A total of 161,783 EB GCs ONLY from all preference categories were approved by USCIS in the past 6 years.
Regards
GCStrat
Guys and Gals
From the Yearly Immigration Statsitics published by the USCIS/ Department of Homeland Security:
Actual Employment based GCs (LPRs) approved by USCIS for people of Indian origin:
Year EB based - I-485 approved for India (LPRs)
Data source Dept of Homeland Security
1999 5,362
2000 15,557
2001 39,010
2002 42,885
2003 20,526
2004 38,443
A total of 161,783 EB GCs ONLY from all preference categories were approved by USCIS in the past 6 years.
Regards
GCStrat
Nearly 900,000 I-485 cases pending with USCIS as of September 2005
Guys and Gals
FYI- from Dept of Homeland Security Website - immigration information:
"Major volumes of pending applications at the end of September 2005 include:
1,291,868 I-130 relative/I-129F fiancé(e) petitions;
889,447 I-485 permanent resident adjustments;
274,395 I-765 employment authorizations;
253,553 I-90 Green Card Renewals/replacements; and
61,374 I-821 temporary protected status."
USCIS is sitting on nearly 900K applications. At 140K / year, it looks like 6.5 years of backlog.
Regards
GCStrat
Guys and Gals
FYI- from Dept of Homeland Security Website - immigration information:
"Major volumes of pending applications at the end of September 2005 include:
1,291,868 I-130 relative/I-129F fiancé(e) petitions;
889,447 I-485 permanent resident adjustments;
274,395 I-765 employment authorizations;
253,553 I-90 Green Card Renewals/replacements; and
61,374 I-821 temporary protected status."
USCIS is sitting on nearly 900K applications. At 140K / year, it looks like 6.5 years of backlog.
Regards
GCStrat
Impact of 245 (I) cases
I dont understand why we are so much anxious about the visa numbers because of 245(i)cases.
Here is my analysis. Please let me know if I am wrong.
1) There is an estimate of 300,000 cases of 245(i) out of which it is estimated that 90% or more are mexicans which have their own quota. So around 30,000 Principal visa numbers will be needed except mexicans.
2) There were two options for the 245(i) applicants.. either they can go with the family based or the emplyment based. Family based is easy to apply rather than employment based as USCIS needs a lot of stuff for verification if someone is applying on employment basis. I would say fewer people applied for employment based.
3) I know personally some people who filed 245(i) and they approved way back and lot of them are still pending at the backlog centers. So there is no estimate how many dont need the visa numbers.
4) Based on the above facts I would say around 15,000 visa numbers would be needed for the employment based and they are further sub divided in India, China, Phillipines and all others.
This doesnt seem much to me. I would say that all others chargebility (in EB3) to which I belong to will become current in 2-3 months. India might take 4 months.
Please comment and let me know.
I dont understand why we are so much anxious about the visa numbers because of 245(i)cases.
Here is my analysis. Please let me know if I am wrong.
1) There is an estimate of 300,000 cases of 245(i) out of which it is estimated that 90% or more are mexicans which have their own quota. So around 30,000 Principal visa numbers will be needed except mexicans.
2) There were two options for the 245(i) applicants.. either they can go with the family based or the emplyment based. Family based is easy to apply rather than employment based as USCIS needs a lot of stuff for verification if someone is applying on employment basis. I would say fewer people applied for employment based.
3) I know personally some people who filed 245(i) and they approved way back and lot of them are still pending at the backlog centers. So there is no estimate how many dont need the visa numbers.
4) Based on the above facts I would say around 15,000 visa numbers would be needed for the employment based and they are further sub divided in India, China, Phillipines and all others.
This doesnt seem much to me. I would say that all others chargebility (in EB3) to which I belong to will become current in 2-3 months. India might take 4 months.
Please comment and let me know.
Backlog estimates - 260K principals; 539K with dependents
Guys and Gals
Please find enclosed an EXCEL spreadsheet which shows estimates of GC backlog. The numbers are scary. I am prepared to further enhance/ fintune the calculations based on your inputs. Also, if you think, I have made any fundamental errors, let me know. This is what I have done:
1) I have started with FACTS - mostly relying on USCIS/ Department of Homeland Security. The key facts considered were:
ACTUAL number of H-1B and L-1 people ADMITTED into USA from India - I did not consider H-1B approvals as folks actually coming in may be delayed (e.g. 2002 H-1B approval person may enter in 2003). Between 1999 and 2004, 631,518 people on H-1B and L-1 entered USA from India.
