kufloyd
06-13 07:58 PM
I think it's fairly common. So don't worry about it too much.
"fairly common"? But what does it indicate? And where has the case moved to?
"fairly common"? But what does it indicate? And where has the case moved to?
wallpaper Valentine#39;s Day 2011 Teddy
dealguy007
04-28 10:01 AM
yes, we should show "paying $1.5 Billion in income tax for an estimated 15-20 million illegals." means 1500M/20M = $75 per person ????
a Blog would be better in my opinion as groups requires signup and not easily searchable via internet.
a Blog would be better in my opinion as groups requires signup and not easily searchable via internet.
sanjeev_2004
08-27 09:54 PM
skdskd and sanjeev_2004 sound one and the same, what are you doing, trying to have some support because nobody is supporting you, i can see that you are fooling in here all day and blame that somebody wants ead for day to day living ? it is you losers who spend all day here fooling around making fun of others, go get a life outside this kind of cheap jokes.
sksatmt:
I have 2 more ids. I always play with you. Can you find my other ids also?
If you will find my other ids than i will salute you. You will also get EAD as reward.
I will check your output in night also.
good luck.
sksatmt:
I have 2 more ids. I always play with you. Can you find my other ids also?
If you will find my other ids than i will salute you. You will also get EAD as reward.
I will check your output in night also.
good luck.
2011 fun Valentine#39;s Day gift?
ebizash
02-08 12:44 PM
Disclaimer - This is only based on my knowledge gathered from different forums so take it as its worth.
Depending on the timing of your return, you will get 2 or 3 years of RNOR (Returning non ordinary resident or something?). The RNOR status makes your overseas income non-taxable in India. So you can withdraw your 401K in those 3 years and pay less or no tax in US and no tax in India (on 401K withdraw). You will still have to pay a 10% penalty. This will ofcourse only work if you have low balance in 401K.
So for example, if you have a $30K in your 401K, you can withdraw $10K every year for 3 years, pay a $1K in penalty and avoid US taxes (due to exemption limits) as well as Indian taxes (due to RNOR status). But if you have a large 401K balance like 100K or something, there is no way to avoid taxes.
Hope this helps!
Depending on the timing of your return, you will get 2 or 3 years of RNOR (Returning non ordinary resident or something?). The RNOR status makes your overseas income non-taxable in India. So you can withdraw your 401K in those 3 years and pay less or no tax in US and no tax in India (on 401K withdraw). You will still have to pay a 10% penalty. This will ofcourse only work if you have low balance in 401K.
So for example, if you have a $30K in your 401K, you can withdraw $10K every year for 3 years, pay a $1K in penalty and avoid US taxes (due to exemption limits) as well as Indian taxes (due to RNOR status). But if you have a large 401K balance like 100K or something, there is no way to avoid taxes.
Hope this helps!
more...
Refugee_New
01-07 12:00 PM
Its really scary for IT folks in India. Read on
http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/jan2009/gb2009017_807784.htm?campaign_id=yhoo
http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/jan2009/gb2009017_807784.htm?campaign_id=yhoo
snathan
02-11 12:17 AM
Please contribute....
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23597&page=1000
http://immigrationvoice.org/forum/showthread.php?t=23597&page=1000
more...
manishgc
05-24 01:52 PM
Sent
2010 Lovely Teddy Bear with Paper
thescadaman
12-10 10:06 AM
I knew that slowly the antis are gaining more and more strength as a result the noose is getting tighter and tighter around us (and will eventually reach our neck). I didn�t expect this fast:
Texas change in driver�s license laws in last 6 months:
1) We knew that instead of the usual 6 years expiry date, they now want to see proof of visa documents and the expiry date is set to the expiry of the visa document.
2) If visa document is expiring less than 6 months, then we CANNOT get a drivers license.
Driver�s license laws - Latest Changes:
1) The driver�s license that all non-citizens will get will be Vertical and NOT the usual horizontal. This license looks very different than the conventional Texas DL and it also has to ominous word �temporary visitor�. I was okay with word being mentioned, but making the drivers license look so different from normal (vertical and not horizontal is taking it too far). I am worried about possible discrimination everywhere wherein we show our IDs.
