6 WKS FROM CSC TO NVC?

[russ 1]

Most are renters and do not. However, the city of San Francisco does have a lottery system where qualified people can buy a home priced below market price but would be affordable if you made somewhere between $58,00 to $98,000 a year. Remember the classic pie chart of Americans spending no more than 33% of their gross income on housing. I find it quite unfair that some follow the pie charts but a growing number of others are spending like me somewhere around 75%.

http://cbs5.com/bayarearealestate/local_story_299215710.html

I grew up in Boston, a very high cost area like San Francisco. The reality of the housing market is what caused me to move to Florida. At least in the US, you have this choice - in many places (such as Russia) you still need permission from the government to live someplace.

Apartments here (Tampa Bay) average $900 monthly at 90 cents a square foot to lease. This is reasonable. San Fran rents are about $3.20 a square foot. This is about what I paid in Boston. I don't see this as sustainable.

If you can make the same money in a low-cost area (Tampa and Dallas come to mind), moving from high cost cities may be a good decision. I am paid the same no matter where I live, but at least in Florida we get to live near the water, downtown, with parking (garaged!), with nice weather. The cost of living in Boston is 248% higher than the national average, so I would proabably want a 300% raise to move back there (to make up for the higher tax bracket).

[Danno 1,228]

Russ, I used your same housing to income rational some 17 years ago when I (along with many others) departed from the North-East too.

It was one of the reason I have grown to embrace strong local Government on domestic issues.

1. States can each experiment with various programs, Methods of Governance and shape themselves to local appeal.

People can then decide if they like it or not and leave or stay. Almost like a freeMarket.

2. When the Fed Govt rolls out it's big "one size fits all" plan, no matter how disastrous it is there is no escaping it.

Sure the state by state Method is not without weak spots too but overall it has worked pretty well.

[Brian and Yenys 0]

it took five weeks for ours, but finally they got it and sent to the Embassy with 4 working days

kEEP THE fAITH, yOU WILL GET IT SOON

BRIAN

[slim 1,525]

The issue for me hasn't been making it or not making it, healthcare, no healthcare, buying vs. renting.....

It's been trying to explain it all to my wife.

There's such a disparity between "the system" in Russia and "the system" here. There are several things that are really irksome:

1. Budgets

2. Applications/Licensing/(and the subsequent fees/waiting involved)

3. The "long-term" goals that must be worried about and the processes involved that must be adhered to

4. and probably a whole bunch of others that I can't think of right now because I'm too tired from making plastic bags all night (but I did go to the dentist twice last week. For FREE!)

Trying to "save" for something is possible, but the concept of - saving for this means not spending on that (FOR A LONG, LONG, LONG TIME) - seems to be hard to grasp.

Anyone have any tips/pointers?

[russ 1]

Anyone have any tips/pointers?

Saving is a lot easier if it happens automatically (automatic payroll deductions). No temptation to spend it then.

I budget things pretty carefully - daily cash flow forecasts typically 6 months in advance. Being married is difficult, since you no longer control all of the spending yourself.

My current employer throws in a lot of savings incentives. Stock purchase plan (payroll deductions for 6 months, then you get shares at a 85% of the closing price). This is a free return for doing nothing (pays much better than leaving it in the bank). 401k match - this is also free money. Finding "free" money like this is one of the easier ways to save.

You can use something like quicken, but a spreadsheet works fine for me.

Make a one year budget and review it with your wife. I think that it is important to do cash flow forcasting before you make a budget. If you don't have positive cash flow, the budget will not be workable. The hardest thing for me when I was running a business wasn't making enough money, it was keeping cash flow positive enough of the time.

[Brian and Yenys 0]

HOW LONG IS IT CURRENTLY TAKING FOR AN APPROVED K1 FIANCEE PETITION TO BE SENT FROM THE CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER (CSC) TO THE NATIONAL VISA CENTER (NVC)?

OUR NOA2 WAS ISSUED SEPTEMBER 19. IT STILL HAS NOT ARRIVED TO THE NVC.

WE HAVE BEEN WAITING 6 WEEKS AND COUNTING.

TELL ME YOUR HORROR STORIES.