2) Based on ACTUAL LPRs (Legal permanent residents information related by Dept of Homeland Security for 2004), I calaculated the principal to dependent ratio and arrive at a "dependent factor", which needs to be multiplied to factor for the actual number of GC aspirants. The dependent factor come to 2.07.
3) Next I calculated the level of GC aspirants. This was calculated as follows:
Total number of H-1B & L-1 multiplied by dependent factor less people who went back to India - this number I assumed to a very high figure of 25% i.e. 1 in 4 H-1B/L-1 person returned home. This gaves us 982,150 GC aspirants in the same time period - 1999 to 2004
4) As we all know, a persons GC process is not started immediately. therefore, I created a "distribution" matrix where I assumed the following distribution - Year 1: 10%, Year 2: 30%, Year 3: 40%, Year 4: 15% and Year 5: 5% i.e. for example, of all the people who were admitted in US in say 2000, 10% of those folks had their GC process started in 2000, 30% in 2001, 40% in 2002, 15% in 2003 and finally 5% in 2004. This way, within 5 years, all GC aspirants would have convinced their employers to file thier application; within the first 3 years, 80% would have initiated their GC process. This distribution matrix shows about 86% of the folks between 1999 to 2004 would have started their GC process by 2005.
5) I have assumed EB2: EB3 proportion as 29%:71% based on inputs on this thread by Akela and others.
6) Next, I searched to obtain authentic data about actual labor filing and I-140 filings. I could not find those and therefore had to do without them, but it did not hamper calculations much. (If someone can help, I am willing to update this sheet)
7) Finally, I key fact about the ACTUAL I-485 adjudicated by USCIS for folks form India. They have approved 161,783 cases from 1999 to 2004.
8) All the above data was used to calculate the BACKLOG figures. 539,020 GC aspirants still waiting i.e. nearly 63% are waiting.
It should be noted that the Backlog can be at any stage - Labor; I-140; I-485.
These calculations seems to suggest that it would have been possible for the EB2 cases to be current till Oct 2005.
Also, I have added 17 sheets (in the EXCEL file) of ACTUAL data that I downloaded from USCIS/ Dept of Homeland Security Website. Please feel free to review them.
Please let me know your thoughts.
Regards
GCStrat
Guys and Gals
Please find enclosed an EXCEL spreadsheet which shows estimates of GC backlog. The numbers are scary. I am prepared to further enhance/ fintune the calculations based on your inputs. Also, if you think, I have made any fundamental errors, let me know. This is what I have done:
1) I have started with FACTS - mostly relying on USCIS/ Department of Homeland Security. The key facts considered were:
ACTUAL number of H-1B and L-1 people ADMITTED into USA from India - I did not consider H-1B approvals as folks actually coming in may be delayed (e.g. 2002 H-1B approval person may enter in 2003). Between 1999 and 2004, 631,518 people on H-1B and L-1 entered USA from India.
2) Based on ACTUAL LPRs (Legal permanent residents information related by Dept of Homeland Security for 2004), I calaculated the principal to dependent ratio and arrive at a "dependent factor", which needs to be multiplied to factor for the actual number of GC aspirants. The dependent factor come to 2.07.
3) Next I calculated the level of GC aspirants. This was calculated as follows:
Total number of H-1B & L-1 multiplied by dependent factor less people who went back to India - this number I assumed to a very high figure of 25% i.e. 1 in 4 H-1B/L-1 person returned home. This gaves us 982,150 GC aspirants in the same time period - 1999 to 2004
4) As we all know, a persons GC process is not started immediately. therefore, I created a "distribution" matrix where I assumed the following distribution - Year 1: 10%, Year 2: 30%, Year 3: 40%, Year 4: 15% and Year 5: 5% i.e. for example, of all the people who were admitted in US in say 2000, 10% of those folks had their GC process started in 2000, 30% in 2001, 40% in 2002, 15% in 2003 and finally 5% in 2004. This way, within 5 years, all GC aspirants would have convinced their employers to file thier application; within the first 3 years, 80% would have initiated their GC process. This distribution matrix shows about 86% of the folks between 1999 to 2004 would have started their GC process by 2005.
5) I have assumed EB2: EB3 proportion as 29%:71% based on inputs on this thread by Akela and others.