2) Chance of Address not possible online: Previously, its only during license renewal, you had to get that new unique non-citizen card. Now, they are not allowing even change of address online! The website says, we don�t qualify for change of address online as well. This means that even for change of address, we have to go to the DL office and surrender of our old good unexpired DLs.
Any inputs? Texans? Others? What have been your experiences? In other states, can you change your address online without any hassle?
http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/driver_licensing_control/LawfulStatusDLID.htm
http://www.texasinsider.org/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=4907
Thanks,
Thescadaman
Texas change in driver�s license laws in last 6 months:
1) We knew that instead of the usual 6 years expiry date, they now want to see proof of visa documents and the expiry date is set to the expiry of the visa document.
2) If visa document is expiring less than 6 months, then we CANNOT get a drivers license.
Driver�s license laws - Latest Changes:
1) The driver�s license that all non-citizens will get will be Vertical and NOT the usual horizontal. This license looks very different than the conventional Texas DL and it also has to ominous word �temporary visitor�. I was okay with word being mentioned, but making the drivers license look so different from normal (vertical and not horizontal is taking it too far). I am worried about possible discrimination everywhere wherein we show our IDs.
2) Chance of Address not possible online: Previously, its only during license renewal, you had to get that new unique non-citizen card. Now, they are not allowing even change of address online! The website says, we don�t qualify for change of address online as well. This means that even for change of address, we have to go to the DL office and surrender of our old good unexpired DLs.
Any inputs? Texans? Others? What have been your experiences? In other states, can you change your address online without any hassle?
http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administration/driver_licensing_control/LawfulStatusDLID.htm
http://www.texasinsider.org/modules.php?name=News&file=print&sid=4907
Thanks,
Thescadaman
more...
centaur
01-26 10:38 PM
Make membership to this site "paid". You want updates, monthly fee $10 or $15.
hair Valentines Day Graphicsquot;
GCard_Dream
02-07 05:58 PM
Truth always hurts. It is not too much talking when I say that people can't afford to contribute 20 bucks to IV. Out of roughly 9000 members, only 200 contributed in the last contribution drive and now you should be able to do the math yourself. That is the fact and it's very troubling that 98% of the members chose to contribute nothing.
If you expect 200 people to find relief for 1 million so called high skilled immigrants present in United States, may be you need to wake up and do some reality check. Just checking IV 50 times a day for an update will not bring any relief, if that's what you are counting on. No wonder we are yet to see any relief whatsoever.
Please dont be rubbish to others. your suggestion to open another thread which make sense. BUT your contribution request and even talking their affordability to 20 bucks are too much talking.
If you expect 200 people to find relief for 1 million so called high skilled immigrants present in United States, may be you need to wake up and do some reality check. Just checking IV 50 times a day for an update will not bring any relief, if that's what you are counting on. No wonder we are yet to see any relief whatsoever.
Please dont be rubbish to others. your suggestion to open another thread which make sense. BUT your contribution request and even talking their affordability to 20 bucks are too much talking.
more...
malaGCPahije
11-24 06:45 AM
I agree, STAY UNITED.
Stay united and fight. We already have few groups like the "Surya" guy, cannot remember his correct id, who fought so that EB3 cannot ever move to EB2. Fortunately I have not seen such issue from EB3 group. There have been occasional venting out out of frustration, but nothing organized to create problems for other groups. Rules are rules and nothing is wrong if the rules are rightly followed.
If the originator of this thread is from Bangladesh, he need not worry. ROW should move faster comparatively, even in EB3.
Stay united and fight. We already have few groups like the "Surya" guy, cannot remember his correct id, who fought so that EB3 cannot ever move to EB2. Fortunately I have not seen such issue from EB3 group. There have been occasional venting out out of frustration, but nothing organized to create problems for other groups. Rules are rules and nothing is wrong if the rules are rightly followed.
If the originator of this thread is from Bangladesh, he need not worry. ROW should move faster comparatively, even in EB3.
hot Valentines day gift 8
pappu
04-15 03:25 PM
immigration related frequently asked questions
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS - Immigration Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/FREQUENTLY_ASKED_QUESTIONS)
Thank you
FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS - Immigration Wiki (http://immigrationvoice.org/wiki/index.php/FREQUENTLY_ASKED_QUESTIONS)
Thank you
more...
house #100670531 Teddy bear romantic
roseball
08-19 09:06 AM
Thank you all for your suggestions and they are helpful.