MISERY LOVES COMPANY.

AAAAAAUUUGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHH

GREETINGS, BUCK AND NATALIA,

Our CSC to NVC timeline was 5 weeks and we were also concerned. But finally NVC recieved it and sent to the Embassy within 3 business days.

When you call NVC, use the operator option and have them look up your case by the beneficiarys name and Date of birth. I was told they do not

input the k1 or k3 in the automated system and you will need to talk to the Operator. As of this date, our NVC case number is not in the automated phone system, so I see truth to what the NVC supervisor told us. My wife faxed all the PKG # documents and verified the embassy got it, which they did, now we are waiting for the Interview date.

Good Luck and keep the faith, I am sure you will hear good news soon !!!!!

BRIAN

[KGSodie 0]

I have not gone to the dentist in two years, since I lost the privilege of being on my parents plan.

Do you really need to go to the dentist?

Right now I am working two jobs, 42 hours a week and no insurance, no vacation pay, and only because the city of San Francisco mandated employers to have sick days do I have that as of 2007. My two jobs are 1. law office clerk and 2. circulation assistant at the university library.

Neither allow me to work full time to get benefits.

You could consolidate all those hours you work into one job with benefits. (And you'd probably make more money!)

Dropping a couple hundred dollars a month for insurance or $100 and having a $8000 deductible does not seem reasonable to me. I am already carrying $130k debt for school

So $130K for school is reasonable but paying a couple hundred bucks a month for insurance is not?

Stable treatment is defined as seeing the doctor once a year and getting a prescription for a year of medication.

This is a classic example of the reason our healthcare system is in the situation it's in.

We've developed a dependency on medical care whether we need it or not. I'm not saying yours isn't needed, what I'm saying is we've all been placed into a system that distinguishes between someone with a chronic condition and someone who is a healthy 25-year-old student that needs nothing more than check-ups and emergency coverage.

Obviously the person that needs a year's worth of medication is going to cost an insurance provider more than someone who needs a check-up every two years. That's why there should be a realistic system in place where the govt. regulates the percentage an individual has to pay to a private company based on that individual's needs. Need a year's worth of meds? OK, you pay the first $2,000 (or an equivalent percentage of your below-poverty salary) then the govt. steps in and pays the rest.

Since the govt. would never go for system like this, where they pay the bills a private company charges them without being regulated (well, except in the rebuilding of a country or running a war) it would have to be a govt. system entirely or a semi-govt. system with private companies being heavily regulated on where they could send individuals for treatment. But, the govt. is in no way near being able to do something like that, so it's going to stay pretty much like it is for quite a while.

Individual plans will only insure exceptionally healthy people.

If there was only the "govt. healthcare plan" then everyone would have equal coverage and would pay an equal amount.

It's just impossible to do.

"You could consolidate all those hours you work into one job with benefits. (And you'd probably make more money!)"

This is a little niave, I think. Depending on the nature of the work done, many businesses won't hire any full-time employees other than in management, so that they don't have to give benefits to all the part time employees who wind up covering all the full-time hours. I have some personal experience with this.

[Danno 1,228]

Well I got this in my Email today.

The letter pretends they are doing all these checks when in fact they don't even have my file yet.

Boy I tell you, "sept 11" has become a catch-all excuse for everything now, I need to some how work this angle in my job as well to cover up what I am not doing or didn't do right.

----------------------------------------

Good Afternoon,

Your inquiry has been received at the National Visa Center (NVC).

As part of the aftermath of the events of September 11, 2001, there are

additional security check requirements for visa applicants. While it is

not possible to predict when the clearances for this case will be

finished by all involved Washington agencies, please be assured that as

soon as the results are received the NVC will be able to schedule this

case for an interview at the assigned US Embassy or Consulate General.

As soon as an interview is scheduled notification will be sent to the

designated agent by mail.

Regards,

National Visa Center

OH2

[slim 1,525]

keeping cash flow positive enough of the time.

I think that's also part of our problem here. That's probably everyone's problem!

"You could consolidate all those hours you work into one job with benefits. (And you'd probably make more money!)"