6) Next, I searched to obtain authentic data about actual labor filing and I-140 filings. I could not find those and therefore had to do without them, but it did not hamper calculations much. (If someone can help, I am willing to update this sheet)
7) Finally, I key fact about the ACTUAL I-485 adjudicated by USCIS for folks form India. They have approved 161,783 cases from 1999 to 2004.
8) All the above data was used to calculate the BACKLOG figures. 539,020 GC aspirants still waiting i.e. nearly 63% are waiting.
It should be noted that the Backlog can be at any stage - Labor; I-140; I-485.
These calculations seems to suggest that it would have been possible for the EB2 cases to be current till Oct 2005.
Also, I have added 17 sheets (in the EXCEL file) of ACTUAL data that I downloaded from USCIS/ Dept of Homeland Security Website. Please feel free to review them.
Please let me know your thoughts.
Regards
GCStrat
Again,
Many big mistakes in the numbers.
1.889,447 I-485 permanent resident adjustments
This number includes both immigration EB GC and family based GC (the limit is 1 million an year for both combined). How many of these are employment base. Infostarved did a good analysis, see first page, only 73k are employment based gc.
2.ACTUAL number of H-1B and L-1 people ADMITTED into USA from India - I did not consider H-1B approvals as folks actually coming in may be delayed (e.g. 2002 H-1B approval person may enter in 2003). Between 1999 and 2004, 631,518 people on H-1B and L-1 entered USA from India.
I guess that number also include Business visa and visitor visa. Actual H1B are very less %. That figure is hard to come by (but if you know a source please let us know). I dont want to even want to guess as this number is hard to come by.
3.4) As we all know, a persons GC process is not started immediately. therefore, I created a "distribution" matrix where I assumed the following distribution - Year 1: 10%, Year 2: 30%, Year 3: 40%, Year 4: 15% and Year 5: 5% i.e. for example, of all the people who were admitted in US in say 2000, 10% of those folks had their GC process started in 2000, 30% in 2001, 40% in 2002, 15% in 2003 and finally 5% in 2004. This way, within 5 years, all GC aspirants would have convinced their employers to file thier application; within the first 3 years, 80% would have initiated their GC process. This distribution matrix shows about 86% of the folks between 1999 to 2004 would have started their GC process by 2005.
That is a good way to do that calculation. However instead of guessing (which btw is a good model), I had the distribution for LC filing at one of the DOL center (see ref 3 on page 1). Assumed that similar distribution held at other DOL (which is an OK guess), Yuo can correctly guess how many GC were filed each month, if you know what the total LC pending at BEC.
The average we got was 2.13 instead of 2.07 (and I still believe that 2.13 is a better figure, your 2.07 also include family based factor, I guess we should concentrate mainly on employment based number.)
So we have covered all that ground already before, but its a nice try. When I do my numbers, we get only 73k employment based visa and some 150k LC pending in BEC (not including perm LC). Now that number looks less, but then point me where I am going wrong.
Total pending GC based on employment before PERM = pending in USCIS + Pending in BEC. I calculated each of them. So where am I going wrong. I do not believe that 600,000 Indians came in last 5 years. Total Indian population in US is 1.8 million, (and I dont know how much dated that figure is). To suggest 1/3 rd came in last 6 years is at best an urban legend. But I am not also convinced what my number says. I mean till mid 2002 I think I am OK, my model would hold as the errors would creep mostly in later years, but if any of my assumptions are off, the whole analysis is baseless.
rgds,
Many big mistakes in the numbers.
1.889,447 I-485 permanent resident adjustments
This number includes both immigration EB GC and family based GC (the limit is 1 million an year for both combined). How many of these are employment base. Infostarved did a good analysis, see first page, only 73k are employment based gc.
2.ACTUAL number of H-1B and L-1 people ADMITTED into USA from India - I did not consider H-1B approvals as folks actually coming in may be delayed (e.g. 2002 H-1B approval person may enter in 2003). Between 1999 and 2004, 631,518 people on H-1B and L-1 entered USA from India.
I guess that number also include Business visa and visitor visa. Actual H1B are very less %. That figure is hard to come by (but if you know a source please let us know). I dont want to even want to guess as this number is hard to come by.