I would wait for one or two months for the next FY visa bulletins and decide on starting my new labour in EB2.
Thank you again.
If your current/future job is eligible for EB-2, you have the qualifications to meet the job requirement and your employer is willing to start EB-2 process, I would get the process started as soon as possible. With your current EB-3 PD, I dont see anything changing in the next 1 to 2 months. You might as well start it now so you can complete the PERM documentation and advertising phase and file PERM in 2-3 months duration instead of waiting. Thats my 2 cents.
I would wait for one or two months for the next FY visa bulletins and decide on starting my new labour in EB2.
Thank you again.
If your current/future job is eligible for EB-2, you have the qualifications to meet the job requirement and your employer is willing to start EB-2 process, I would get the process started as soon as possible. With your current EB-3 PD, I dont see anything changing in the next 1 to 2 months. You might as well start it now so you can complete the PERM documentation and advertising phase and file PERM in 2-3 months duration instead of waiting. Thats my 2 cents.
tattoo Teddy Bear Valentine#39;s Day
la6470
04-14 11:59 PM
Immigration: 'Birth Tourism' Industry Markets U.S. Citizenship Abroad - ABC News (http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/birth-tourism-industry-markets-us-citizenship-abroad/story?id=10359956&partner=yahoo)
A New Baby Boom? Foreign 'Birth Tourists' Seek U.S. Citizenship for Children
More Foreign Mothers Live Abroad to Give Birth on U.S. Soil, Debate Over 14th Amendment
Millions of foreign tourists visit the United States every year, and a growing number return home with a brand new U.S. citizen in tow. housands of legal immigrants, who do not permanently reside in the United States but give birth here, have given their children the gift of citizenship, which the U.S. grants to anyone born on its soil.
The number of U.S. births to non-resident mothers rose 53 percent between 2000 and 2006, according to the most recent data from the National Center for Health Statistics. Total births rose 5 percent in the same period.
Among the foreigners who have given birth here, including international travelers passing through and foreign students studying at U.S. universities, are "birth tourists," women who travel to the United States with the explicit purpose of obtaining citizenship for their child.
Catering to the women is a nascent industry of travel agencies and hotel chains seeking to profit from the business. The Marmara Manhattan, a Turkish-owned luxury hotel on New York's City Upper East Side, markets birth tourism packages to expectant mothers abroad, luring more than a dozen pregnant guests and their families to the United States to give birth last year alone.
"What we offer is simply a one-bedroom suite accommodation for $7,750, plus taxes, for a month, with airport transfer, baby cradle and a gift set for the mother," Marmara Hotel spokeswoman Alexandra Ballantine said.
The hotel estimates the total cost of the package at $45,000.
Most women stay for two months, Ballantine said, and they make medical arrangements on their own. "Guests arrange and pay for these by themselves," she said of hospital costs that can approach $30,000.
For those with the means to pay, it's a small price to give a child the full benefits of U.S. citizenship, including the ability to travel freely to and from the United States, easy access to a U.S. education and a chance to start a life here.
"We found a company on the Internet and decided to go to Austin [Texas] for our child's birth," Turkish mother Selin Burcuoglu told Istanbul's Hurriyet Daily News. "I don't want [my daughter] to deal with visa issues. American citizenship has so many advantages."
The greatest of those advantages may be the ability of the citizen child to later sponsor the legal immigration of his or her entire family permanently to this country, experts say.
The "birth tourism" industry, which is difficult to track and remains largely anecdotal, has been on the rise for years, according to government and participants reports. Of the 4,273,225 live births in the United States in 2006, the most recent data gathered by the National Center for Health Statistics, 7,670 were children born to mothers who said they do not live here.
Many, but not all, of those mothers could be "birth tourists," experts say, although it is difficult to know for sure. The government does not track the reasons non-resident mothers are in the United States at the time of the birth or their citizenship, meaning births to illegal immigrants who live in the United States are counted in the overall total.
