Harsh Question

[K&E2009 71]

When ever some tragedy happens in the world, and the world takes notice, who does the world collectively look to? Such as the 2004 Tsunami - Did the world look to Sweden or Zimbabwe or Russia to help? No, the first response was where were the carriers, where was the US?

When things go to ####### in a handbasket... Who does the world look for in terms of leadership and protection? Venezuela? Argentina? Greece? No, the worlds looks for the US to ride in there and clean up the mess. Often when it does us absolutely no good. Because just like the old adage says "no good deed goes unpunished".

Freedom of Speech is a common freedom in the developed world. Nothing special there.

Well look back at your history (I would say books but we all know just google it).

When Europe was bogged down in the 80's - early 2000 with perpetually high unemployment rates of 10% or more,

it was the vitality of the US system that was the beacon of the world. In the US, you are limited only by your own skills and drive. There is no caste system like in India or England for that matter where you are expected to be a member of this sect and you'd damn well better stay there. That is why you have college drop outs who have gone on to create the two largest companies in the US - Apple and Microsoft. Why you have presidents who came from single family homes (Bill Clinton) or other walks of life (not the ruling elites like of Europe).

People are protesting 24/7 on Wall St, and in other cities around the country. They must be upset about something.

So if you condemn the concept that marriage has been a concept of a union of a man and a woman then I guess the next group that comes along to expand you're already expanded definition to include poligamy or beastiality, you will be ok with expanding the definition because of the fairness clause. How about arranged marriages for kids to old men? some cultures still do this? If you are going to open the door way to anything goes, then you have to be ready for all of the ####### that seeps in along with it.

So why do independent polls show that 90% of reporters are democrats? Until Fox came along and 90% of reporters are democrats/liberals, then where was the bias then? Grow up.

And what happened before those 52 years? It was called the Great Depression. Well in the history books years from now, this period also will have a catchy name for it. Look around the world. There are problems boiling up on every front, Western Europe and it socialist welfare - cradle to grave - entitlements, where the companies can not hire anyone because once they do they are stuck with that individual for life (damn near). The rising economies, India, China, are rising due to better negotiating skills on the part of their politicians. They make their money off of the US economy, just like the vast majority of the rest of the world does. Our politicians sell out the US day in and day out. Even a country as small as Columbia has a $4M trade surplus with the US. So multiply that with a larger Western European or Chinese economy.

Why do you think it takes so long to get processed for immigration visas? Try playing with your NOA1 number and see how many 100's of thousands you have to go back for a month prior to your priority date. That shows you just how many people are clamoring to get into the US. Why are they trying to come here and not in their own country? Because they, unlike your type, know this country is the land of opportunity. You can achieve greatness but you are going to have to do it on your own. Historically big government wasn't sitting there with their knee on your throat hampering your ability to succeed. Take a look at the restrictions and things that have become illegal to do in the last 40 years. Big Government stealing our liberty one act at a time.

For example. kids today are not grouped by their cognitive abilities like they were in days past. Because they will be stigmatized because they are put together in the 'dumb kids class' or other nonsense, (instead of viewing it as the kids are at this level and are taught at this particular pace), so now the kids are disbursed into the regular classroom and the teacher is forced to teach at the LCD (lowest common denominator) pace to the benefit of that one child at the expense of the rest. Our education schools have nose dived in direct relation to the implementation of this feel good philosophy. (google it! - there i quoted Rosie for you).

No other country in the world has as many diverse groups of people vying to get inside their country like the US does.

If you hate this country so much. You have my permission to find a more appealing one that more suits your tastes.

1. Yes, 'world leader'. Like helping those poor people in Syria... oh wait.

2. Talking about the US being a 'Beacon' for the World in the PAST has loads to do with the current state of affairs... oh wait.

3. Basically your argument about Gay marriage is; We can't let them marry, because then all those other minority groups will want to marry. Think about this, then realize how bigoted that view is.

4. 'Our politicians sell out the US day in and day out.' - In the 'greatest country in the World'. You helped my argument with this.

5. 'unlike your type' - My type? The one's who actually use their mind to see what's right and what's wrong? The one's who realize that America is FAR FROM THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD AND HAVE THE CONFIDENCE TO SAY IT.

6. I never said I hated America.

7. Stop watching Fox.

[Kevin_USA 9]

1. Yes, 'world leader'. Like helping those poor people in Syria... oh wait.

2. Talking about the US being a 'Beacon' for the World in the PAST has loads to do with the current state of affairs... oh wait.