This is a little niave, I think. Depending on the nature of the work done, many businesses won't hire any full-time employees other than in management, so that they don't have to give benefits to all the part time employees who wind up covering all the full-time hours. I have some personal experience with this.

Consolidating two or more part-time jobs into a full-time job and hoping to keep the same job (or even the same line of work) is a little naive. Consolidating 42 hours of work each week into one job isn't very difficult.

What is difficult is the job itself or the hours you must work (typically evenings, weekends or 3rd shift) and maybe even swallowing your pride a little and getting your hands dirty.

If you lack the money to simply pay for everything you want, then sacrifices must be made in the pursuit of attaining the lifestyle which you choose to live. Want to be a lawyer and don't have an extra $150,000 laying around? Well, you may have to go without health insurance for a while. Want to have three kids and make only $24,000/year at the video store? Well, you may have to go without seeing your kids on the weekends while you're working at a pizza restaurant for extra cash.

Or, what you could do is work at a factory or similar type of job that pays benefits and a decent wage, live in an affordable housing/rental unit, and budget your money accordingly.

I know that's not possible for everyone to do. But, here in the U.S. there is a system in place, and it's a pretty clearly defined system of wanting something and what you must do and what you must sacrifice in the attainment of that goal. To make the argument that it's not fair or not right, or the system isn't fair is true, however, it's not an argument that's going to change the system or our place in it. I don't want to make plastic bags forever, but I didn't have the luxury of being covered under my parent's dental plan until I was 23. So, as a result of that, I'm now (and have been since) covering myself by the means necessary to do so. I would love to go to college and work two part-time jobs, and hopefully some time in the not-so-distant future I'll be able to do just that. But, for now, I have to sacrifice doing that to ensure myself and my wife are covered. Call it being naive, but it works.

Boy I tell you, "sept 11" has become a catch-all excuse for everything now, I need to some how work this angle in my job as well to cover up what I am not doing or didn't do right.

You could try a PTSD angle or even something like a disclaimer on all your e-mails you send out "messages may be late due to mandatory Sept. 11, 2001 security checks" or if you're in a line of work where they'd buy it "We're about six months behind on that project because of the new 9/11 laws.... yeah, it's a real drag, but you know, govt. regulations. We've gotta do it."

[Buck and Natalia 0]

HOW LONG IS IT CURRENTLY TAKING FOR AN APPROVED K1 FIANCEE PETITION TO BE SENT FROM THE CALIFORNIA SERVICE CENTER (CSC) TO THE NATIONAL VISA CENTER (NVC)?

OUR NOA2 WAS ISSUED SEPTEMBER 19. IT STILL HAS NOT ARRIVED TO THE NVC.

WE HAVE BEEN WAITING 6 WEEKS AND COUNTING.

TELL ME YOUR HORROR STORIES.

MISERY LOVES COMPANY.

AAAAAAUUUGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHH

GREETINGS, BUCK AND NATALIA,

Our CSC to NVC timeline was 5 weeks and we were also concerned. But finally NVC recieved it and sent to the Embassy within 3 business days.

When you call NVC, use the operator option and have them look up your case by the beneficiarys name and Date of birth. I was told they do not

input the k1 or k3 in the automated system and you will need to talk to the Operator. As of this date, our NVC case number is not in the automated phone system, so I see truth to what the NVC supervisor told us. My wife faxed all the PKG # documents and verified the embassy got it, which they did, now we are waiting for the Interview date.

Good Luck and keep the faith, I am sure you will hear good news soon !!!!!

BRIAN

CONGRATULATIONS BRIAN AND YENYS !!!

The NVC received our petition on 11/02/2007 which was 44 days (6.3 weeks) from our 9/19/2007 NOA2 date. Now we will hope and pray that the NVC's review is problem free and that they forward the petition to the Moscow Consulate quickly.

We thank all of you that responded for your kind words of encouragement and advice....... plus, we had some interesting political/socio-economic chat thrown in as well.

Buck & Natalia

[Satellite 1]

Consolidating two or more part-time jobs into a full-time job and hoping to keep the same job (or even the same line of work) is a little naive. Consolidating 42 hours of work each week into one job isn't very difficult.