In recent years, many women have come from Mexico, South Korea, China and Taiwan, but the trend now extends to countries in Eastern Europe, such as Turkey, where as many as 12,000 children were born in the United States to Turkish parents since 2003 by one estimate.
The business of birth tourism is perfectly legal as long as immigrants are able to pay their own way.
The State Department and Department of Homeland Security have no specific regulations banning pregnant foreigners from entering the United States. But officials say they can and do turn away pregnant women with obvious designs on coming to the United States to take advantage of free medical care. "When determining if an individual will be allowed to enter the U.S., Customs and Border Protection officers take into consideration the date the child is due for delivery and the length of time the individual intends to stay in the U.S.," a Department of Homeland Security spokesman said.
Still, critics say the practice largely goes unchecked and exploits the true meaning of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, enacted after the Civil War to grant citizenship to descendants of slaves.
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside," the amendment reads.
"It's really an incorrect interpretation of the 14th Amendment," said Jerome Corsi, a conservative author and columnist who has studied the issue of birth tourism. "Birthright citizenship is a loophole � [and] as it expands into a business for entrepreneurs in foreign countries who offer birth tourism packages, it markets the loophole to attract additional mothers to the U.S."
Lino Graglia of the University of Texas law school wrote in the Jan. 11 Texas Review of Law & Politics that the authors of the 14th Amendment never would have imagined their words bestowing citizenship to illegal or visiting immigrants.
"It is difficult to imagine a more irrational and self-defeating legal system than one which makes unauthorized entry into this country a criminal offense and simultaneously provides perhaps the greatest possible inducement to illegal entry," Graglia wrote of birthright citizenship. The Supreme Court has only addressed the issue once, ruling in 1898 that citizenship applies to U.S.-born children of legal immigrants who have yet to become citizens.
Some legislators, including U.S. Rep. Gary Miller, R-Calif., have called for revising the Constitution to forbid citizenship by birth alone and thereby end the attraction of birth tourists. But other politicos, from both sides of the aisle, say such an approach is politically unrealistic, not to mention unnecessary. "You just turn people down for being pregnant," said Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies. "That should be the default position and then there'd have to be some very good reason for an exception."
Krikorian acknowledged that some people might find a ban on pregnant visitors "outrageous," but questions the rationality of the alternative.
"Do you really think that's right that somebody here visiting Disneyland should have their children be U.S. citizens, which they'll then inevitably use to get access to the U.S.?" he asked.
Krikorian and others call the offspring of birth tourists "anchor babies," because they can serve as a foothold for future legal immigration of an entire family.
Ali Noorani, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, said he sees the debate about birth tourists in a different light, however, noting that arguments about citizenship of children ignore a fundamental question of humanity.
"If we're a country that cares about families and family values, then why are we blaming the children for a decision the parents made. Their only decision was to take a first breath," he said.
"What is the State Department going to do? To fill out a visa application have a woman pee on a stick?"
The United States is one of the few remaining countries to grant citizenship to all children born on its soil. The United Kingdom, Ireland, India and Australia, among others, have since revised their birthright laws, no longer allowing every child born on their soil to get citizenship.
This news is not only ridiculous but also looks down on people from other country and the writer lives in the illusion that the US is the greatest country in the world.
People in other country have a life too (probably a better one) and I dont think any sane person will consider spending 15K to come to USA just to give birth and get the advantage of US citizenship. People in other countries are just like people in this country and any normal family will celebrate the birth of a kid and not worry about something as sickening as this.
After all USA is a great country but it is not the ONLY great country. Every country has their share of advantages and disadvantages.
A New Baby Boom? Foreign 'Birth Tourists' Seek U.S. Citizenship for Children
More Foreign Mothers Live Abroad to Give Birth on U.S. Soil, Debate Over 14th Amendment
Millions of foreign tourists visit the United States every year, and a growing number return home with a brand new U.S. citizen in tow. housands of legal immigrants, who do not permanently reside in the United States but give birth here, have given their children the gift of citizenship, which the U.S. grants to anyone born on its soil.
The number of U.S. births to non-resident mothers rose 53 percent between 2000 and 2006, according to the most recent data from the National Center for Health Statistics. Total births rose 5 percent in the same period.