3. Basically your argument about Gay marriage is; We can't let them marry, because then all those other minority groups will want to marry. Think about this, then realize how bigoted that view is.

4. 'Our politicians sell out the US day in and day out.' - In the 'greatest country in the World'. You helped my argument with this.

5. 'unlike your type' - My type? The one's who actually use their mind to see what's right and what's wrong? The one's who realize that America is FAR FROM THE GREATEST COUNTRY IN THE WORLD AND HAVE THE CONFIDENCE TO SAY IT.

6. I never said I hated America.

7. Stop watching Fox.

Commenting on one of your earlier posts...

Same-Sex Marriage is not illegal in the US, it's not legally recognized in most of the states or by the federal government (and note that it is legal in Maryland and Washington with more state to follow). Big difference. Where I take exception is you act as if we are out of step with the rest of the world. Yes, agreed, we should be the leader on this issue and I would suggest it is all going to change over the next few years.

But... Very few nations recognize Same-Sex Marriage and those that do only did so within the last few years. Furthermore, Same-Sex Marriage (and Homosexuality) is punishable by prison or even death in 93 countries in this world. How about Saudi Arabia for Greatest Country? Yeah, I don't think so.

[Dan & Jenni 457]

i think that this thread kinda got sidetracked... plus im right and everyone else is wrong... end of story!!

[K&E2009 71]

Commenting on one of your earlier posts...

Same-Sex Marriage is not illegal in the US, it's not legally recognized in most of the states or by the federal government (and note that it is legal in Maryland and Washington with more state to follow). Big difference. Where I take exception is you act as if we are out of step with the rest of the world. Yes, agreed, we should be the leader on this issue and I would suggest it is all going to change over the next few years.

But... Very few nations recognize Same-Sex Marriage and those that do only did so within the last few years. Furthermore, Same-Sex Marriage (and Homosexuality) is punishable by prison or even death in 93 countries in this world. How about Saudi Arabia for Greatest Country? Yeah, I don't think so.

How about somewhere other than America? No, not in your narrow-minded view.

[Laure&Colin 558]

USCIS as it is does not make much of a distinction as it is between married or fiance -priority wise-. So be it as it is, a reason for that there must be.

How would you of seen this if you were an interviewer for my CR1? "-Yes we married and lived together for 2 weeks." Would I of gotten a approval without them thinking of a red flag? -Remember there are even "red flag" countries, that again, comes with the whole context of the country.-

Actually USCIS makes a big distinction: a IR1/CR1 visa holder is a legal resident upon entry, while a K1 visa holder has to file for AOS before they can become one. So the 1st part of the process might take more or less the same amount of time, but there's no 2nd part of the process for spousal visas. I still think the 1st part should be faster for spouses as they are already legally committed, like I said.

So you think promising to marry someone you've never lived with within 90 days of arrival is less suspicious?

A lot of people get married and file for CR1 although they have never been able to live together. Of course it's impossible for a lot of couples, unless the USC would relocate to the spouse's country. I've never heard of the fact the couple wasn't able to live together yet being a red flag, even in the toughest countries like Nigeria or China.

I think you have misconceptions of the different visa types, which seems common among K1 filers.

Edited February 24, 2012 by Laure&Colin

[Kevin_USA 9]

How about somewhere other than America? No, not in your narrow-minded view.

Where?

Show some courage, I am very curious to your answer.

[AKSinghSingh79 143]

I think that 125% of the poverty line is a fair number in regards to supporting a foreign spouse.

What I don't agree with is how certain consulates (like the ones in India) base your eligibility to support your spouse on past years income.

I am a relatively recent college grad and these days it is not so easy to jump into a decent job in your field when you're fresh out of school. I interned for two years before I was able to land a full-time position.

However, because my internships were low paying and temporary, my past 3 years of income taxes don't look so hot.

Because of this I will need a co-sponsor which is frustrating because I make more than enough money now to support 2 people comfortably. Your present salary should be considered only and they should take into account recent college graduates.

Edited February 24, 2012 by AKSinghSingh79

[K&E2009 71]

Where?

Show some courage, I am very curious to your answer.

Canada, Australia, Norway, France, Switzerland.

Edited February 24, 2012 by Widsy97

[Gigli2008 70]

Take a look at the restrictions and things that have become illegal to do in the last 40 years. Big Government stealing our liberty one act at a time.

