Jump to content
TBoneTX

All Things Coronavirus (Part 2)

 Share

2,372 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Russia
Timeline
31 minutes ago, laylalex said:

I'm baffled by what "antiquating" is supposed to mean here.

NB Spellchecking I imagine.

Visa Received : 2014-04-04 (K1 - see timeline for details)

US Entry : 2014-09-12

POE: Detroit

Marriage : 2014-09-27

I-765 Approved: 2015-01-09

I-485 Interview: 2015-03-11

I-485 Approved: 2015-03-13

Green Card Received: 2015-03-24 Yeah!!!

I-751 ROC Submitted: 2016-12-20

I-751 NOA Received:  2016-12-29

I-751 Biometrics Appt.:  2017-01-26

I-751 Interview:  2018-04-10

I-751 Approved:  2018-05-04

N400 Filed:  2018-01-13

N400 Biometrics:  2018-02-22

N400 Interview:  2018-04-10

N400 Approved:  2018-04-10

Oath Ceremony:  2018-06-11 - DONE!!!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Ban Hammer said:

And as always, government often excludes itself and its preferred people from its own rules. Which is why we just say to hell with that, we'll have our freedoms. We're watching governors and mayors now and their preferential lockdowns, attacking churches and religions, attacking speech, attacking businesses, all while excluding themselves and their preferred demographic from the gestapo compliance treatment. They're painfully transparent about the targeted methodology and its malicious use, illustrating just why government "telling people what to do" is an awful and un-American approach. For now, at least courts have been willing to strike down these authoritarian measures across the country, but institutions are not reliable protectors of freedoms absent a populace willing to fight for it.

Edited by Burnt Reynolds
Link to comment
Share on other sites

52 minutes ago, Ban Hammer said:

ban weddings and solve that problem

That might be a good platform, regardless of virus or maybe weddings are a virus 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: K-1 Visa Country: England
Timeline
8 minutes ago, Ban Hammer said:

 

1 minute ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

It isn't. Prior restraint, government level website bans, censorship laws, can't offend the wrong people, it's not even close. So it makes sense that you can say, without reservation, that even though the UK government increasingly institutes narrow concepts of proper behavior and rightthink, people in the US need to be told what to do, even though in the US that's a horrific infringement, and the best defense of it (which isn't an argument at all relevant to the US) is "but we don't have mass shootings and have stellar healthcare!".

The right to offend people! The right to spew hate! The right to infect other people with deadly disease! The right to shoot someone dead and ask questions later. 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, fip & jim said:

The right to offend people! The right to spew hate! The right to infect other people with deadly disease! The right to shoot someone dead and ask questions later. 

That's right, the right to offend people, and to be stupid, and guess what, pay for it if you demonstrably wronged/harmed another. You can't argue that you have comparable freedoms just because you have a nanny government that pre-emptively restrains people and excessively punishes them for trivial things, or institutes some narrow concept of proper behavior that people believe is free just because they spent a lifetime in that environment. This is why the UK justifiably gets the "nanny" government comparisons. 

 

An apt approach in the US is education, the utilization of private businesses and private places to make better choices for themselves. The US isn't beyond changing behavior, the key is understanding how and working within a system rather than trying to institute it through authoritarian means, where you're far more likely to find people rejecting it. That's how it's been, and how it will be.

Edited by Burnt Reynolds
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some hospitals in Calgary and Edmonton AB are over 100% capacity, but capacity changes. Nonetheless, a high capacity utilization isn't inherently a bad thing, and one of the key considerations in capacity management is the ability to supply/service the added demand. 

 

For me it puts it in perspective that US healthcare, namely hospitals (in this example), are so used to excess (excess third party costs, excess beds, excess staff, excess inventory, any of these, variably), people have no idea how to handle seeing a higher utilization, nor do they understand that in most cases higher utilization is a good thing. If people ever want healthcare affordable, or ever want a functional universal on a local scale, they have to start from a perspective of cost minimization and responsive capacity management. This is how healthcare has been managed in Canada, and I'd say, very well, in comparison. We want no wait times, but the lower utilization, excess beds, and such (all driven by mandates and the infuriating insurance industry), are a bad thing, and are massive cost drivers. At some point logic has to give somewhere and people need to decide what tradeoffs they really want.