3.4) As we all know, a persons GC process is not started immediately. therefore, I created a "distribution" matrix where I assumed the following distribution - Year 1: 10%, Year 2: 30%, Year 3: 40%, Year 4: 15% and Year 5: 5% i.e. for example, of all the people who were admitted in US in say 2000, 10% of those folks had their GC process started in 2000, 30% in 2001, 40% in 2002, 15% in 2003 and finally 5% in 2004. This way, within 5 years, all GC aspirants would have convinced their employers to file thier application; within the first 3 years, 80% would have initiated their GC process. This distribution matrix shows about 86% of the folks between 1999 to 2004 would have started their GC process by 2005.
That is a good way to do that calculation. However instead of guessing (which btw is a good model), I had the distribution for LC filing at one of the DOL center (see ref 3 on page 1). Assumed that similar distribution held at other DOL (which is an OK guess), Yuo can correctly guess how many GC were filed each month, if you know what the total LC pending at BEC.
The average we got was 2.13 instead of 2.07 (and I still believe that 2.13 is a better figure, your 2.07 also include family based factor, I guess we should concentrate mainly on employment based number.)
So we have covered all that ground already before, but its a nice try. When I do my numbers, we get only 73k employment based visa and some 150k LC pending in BEC (not including perm LC). Now that number looks less, but then point me where I am going wrong.
Total pending GC based on employment before PERM = pending in USCIS + Pending in BEC. I calculated each of them. So where am I going wrong. I do not believe that 600,000 Indians came in last 5 years. Total Indian population in US is 1.8 million, (and I dont know how much dated that figure is). To suggest 1/3 rd came in last 6 years is at best an urban legend. But I am not also convinced what my number says. I mean till mid 2002 I think I am OK, my model would hold as the errors would creep mostly in later years, but if any of my assumptions are off, the whole analysis is baseless.
rgds,
Last edited by a moderator:
I stand by my workings - Some pointers
Dear Akela
I am sorry I do not agree with you, especially with your statement - "Many big mistakes in numbers."
Also, please note ALL my sources were listed on the sheet - I am not making up any factual data. If you do not like the FACTS, that is not my problem. I think you have not studied the Excel properly and were quick to "denounce" it.
The number of H-1B who were ADMITTED to USA form India is from USCIS source. The source of that data is the YEARLY IMMIGRATION STATISTICS BOOK. The weblink is http://uscis.gov/graphics/shared/statistics/publications/index.htm
And for the benefit of everyone, I have actually copied those excel in my sheets - if you check them there are additional 17 sheets of data after the first "estimates" sheet. So, I do not understand your point that these figures are "hard to come by". Please review the entire EXCEL (all 18 sheets) before making such "matter-of-fact" statements. My figures are for H-1B and L-1 only and they are from the most authentic source you can get them - the USCIS. I have not included Busines or other visas information.
Secondly, your point more than 1/3rd of the Indian population came in the in past 6 years ia very likely. We have the 1990 and 2000 Census figures and the Indian Population more than doubled in that decade. If yopu want I can download that document from US Census website and send it to you.
Thirdly, the 2.07 is based on EB visas only - I have not included Family based. I am attaching the "2004 Emplyment Based FActSheet" issued by Department of Homeland Security for your reference. They have clearly indicated that for India - total EB LPRS is 38, 443; principals is 18,539 and dependents - 19,904, giving us the ratio of 2.07. Please review the same. The calulation is fairly simple - it is (Principal+Dependent)/Principal. The data was for 2004.
Fourthly, regarding 889,447 I-485 permanent resident adjustments pending with USCIS, there is no official breakdown by categories. So, 73K can only be an estimate (which can be inaccurate - I haven't seen his analyses / assumptions so I will not comment about its accuracy). And frankly, that e-mail was separate from the analyses - the backlog analyses did not reference that information at all.
I stand by my workings. Let's focus on FACTS and not on what we like to believe.
Regards
GCStrat
Dear Akela
I am sorry I do not agree with you, especially with your statement - "Many big mistakes in numbers."
Also, please note ALL my sources were listed on the sheet - I am not making up any factual data. If you do not like the FACTS, that is not my problem. I think you have not studied the Excel properly and were quick to "denounce" it.
The number of H-1B who were ADMITTED to USA form India is from USCIS source. The source of that data is the YEARLY IMMIGRATION STATISTICS BOOK. The weblink is http://uscis.gov/graphics/shared/statistics/publications/index.htm
And for the benefit of everyone, I have actually copied those excel in my sheets - if you check them there are additional 17 sheets of data after the first "estimates" sheet. So, I do not understand your point that these figures are "hard to come by". Please review the entire EXCEL (all 18 sheets) before making such "matter-of-fact" statements. My figures are for H-1B and L-1 only and they are from the most authentic source you can get them - the USCIS. I have not included Busines or other visas information.