For example. kids today are not grouped by their cognitive abilities like they were in days past. Because they will be stigmatized because they are put together in the 'dumb kids class' or other nonsense, (instead of viewing it as the kids are at this level and are taught at this particular pace), so now the kids are disbursed into the regular classroom and the teacher is forced to teach at the LCD (lowest common denominator) pace to the benefit of that one child at the expense of the rest. Our education schools have nose dived in direct relation to the implementation of this feel good philosophy. (google it! - there i quoted Rosie for you).

The example you give below on "Big Government" is pure hogwash. Basically you are repeating talking points without really understanding the implications. BTW "Big government" is not the cause of poor performance in schools. There is something wrong with the school system, and it's not "Big Government". "Big Government" is just a catch-phrase that people throw out willy nilly. The problem with the schools nowadays is teacher training, education management, and lack of student & parental responsibility.

People should start paying attention and not wait for media to brainwash them. And this goes both ways, liberals or conservatives.

1. Jobs have been outsourced to other countries to the detriment of the American people and yet people don't blame the people who caused this to happen because of another catch-phrase, "free enterprise" that people don't fully understand.

2. More and more prisons have been privatized causing more tax payer money to be funneled into the hands of the people who own these prisons. http://www.correctionsproject.com/corrections/pris_priv.htm

3. The free enterprise and anti-"big government" crowd has been misinformed into thinking that less regulation is what big pharma, banks, insurance companies etc., need to bring this country back into prosperity while, right in front of their noses, during the longest time of less regulations these same companies were the cause of recession and near depression and the downward spiral of said prosperity.

4. Now the free enterprise and anti-"big government" crowd has been led to believe that privatising Social Security, Medicare & Public School Education is what the country needs to thrive while they fail to realize that Social Security, Medicare and Public School Education dollars are essentially tax payer dollars, and their costs should not be tied to share holders needs. http://www.edweek.org/ew/issues/privatization-of-public-education/

And if privatized, Social Security, Medicare and Education dollars will be given to these private institutions to manage, which will only guarantee that they get rich off the tax payer dollar (driven by share holder greed) while not really giving any better Benefits or Education.

Privatization essentially turns tax payer contributions into a for-profit enterprise. And as you know, even great enteprises can fail....it is the nature of business....so what happens if these private institutions claim that business was bad this year and sorry, we no longer have your money.

5. Same old, Same old story. Banks looted the american people of their money by doing shoddy practices in mortgage lending and using tax payer dollars as collateral. Both parties were to blame for allowing this to happen. Health Insurance companies have fought to keep the status quo, so they can keep looting the american people off their premium money, while not really providing care that is comensurate to the premiums that tax payers pay or that doctors get paid. Is it a wonder then that Medicare currently has a 3-5% Administration overhead because it is not a private entity while the "free enterprise" health insurance companies have a 17 - 35% on Administrative cost alone. What happens when Medicare becomes privatized.....the needs of the shareholder will trump the needs of the beneficiary or the doctor who gets paid. That is what drives the cost of health insurance up. Doctors have no problem with the amount they get from Medicare for seeing medicare patients, and they get roughly the same amount from private health insurance. The difference is, Medicare has no shareholders demanding millions of dollars in earnings while private insurance is driven by shareholder needs for those millions in earnings. So in order for the insurance companies to meet the shareholder demands, they drive up the cost in premiums, gives the same amount as Medicare to the doctors and pay themselves huge amounts in salaries and give the rest to share holders.

6. And now those that cry free enterprise the loudest ask... where can we get more tax payer money?, SS, Medicare, Public School Education, instutitons that are still funded by tax payers. Please, people do not allow your tax dollars to go to private institutions that the government would outsource its functions to.

Why can't we all be independent thinkers. The power of having access to the internet should ensure that every one of us can research for themselves and separate politically biased talking points from reality.

This country is going to ruin because the american people are lazy and believe everything that the media tells them to. They shout "big government" this and the other and the next day their viewers have the term "big government" coined in their vocabulary. The media says "death panels" and the next day their viewers have those exact words flying in their every conversation. Comeon, be original. Evaluate the facts and come up with your own opinion.

Edited February 24, 2012 by Gigli2008

[HannahP 119]

Y'know, my husband and I had absolutely no issues living far below the 125% poverty level for the first four years that we lived together. (Ages 18-22). We were lucky to be living in places with extremely reasonable cost of living issues. We weathered car issues, as well as some health issues on my part, without much in the way of savings but never had to rely on credit or the gubberment for halp. And I somehow managed to keep from getting knocked up.

