Harsh Question

[X Factor 1,112]

If you want to revise the process,, how abut changes in tourist visa. Some countries, Philippines is one, it is next to imposable for them to get a tourist visa to visit the US. I have been told for an unmarried female under 40yrs old it may be 8 years to get approved for a tourist visa.

The USC can go there any time for weeks without any pre approval. But if a Filipino wants to come to the US to see where and how their future spouse lives the only option is the K1 visa.

Very true ... it's so difficult for the Filipina under 40 yrs old to come here on a tourist visa.

[Dan & Jenni 457]

The problem with the K visas is the way they are constructed as non-immigrant visas. That makes them non-enforceable as far as the public charge requirement, and creates a situation where once married to the petitioner, the out of status alien could abandon the petitioner, and remain indefinitely in the US without any further processing, having met the conditions of his/her visa. Until the beneficiary tries to adjust status, there is no provision in the law to prevent the alien from doing exactly that.

so all us K-1's should suffer because of what a few have done or could do??

[EmelyNJoel 43]

1330108161[/url]' post='5177277']

What right do we have to say such things when we already have a problem in our country with natural born Americans that don't even attempt to get a job but instead sit at home living off the free money they are receiving for nothing? Those that are at 125% or 100% or whatever, at least they are working and trying to pay their way.

It's their (my) country. If they want to be a bum that sucks, but it is their birthright. Life isn't fair. Get used to it. We get to say no unnecessary freeloaders. I'm stuck with the ones born here, that doesn't mean I can't curtail new arrivals.

[Samantha78 117]

It's their (my) country. If they want to be a bum that sucks, but it is their birthright. Life isn't fair. Get used to it. We get to say no unnecessary freeloaders. I'm stuck with the ones born here, that doesn't mean I can't curtail new arrivals.

I agree. Reading all of the posts, I can relate to everyone and understand but at the end of the day, the problem or issue is that it's one thing to already have a problem in this country with lazy people who suck up every benefit from the government and another thing to add more people from other countries to the equation. Realistically, problems can occur and people can run into financial hardship that they never expected could happen but trying your best, from the beginning to avoid that is the best bet. So living already at a minimum and adding a person to that equation is recipe for disaster.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

so all us K-1's should suffer because of what a few have done or could do??

There are other paths. Those paths were there before the K visas were created, and now that the processing times for those paths are similar to the K visas, the K visas are no longer needed. One of those, the K-3 visa, is already obsolete.

Edited February 24, 2012 by ☼

[san diego 407]

so how should it be then...would it be better that they lived thousands of miles away from each other instead of together just because they are poor Dont be so quick to judge we are all a day away from losing everything ....people are people rich or poor black or white

So, then tax payers should support them?

[Kelly C 16]

I never really paid attention to how low some of the guidelines were, as I knew I was over the amount enough to be comfortable, but reading this - family of 3 - $23, 163 - that is absurd!!!! I also cannot see how in the world anyone can get by on that...it's a struggle waiting to happen.

I don't know about doubling it but raising it, absolutely.

I currently spend $1000 a month for Mortgage, Insurance, (Homeowners, Auto, Rv), Satellite TV, Cell Phone, Internet. grannted my mortgage is 200 bucks a month and almost paid off. no car payments. But I am happier now than when i was making 70k. So it can be done on the 125% guidelines. From what I understand they will take in consideration your assests/real property. I agree typically 125% is not adequate for cost of living in most places and I personally think 150% would be more appropriate. But in that scenario I would require a co-sponsor, I think most people "stuggle" at some point in their lives.

On another point from another poster, Yes considering the reason one looks overseas, which in my case is I have been divorced for 10 years after being married for 20 bustin my hump since i was 17. I was fortunate to find Rose on a dating site, and we fell in Love. We want a simple life, the white picket fence (I have 5 acres) a garden, friends over for BBQs, and raise a child in a loving environment. for me personally I am so tired of "expectations". I expanded my search to include out of my area, and subsequently "overseas".

Kelly

[Kelly C 16]

There are other paths. Those paths were there before the K visas were created, and now that the processing times for those paths are similar to the K visas, the K visas are no longer needed. One of those, the K-3 visa, is already obsolete.

Yes I agree, Had I known the process before I submitted The I-129F, I would have went the CR1 route.

[K&E2009 71]

America was founded by immigrants.

Around 40 MILLION Americans claim Irish ancestry, alone.

To claim that America should put EVEN MORE restrictions on Immigration is laughable.

Also, the whole 'America is the greatest country in the world' statement... does anyone ACTUALLY think this nowadays!?!

Yes I agree, Had I known the process before I submitted The I-129F, I would have went the CR1 route.

Why?