Edited by Burnt Reynolds
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: K-1 Visa Country: England
Timeline
8 hours ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

That's right, the right to offend people, and to be stupid, and guess what, pay for it if you demonstrably wronged/harmed another. You can't argue that you have comparable freedoms just because you have a nanny government that pre-emptively restrains people and excessively punishes them for trivial things, or institutes some narrow concept of proper behavior that people believe is free just because they spent a lifetime in that environment. This is why the UK justifiably gets the "nanny" government comparisons. 

 

An apt approach in the US is education, the utilization of private businesses and private places to make better choices for themselves. The US isn't beyond changing behavior, the key is understanding how and working within a system rather than trying to institute it through authoritarian means, where you're far more likely to find people rejecting it. That's how it's been, and how it will be.

Why are you on this forum? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: K-1 Visa Country: England
Timeline
9 hours ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

That's right, the right to offend people, and to be stupid, and guess what, pay for it if you demonstrably wronged/harmed another. You can't argue that you have comparable freedoms just because you have a nanny government that pre-emptively restrains people and excessively punishes them for trivial things, or institutes some narrow concept of proper behavior that people believe is free just because they spent a lifetime in that environment. This is why the UK justifiably gets the "nanny" government comparisons. 

Do you even understand how the world views your "freedoms"? They pity the US. They laugh at the president. They rejoice that he will be gone if Americans protect some semblance of democracy. 

 

You said it yourself. The right to offend. The right to be stupid. And the tragedy is that in by believing that you have the right to be offensive and stupid Americans will suffer. Be offensive. Be stupid. And don't be surprised if in the end that's all you have left. 

Edited by fip & jim
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, fip & jim said:

Do you even understand how the world views your "freedoms"? They pity the US. They laugh at the president. They rejoice that he will be gone if Americans protect some semblance of democracy. 

 

You said it yourself. The right to offend. The right to be stupid. And the tragedy is that in by believing that you have the right to be offensive and stupid Americans will suffer. Be offensive. Be stupid. And don't be surprised if in the end that's all you have left. 

The President is the choice Americans made, and while your disdain for American freedoms is quite hyperbolic, it does make me wonder why you chose to come to a place you clearly have so much animosity toward.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: K-1 Visa Country: England
Timeline
2 minutes ago, Burnt Reynolds said:

The President is the choice Americans made, and while your disdain for American freedoms is quite hyperbolic, it does make me wonder why you chose to come to a place you clearly have so much animosity toward.

Care to answer a question? Then maybe I'll reciprocate. 

 

Why are you on this forum? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, fip & jim said:

Care to answer a question? Then maybe I'll reciprocate. 

 

Why are you on this forum? 

Hard pass, I wasn't asking an actual question.

 

Part of immigrating to a place is assimilating to their laws and customs. Freedoms are one of those things. Those don't go away because of a virus, or because someone said something another person subjectively finds offensive. I'll leave the argument tonight by citing the US Supreme Court, in an 8-0 decision tearing apart the concept of "hate speech" (of which is accepted over yonder), and a state Supreme Court in striking down authoritarian state/local leaders trying to use the broad logic espoused about "serious problems" and the unacceptable authoritarian implements of a government just telling people what to do:

 

Quote

 But no matter how the point is phrased, its unmistakable thrust is this: The Government has an interest in preventing speech expressing ideas that offend. And, as we have explained, that idea strikes at the heart of the First Amendment. Speech that demeans on the basis of race, ethnicity, gender, religion, age, disability, or any other similar ground is hateful; but the proudest boast of our free speech jurisprudence is that we protect the freedom to express "the thought that we hate.

https://casetext.com/case/matal-v-tam

 