Secondly, your point more than 1/3rd of the Indian population came in the in past 6 years ia very likely. We have the 1990 and 2000 Census figures and the Indian Population more than doubled in that decade. If yopu want I can download that document from US Census website and send it to you.
Thirdly, the 2.07 is based on EB visas only - I have not included Family based. I am attaching the "2004 Emplyment Based FActSheet" issued by Department of Homeland Security for your reference. They have clearly indicated that for India - total EB LPRS is 38, 443; principals is 18,539 and dependents - 19,904, giving us the ratio of 2.07. Please review the same. The calulation is fairly simple - it is (Principal+Dependent)/Principal. The data was for 2004.
Fourthly, regarding 889,447 I-485 permanent resident adjustments pending with USCIS, there is no official breakdown by categories. So, 73K can only be an estimate (which can be inaccurate - I haven't seen his analyses / assumptions so I will not comment about its accuracy). And frankly, that e-mail was separate from the analyses - the backlog analyses did not reference that information at all.
I stand by my workings. Let's focus on FACTS and not on what we like to believe.
Regards
GCStrat
Good analysis
Hi Gcstrat/Akela,
You are approaching estimating same thing from different directions:
In both of your models there is big guess...
Akela,
It would be very hard to know what percentage of backlog labour are indian/overestimating duplicate labour/overestimating 245I factor/dependent factor....
I think You may be overly optimistic.
"""
There are allegedly 350 K LC application in BEC. Murthy.com says 250 of them are April 30, 2001 application. I tend to believe 25% are. Lets be bold and say 100k are 245 i. See refernce 3.
"""
Where as Mr Gcstrat , You have done a good analysis , But incoming people for temp work visa is very difficult data to rely on.I do agree with Akela it
may include short term business/work visas. So You may be overly pessimistic here.But I still see Akela's model can be more correct( If somehow we know what is there in backlog centers).I know people who were given H1B visa to work for only 2 months here & then they go back...
above all teh distribution of dependent factor may be very variable.. Initially
it should be 1 as lot of young people came in & can go to as high as 3/4 if things remain backlogged for long.
The best thing to do for you guys is assuming your models are correct, You
create a priority date table at 6 month intervals..assuming USCIS is efficient enough to consume all visas available to it.
OPTIMISTIC PRIORITY DATE PESSIMISTIC
************************* *************
jan 2006
june 2006
JAN 2007
.
In that way we will know how much you guys differ
Again excellent effort to put some brains at problem.
Hi Gcstrat/Akela,
You are approaching estimating same thing from different directions:
In both of your models there is big guess...
Akela,
It would be very hard to know what percentage of backlog labour are indian/overestimating duplicate labour/overestimating 245I factor/dependent factor....
I think You may be overly optimistic.
"""
There are allegedly 350 K LC application in BEC. Murthy.com says 250 of them are April 30, 2001 application. I tend to believe 25% are. Lets be bold and say 100k are 245 i. See refernce 3.
"""
Where as Mr Gcstrat , You have done a good analysis , But incoming people for temp work visa is very difficult data to rely on.I do agree with Akela it
may include short term business/work visas. So You may be overly pessimistic here.But I still see Akela's model can be more correct( If somehow we know what is there in backlog centers).I know people who were given H1B visa to work for only 2 months here & then they go back...
above all teh distribution of dependent factor may be very variable.. Initially
it should be 1 as lot of young people came in & can go to as high as 3/4 if things remain backlogged for long.
The best thing to do for you guys is assuming your models are correct, You
create a priority date table at 6 month intervals..assuming USCIS is efficient enough to consume all visas available to it.
OPTIMISTIC PRIORITY DATE PESSIMISTIC
************************* *************
jan 2006
june 2006
JAN 2007
.
In that way we will know how much you guys differ
Again excellent effort to put some brains at problem.
Might not help but...
I have been in and out of the US three times in the last six years with different employers. I supect I would be counted three times in your total figure of H1/L1 people admitted to the US.
I know this makes things harder but I suspect I am not unique.
S
I have been in and out of the US three times in the last six years with different employers. I supect I would be counted three times in your total figure of H1/L1 people admitted to the US.
I know this makes things harder but I suspect I am not unique.
S