[Samantha78 117]

I currently spend $1000 a month for Mortgage, Insurance, (Homeowners, Auto, Rv), Satellite TV, Cell Phone, Internet. grannted my mortgage is 200 bucks a month and almost paid off. no car payments. But I am happier now than when i was making 70k. So it can be done on the 125% guidelines. From what I understand they will take in consideration your assests/real property. I agree typically 125% is not adequate for cost of living in most places and I personally think 150% would be more appropriate. But in that scenario I would require a co-sponsor, I think most people "stuggle" at some point in their lives.

On another point from another poster, Yes considering the reason one looks overseas, which in my case is I have been divorced for 10 years after being married for 20 bustin my hump since i was 17. I was fortunate to find Rose on a dating site, and we fell in Love. We want a simple life, the white picket fence (I have 5 acres) a garden, friends over for BBQs, and raise a child in a loving environment. for me personally I am so tired of "expectations". I expanded my search to include out of my area, and subsequently "overseas".

Kelly

We live a similar life. I also began working at 17, mainly because I had already given birth to 2 children by then and had to work. I am a home owner and pay the same kinds of things you pay. I agree with the percentage you suggest. It shouldn't be extreme but it should be more appropriate. Just from my own experience, I know last year financially was an absolute horror for me.....but the 2 years before that I was doing extremely well....brought my kids to Hawaii, had everything I needed. And then the economic problems really tampered with that comfort zone. My home lost 75,000 in value almost overnight but the mortgage company still wanted their normal payment. The option to sell was no longer there because it would be a loss, and my mother (who I had basically been supporting) ended up becoming more evil that I already knew her to be and put me in the hole for over 10,000....racking up bills and expenses secretly and then one day, she was gone - up and left with no trace.

Definitely not something I expected, but crazy stuff like this can happen to anyone. This is the main reason why I think its very important to have more than less when bringing another person here.....in one moment, everything can change. Better to be financially safe than sorry.

[chaine1 116]

There are far too many variables at play here, and I think anyone who takes a black-and-white view fails to see the whole picture. I, for one, am grateful that the USCIS understands the great variation among its petitioners and tries to accommodate these differences.

I have lived abroad for five years, and would now like to return home to the USA to enter into a PhD program. As a PhD student, I will barely meet the poverty guidelines. I met my husband abroad, and while there are arguments floating around here stating "You could have found your love in the USA," this was not the path my life took. Should I have stopped myself from falling in love with him, because I somehow should have known that I would struggle to meet the poverty guidelines if and when we wanted to move the USA?

My husband's earning potential is high (fingers crossed he will find a job quickly), but is it possible for the two of us to survive on 125% of the poverty line? Absolutely. I have lived on less. However, if the USCIS did not allow me the option to have a co-sponsor, I would probably not be approved and my husband and I would look elsewhere to move.

I think it's fair to say that no two cases are the same. Are there people getting married who can't even support themselves? Sure, but I don't think povery requirements will stop that.

Anyway, I'm just grateful that the USCIS sees each case as individual, and does not apply a one-size-fits-all policy. I would likely fall through the cracks that way.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Why?

Costs less, process is straight forward, and beneficiary gains LPR status after arriving in the US, so can work right away. Plus, no need to rush and have a civil wedding to continue the process soon after arriving in the US. Your spouse can be married in his/her own country with the appropriate religious ceremony, if so desired, and friends and family present.

Edited February 24, 2012 by ☼

[Dan & Jenni 457]

There are other paths. Those paths were there before the K visas were created, and now that the processing times for those paths are similar to the K visas, the K visas are no longer needed. One of those, the K-3 visa, is already obsolete.

yes there are other paths but i think the strongest ties rule sometimes makes these other options non-viable for some. now im not saying for 1 minute that that is a bad rule... i come from a country that has immigrations problems on a par with the US and i like it as much as you do... but it is often impossible to come to the US to marry (and be honest with USCIS or CBP about it) and then return home to start the CR1/IR1 process.

rather than doing away with a certain visa just because a few abuse it i think they should change the rules to try and prevent that abuse

[Dan & Jenni 457]

Your spouse can be married in his/her own country with the appropriate religious ceremony, if so desired, and friends and family present.

if only everything in life was so simple!!

[Chicagoguy 2 27]

I believe that living at 125% of the poverty line is possible. BUT what if emergencies arise. Like health issues. Maybe we should check to be sure couples have decent health coverage. I am on Medicare and not working so I have no coverage for my wife. Good coverage is very expensive. I am always mindful of my late wife's hospital bill. 1.2 million $. How would you like to open that envelope ?

Our plan now is to pay small Dr. bills but she goes back home for the big ones.