Slim, you must have misread my post. I stated that both of my employers refuse to offer anything beyond 20 and 22 hours a week to avoid paying benefits. Therefore, to consolidate, I would have to seek out a third employer. It's not about extra hours, shifts, or different line of work.

[russ 1]

Slim, you must have misread my post. I stated that both of my employers refuse to offer anything beyond 20 and 22 hours a week to avoid paying benefits. Therefore, to consolidate, I would have to seek out a third employer. It's not about extra hours, shifts, or different line of work.

Same situation while I was going through school - no benefits, since I had the title of "Intern" for about 2 years. Still worked 40 hours a week though.

Finding a good job while you are in school is difficult, as employers know that school will be your first priority.

[Buck and Natalia 0]

Consolidating two or more part-time jobs into a full-time job and hoping to keep the same job (or even the same line of work) is a little naive. Consolidating 42 hours of work each week into one job isn't very difficult.

Slim, you must have misread my post. I stated that both of my employers refuse to offer anything beyond 20 and 22 hours a week to avoid paying benefits. Therefore, to consolidate, I would have to seek out a third employer. It's not about extra hours, shifts, or different line of work.

Sadly, most law firms really stick-it-to the clerks to limit benefits. The clerks then get to stick-it-to the firms when negotiating starting salary requirements when they become associate attorneys. However, the firms then stick-it-to the associates again regarding billable hour requirements. I don't miss any of this. It is probably too late to change course now, but are you really certain that you want to go into a profession where for the next several years you will mean nothing more to the partners of the firm than your billable hour totals? Of course, they will state just the opposite when hiring you. I am hard pressed to think of any profession more demanding on your time at the entry level or less suitable for starting a new family with a spouse immigrating from another country. On a more constructive note, if you do want to stay with the law, have you thought about working as an attorney in place with no billable hour requirements....... such as government attorney, in-house corporate counsel, or other less time-demanding area? Just a thought.

Buck

[russ 1]

Sadly, most law firms really stick-it-to the clerks to limit benefits. The clerks then get to stick-it-to the firms when negotiating starting salary requirements when they become associate attorneys. However, the firms then stick-it-to the associates again regarding billable hour requirements. I don't miss any of this. It is probably too late to change course now, but are you really certain that you want to go into a profession where for the next several years you will mean nothing more to the partners of the firm than your billable hour totals? Of course, they will state just the opposite when hiring you. I am hard pressed to think of any profession more demanding on your time at the entry level or less suitable for starting a new family with a spouse immigrating from another country.

The consulting business (what I do) is very similar - low pay and long hours at the begining, with the added benefit of being out of town most of the time. It does get better though, after a few years.

[Satellite 1]

Sadly, most law firms really stick-it-to the clerks to limit benefits. The clerks then get to stick-it-to the firms when negotiating starting salary requirements when they become associate attorneys. However, the firms then stick-it-to the associates again regarding billable hour requirements. I don't miss any of this. It is probably too late to change course now, but are you really certain that you want to go into a profession where for the next several years you will mean nothing more to the partners of the firm than your billable hour totals? Of course, they will state just the opposite when hiring you. I am hard pressed to think of any profession more demanding on your time at the entry level or less suitable for starting a new family with a spouse immigrating from another country. On a more constructive note, if you do want to stay with the law, have you thought about working as an attorney in place with no billable hour requirements....... such as government attorney, in-house corporate counsel, or other less time-demanding area? Just a thought.

Actually, at both places that I have interned one was a solo practitioner and another is a professional corporation that is really just a one man team with occasional of counsel help were far from the typical firm structure.

To be honest if I could land an associate position with partnership track that would be pretty amazing considering the kind of debt I am in. The work or treatment wouldn't really scare me. My wife has been here for 3 years she is pretty much American now. Not an issue at all.

Of course the other options all sound fine except working for the government because it doesn't pay much. Might have to go solo too if I can't find a job. I am more scared of generating clients, since I seem to lack those kind of skills.

My schedule is crazy as it is already with working full time and going to school full time. For example today I left the home at 6:00am and won't return until 12:15am. So it can't be much more demanding than that.

Actually looking forward to BAR preparation where I will take the recommendation of not working for 2 months!

Edited November 6, 2007 by Satellite