Quote

The Court closes this Opinion as it began, by recognizing that Defendants’ actions atissue here were undertaken with the good intention of addressing a public health emergency. But even in an emergency, the authority of government is not unfettered. The liberties protected by the Constitution are not fair-weather freedoms—in place when times are good but able to be cast aside in times of trouble. There is no question that this Country has faced, and will face, emergencies of every sort. But the solution to a national crisis can never be permitted to supersede the commitment to individual liberty that stands as the foundation of the American experiment. The Constitution cannot accept the concept of a “new normal” where the basic liberties of the people can be subordinated to open-ended emergency mitigation measures. Rather, the Constitution sets certain lines that may not be crossed, even in an emergency.

https://www.scribd.com/document/476017344/Judge-Stickman-s-order-in-Butler-County-v-Wolf

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Ecuador
Timeline

A post has been removed for comments violating two provisions of the Terms of Service.

Administrative action has been applied.

06-04-2007 = TSC stamps postal return-receipt for I-129f.

06-11-2007 = NOA1 date (unknown to me).

07-20-2007 = Phoned Immigration Officer; got WAC#; where's NOA1?

09-25-2007 = Touch (first-ever).

09-28-2007 = NOA1, 23 days after their 45-day promise to send it (grrrr).

10-20 & 11-14-2007 = Phoned ImmOffs; "still pending."

12-11-2007 = 180 days; file is "between workstations, may be early Jan."; touches 12/11 & 12/12.

12-18-2007 = Call; file is with Division 9 ofcr. (bckgrnd check); e-prompt to shake it; touch.

12-19-2007 = NOA2 by e-mail & web, dated 12-18-07 (187 days; 201 per VJ); in mail 12/24/07.

01-09-2008 = File from USCIS to NVC, 1-4-08; NVC creates file, 1/15/08; to consulate 1/16/08.

01-23-2008 = Consulate gets file; outdated Packet 4 mailed to fiancee 1/27/08; rec'd 3/3/08.

04-29-2008 = Fiancee's 4-min. consular interview, 8:30 a.m.; much evidence brought but not allowed to be presented (consul: "More proof! Second interview! Bring your fiance!").

05-05-2008 = Infuriating $12 call to non-English-speaking consulate appointment-setter.

05-06-2008 = Better $12 call to English-speaker; "joint" interview date 6/30/08 (my selection).

06-30-2008 = Stokes Interrogations w/Ecuadorian (not USC); "wait 2 weeks; we'll mail her."

07-2008 = Daily calls to DOS: "currently processing"; 8/05 = Phoned consulate, got Section Chief; wrote him.

08-07-08 = E-mail from consulate, promising to issue visa "as soon as we get her passport" (on 8/12, per DHL).

08-27-08 = Phoned consulate (they "couldn't find" our file); visa DHL'd 8/28; in hand 9/1; through POE on 10/9 with NO hassles(!).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Filed: Citizen (apr) Country: Brazil
Timeline
9 hours ago, fip & jim said:

 

Why are you on this forum? 

it is not your place to ask this question to members.  if you feel there is an issue, use the report button and convey your concern to the mod team.
 

 

* ~ * Charles * ~ *
 

I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy.

 

USE THE REPORT BUTTON INSTEAD OF MESSAGING A MODERATOR!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
- Back to Top -

Important Disclaimer: Please read carefully the Visajourney.com Terms of Service. If you do not agree to the Terms of Service you should not access or view any page (including this page) on VisaJourney.com. Answers and comments provided on Visajourney.com Forums are general information, and are not intended to substitute for informed professional medical, psychiatric, psychological, tax, legal, investment, accounting, or other professional advice. Visajourney.com does not endorse, and expressly disclaims liability for any product, manufacturer, distributor, service or service provider mentioned or any opinion expressed in answers or comments. VisaJourney.com does not condone immigration fraud in any way, shape or manner. VisaJourney.com recommends that if any member or user knows directly of someone involved in fraudulent or illegal activity, that they report such activity directly to the Department of Homeland Security, Immigration and Customs Enforcement. You can contact ICE via email at Immigration.Reply@dhs.gov or you can telephone ICE at 1-866-347-2423. All reported threads/posts containing reference to immigration fraud or illegal activities will be removed from this board. If you feel that you have found inappropriate content, please let us know by contacting us here with a url link to that content. Thank you.
×
×
  • Create New...