We're only five years out of having to live like that and I can't imagine going back. I mean...with a mortgage and two car payments, we couldn't. But being very young and totally un-established in life definitely helped us get by when we needed to.

[Mike B. 231]

Our active military is the reason we can bring foreign nationals here.

This is just patriotic rah-rah nonsense with no substance behind it. People who are currently on active duty in the military have nothing to do with immigration, despite the political correctness of attributing all them with all that is good in the world. This country had plenty of immigration back when the people who founded it were still alive (and considered a standing army to be anathema to the republican form of government), and plenty of other countries don't even have militaries and still manage to have immigration systems. Say what you want about the US military. It's not responsible for our immigration system, good or bad.

[K&E2009 71]

This is just patriotic rah-rah nonsense with no substance behind it. People who are currently on active duty in the military have nothing to do with immigration, despite the political correctness of attributing all them with all that is good in the world. This country had plenty of immigration back when the people who founded it were still alive (and considered a standing army to be anathema to the republican form of government), and plenty of other countries don't even have militaries and still manage to have immigration systems. Say what you want about the US military. It's not responsible for our immigration system, good or bad.

:thumbs:

[Mike B. 231]

I couldn't disagree with you more.

I am an American citizen, covered by my 4th amendment right to pursue life, liberty and happiness. In this case I consider having my wife with me here as 'pursuing my happiness'.

As a veteran who has served this country and at one point I technically wrote an open check that included up to and including my life; I believe I should enjoy the same benefits that are FREELY and OPENLY given to all of the illegal aliens who step one foot on US soil, and they are entitled to FREE education, healthcare, welfare, and they are protected with anchor babies.

But such is not the case. Instead I have to prove that I can support my wife before she is allowed to come here.

I have to prove she will not obtain any government services, that I am a USC am already entitled to.

I have to pay thousands of dollars to get her here, whereas illegals pay a few hundred to be sneaked across the border and then its 'alli-alli oxen free' and they're in the big bucks of a welfare government system that penalizes those who play by the rules.

I think it would be very interesting / telling if the media would work with the government and conduct a poll on legal immigrants what their opinions are for legalizing illegal aliens? They can't be viewed as immigrant-phobic, because they are immigrants. But they more than anyone else can tell you about the hardships and bureaucratic nightmares the USG puts on its own citizens while ignoring and assisting those who technically should have no rights in this country.

I agree with the overall sentiments of this post, but you might want to read the Fourth Amendment again:

The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

There is actually nothing about the right to pursue happiness in the Constitution.

[EmelyNJoel 43]

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

Why?

Yes, I absolutely believe it. And people who don't believe it and come here to live or work are free to leave at any time.

I'm not a "my country right or wrong" person, but I believe we get way more right than we get wrong. Are we perfect? Not by a long shot, but we're a damn site better than any of the alternatives. If you want a country with the possibility of maximizing personal wealth and achievement, no other country comes close. If you want a welfare state where all needs are provided, well... we provide a lot of benefits, but you need to move to one of the European countries where socialism is truly practiced. Sorry.

joelb

Edited February 24, 2012 by Joelb1

[HannahP 119]

I see other changes that need to be done. One would be to process immediate relative visas with a priority over K visas. When a USC petitions for a spouse, they are already legally bound through marriage and obligated to provide assistance to each other, and could claim that physical separation during the immigration process is causing them not to be able to perform their legal duties.

In the case of a fiancé, the USC and the foreigner are legally nothing to each other, and don't owe each other anything. The only "link" is the letter of intent to marry, and it doesn't create any legal obligations.

So from a purely legal point of view, the US government owes due diligence in processing immediate relative applications, however fiancé applications could wait without any detrimental effect on the USC's rights or obligations towards their family.

Can you actually specify how married citizens are obligated to provide for each other, outside of having to meet the conditions for a pre-nup? Not providing can be grounds for divorce, I suppose. And parents are obligated to pay for any children conceived via child support. Alimony might come into play but seems to be getting harder and harder to receive. And splitting any debt incurred while you were married. But those last three are all post-divorce issues. I really can't think of how a married couple are legally bound to support each other, at all. Ethically, yes.

My husband and I eventually married on a K1 but lived together for two years while he was here on a student visa. Our names were together on the apartment lease and the bills. We probably had greater legal obligations to each other in that manner than someone who is just married but has no kids, etc.