Third K1 Visa

[DanielParul 50]

india is what the english called "the subcontinent". the native people there are not asian. alta plano chileans are more of an "asian" people than people from india. (yeah, i worked in india, was not impressed, liked chile much better).

india was peopled by a variety of immigrants over the past 30-40,000 years. dravidians came from the mediterranean cultures and settled in the indus valley, negritos came from east africa and have since occupied the andamans and other parts of the southern tip. australoids come over during the ice ages and to this day occupy the eastern and some central parts of the country. aryans entered from persia and fathered the culture that currently occupies the north and west of india. other groups immigrated to india from south eastern europe and the northern middle east and occupy the western states, including gujarat, kamatka, etc. mongols entered the northern parts of what is india today and settled in the mountainous north states, such as manipur, and assam.

you can see the variety of origin in the variety of languages in common use in india. erdu, an aryan language sounding rather like german in spoken form, is used more frequently than anything other than hindi or english, but there are 14 different written languages represented on the national currency, and approximately 25 different spoken languages in common use, varigated principally by state.

so you see, india is an ethnically and culturally disharmonius agglomeration of states, which today writhes vainly in agonising strife in search of social order. many states seek independence, and the central government has barely enough power to keep them together. this explains the economic chaos that exists in india today. this explains why so many indians want to move to America.

India is a Country in the Continent of Asia. Oh BTW, I know Indian history more that u can ever imagine to in your entire life. Go read about China (you will need that).

[justashooter 430]

http://www.rootsforreal.com/migrations_en....de=13#slideshow

watch the slide show and read the text. of course, this presentation is relevant to early history before the age of advanced social structure (kingdoms - time of christ or up to 2k years before). you will see how the peoples below the mountain chain (south east asian) seperated from the peoples above it (han chinese, japanese, koreans, mongols, american indians) 50,000 years ago. since the time of kingdoms india has been repeatedly invaded by conquering people because the path through it was easy. north asians are more ethnically distinct because there was nothing in their turf to make it worth occupying. same with pacific islanders and amerinds.

so, asian means chinese/japanese/korean, with special consideration for amerinds, and the inclusion of mongol, which are really an imbalanced cross between asian and euro stock.

south east asians are those people below the mountains. and their offshoots distinct within the parentage.

india is a sub-continent and not ethnically homogenous, surely having at root a base stock close to south east asians, but many times overridden.

[Old Dominion 26]

The poll idea is interesting because the majority of people I know from Chinese and Indian backgrounds, especially, push their children very hard to get educated and to make a good living and they'd be hard pressed to accept a mate who makes $18K at the age of 30 or 40 or whatever.

The kind of person who would say they dont' mind how much you make so long as you work probably doesn't have a lot of hope where they are, so they'll marry you for a ticket out, not for how much you make. Will they stay with you? I think that's a good question to ask. Anyone have any statistics? My guess is that when you are not making enough to really support yourself and her that things will be full of tension and the wife will figure out they can do better elsewhere. Because she can.

Think of the American women who wouldn't marry you as having the good sense to know that you aren't capable of doing better and therefore you're not really good long-term investment material so they just skip the marriage and divorce part of our program.

Considering that I make >4X $18K, I wouldn't marry a guy who only makes $18K because I'd assume they're 22 years old and just starting out and that's too young for me. And if they're in their 30s or 40s, we'd be significantly incompatible because in general (in general, not a sweeping statement), people my age who make considerably less than me likely come from a very different background and this would pose an issue within the relationship. Even an artist who loves their work wouldn't be compatible with me because while I may admire it, I wouldn't want to tie my future to someone whose ability to share the economic load were so limited. Life is freaking hard right now. People are getting laid off left and right. So how is $18K going to pay the mortgage, feed the family, and pay utilities? It won't.

I think American women simply live in a world that judges people by their perception of REALITY. An American perception that hard work and a good job are what it takes to survive. Someone who is coming from abject poverty might judge on opportunity for themself or their children (or potential children). But anyone who spends any time in the US is going to find the same thing -- that $18K ain't worth a whole lot when you can't afford two cars so both of you can work and they can't earn much more because they don't have an education or facility with the language... and then babies come along and childcare? probably not -- too expensive, so she stays home again. Yeah. That $18K is going to be the starting point of a LOT of arguments.

That's a sad commentary, MsZ. I've never seen anyone worried about tying their future only to someone with high earning capacity. I guess it's all about the BMW lifestyle?

[DeathNova 0]

http://www.rootsforreal.com/migrations_en....de=13#slideshow

watch the slide show and read the text. of course, this presentation is relevant to early history before the age of advanced social structure (kingdoms - time of christ or up to 2k years before). you will see how the peoples below the mountain chain (south east asian) seperated from the peoples above it (han chinese, japanese, koreans, mongols, american indians) 50,000 years ago. since the time of kingdoms india has been repeatedly invaded by conquering people because the path through it was easy. north asians are more ethnically distinct because there was nothing in their turf to make it worth occupying. same with pacific islanders and amerinds.

so, asian means chinese/japanese/korean, with special consideration for amerinds, and the inclusion of mongol, which are really an imbalanced cross between asian and euro stock.

south east asians are those people below the mountains. and their offshoots distinct within the parentage.

india is a sub-continent and not ethnically homogenous, surely having at root a base stock close to south east asians, but many times overridden.

Whoa, what do you mean "those people?"

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

Sometimes I feel like VJ has me trapped in an alternate reality and it's 1955 again.

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

Sometimes I feel like VJ has me trapped in an alternate reality and it's 1955 again.

You too? Don't worry Robin -- I have an extra poodle skirt, a feather duster and a bottle of Valium you can borrow.

[mox 298]

Whoa, what do you mean "those people?"

Um, excuse me, but just what are you implying about those of us with bright yellow skin and a blinking condition?

[TBoneTX 45,064]

Um, excuse me, but just what are you implying about those of us with bright yellow skin and a blinking condition?

Uh, that you have a jaundiced eye? Si, man?

[Brad and Vika 129]

Whoa, what do you mean "those people?"

Um, excuse me, but just what are you implying about those of us with bright yellow skin and a blinking condition?

[justashooter 430]

use of the term "those people" was in no way intended to offend. just a way of describing the many ethnic groups in south-east asia as a whole. the study of genetic dispersal really is quite fascinating, and if approached with scientific method, quite illuminating. it is enlightening to learn that there is as much difference between chinese and thai as there is between chinese and anglo. those of us in the western world would just have assumed that all easterners are genetically close. learn something new everyday.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

Sometimes I feel like VJ has me trapped in an alternate reality and it's 1955 again.

You too? Don't worry Robin -- I have an extra poodle skirt, a feather duster and a bottle of Valium you can borrow.

Got some Geritol there too????? :blush:

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

Sometimes I feel like VJ has me trapped in an alternate reality and it's 1955 again.

You too? Don't worry Robin -- I have an extra poodle skirt, a feather duster and a bottle of Valium you can borrow.

Got some Geritol there too?????

I have a whole medicine chest filled with the stuff.

[Chica Yeyé 41]

Sometimes I feel like VJ has me trapped in an alternate reality and it's 1955 again.

You too? Don't worry Robin -- I have an extra poodle skirt, a feather duster and a bottle of Valium you can borrow.

Got some Geritol there too?????

I have a whole medicine chest filled with the stuff.

I knew it.

[MsZ 6]

I don't know anything about the BMW lifestyle. But I do know that in general earning ability is also parallel to intelligence, education and other important areas of compatibility.

Also, people tend to meet other people of their socio-economic peers. For me, the chance of meeting people I'd hang out with who make a lot less is much smaller because much of my life is consumed with my career -- so that's where I meet people. Also, in my hobby and that hobby tends to attract intelligent, educated people. And guess what? They also tend to make decent livings. So when a pool of people who have good qualities and decent livings is available why on Earth would anyone choose to pursue an $18k/year underachiever? Is being poor somehow more pure? I don't think so.

Would you like your daughter to tie herself to a guy who at the age of 35 or 40 is pulling in $18K? Even if he were the salt of the earth you'd be concerned about his ability to provide for his family. And it'd be very valid in these tough times.

My husband and I make comparable salaries. That means we could live on one if we had to. It'd be tough, but we could. Neither of us take expensive vacations, drive BMWs and our home is modest (and at the moment, underwater). My company is being acquired by another company and they're goign to lay off 20,000 of us. We have 4 children. That 18K salary dude can't afford dating, let alone raising a family. So I won't apologize for anyone who looks at his earning ability and draws negative conclusions. This is the world we live in. I didn't make it. I don't like it. But life is expensive.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

A lot of people with PhDs aren't pulling in the big bucks and a lot of college dropouts (like Bill Gates) do pretty well so I'm not sure this comparison with income and education is a particularly sound one.

And as a woman of the 21st century I'm able to provide for myself quite well.