Among the foreigners who have given birth here, including international travelers passing through and foreign students studying at U.S. universities, are "birth tourists," women who travel to the United States with the explicit purpose of obtaining citizenship for their child.
Catering to the women is a nascent industry of travel agencies and hotel chains seeking to profit from the business. The Marmara Manhattan, a Turkish-owned luxury hotel on New York's City Upper East Side, markets birth tourism packages to expectant mothers abroad, luring more than a dozen pregnant guests and their families to the United States to give birth last year alone.
"What we offer is simply a one-bedroom suite accommodation for $7,750, plus taxes, for a month, with airport transfer, baby cradle and a gift set for the mother," Marmara Hotel spokeswoman Alexandra Ballantine said.
The hotel estimates the total cost of the package at $45,000.
Most women stay for two months, Ballantine said, and they make medical arrangements on their own. "Guests arrange and pay for these by themselves," she said of hospital costs that can approach $30,000.
For those with the means to pay, it's a small price to give a child the full benefits of U.S. citizenship, including the ability to travel freely to and from the United States, easy access to a U.S. education and a chance to start a life here.
"We found a company on the Internet and decided to go to Austin [Texas] for our child's birth," Turkish mother Selin Burcuoglu told Istanbul's Hurriyet Daily News. "I don't want [my daughter] to deal with visa issues. American citizenship has so many advantages."
The greatest of those advantages may be the ability of the citizen child to later sponsor the legal immigration of his or her entire family permanently to this country, experts say.
The "birth tourism" industry, which is difficult to track and remains largely anecdotal, has been on the rise for years, according to government and participants reports. Of the 4,273,225 live births in the United States in 2006, the most recent data gathered by the National Center for Health Statistics, 7,670 were children born to mothers who said they do not live here.
Many, but not all, of those mothers could be "birth tourists," experts say, although it is difficult to know for sure. The government does not track the reasons non-resident mothers are in the United States at the time of the birth or their citizenship, meaning births to illegal immigrants who live in the United States are counted in the overall total.
In recent years, many women have come from Mexico, South Korea, China and Taiwan, but the trend now extends to countries in Eastern Europe, such as Turkey, where as many as 12,000 children were born in the United States to Turkish parents since 2003 by one estimate.
The business of birth tourism is perfectly legal as long as immigrants are able to pay their own way.
The State Department and Department of Homeland Security have no specific regulations banning pregnant foreigners from entering the United States. But officials say they can and do turn away pregnant women with obvious designs on coming to the United States to take advantage of free medical care. "When determining if an individual will be allowed to enter the U.S., Customs and Border Protection officers take into consideration the date the child is due for delivery and the length of time the individual intends to stay in the U.S.," a Department of Homeland Security spokesman said.
Still, critics say the practice largely goes unchecked and exploits the true meaning of the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, enacted after the Civil War to grant citizenship to descendants of slaves.
"All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are citizens of the United States and of the state wherein they reside," the amendment reads.
"It's really an incorrect interpretation of the 14th Amendment," said Jerome Corsi, a conservative author and columnist who has studied the issue of birth tourism. "Birthright citizenship is a loophole � [and] as it expands into a business for entrepreneurs in foreign countries who offer birth tourism packages, it markets the loophole to attract additional mothers to the U.S."
Lino Graglia of the University of Texas law school wrote in the Jan. 11 Texas Review of Law & Politics that the authors of the 14th Amendment never would have imagined their words bestowing citizenship to illegal or visiting immigrants.
"It is difficult to imagine a more irrational and self-defeating legal system than one which makes unauthorized entry into this country a criminal offense and simultaneously provides perhaps the greatest possible inducement to illegal entry," Graglia wrote of birthright citizenship. The Supreme Court has only addressed the issue once, ruling in 1898 that citizenship applies to U.S.-born children of legal immigrants who have yet to become citizens.
Some legislators, including U.S. Rep. Gary Miller, R-Calif., have called for revising the Constitution to forbid citizenship by birth alone and thereby end the attraction of birth tourists. But other politicos, from both sides of the aisle, say such an approach is politically unrealistic, not to mention unnecessary. "You just turn people down for being pregnant," said Mark Krikorian of the Center for Immigration Studies. "That should be the default position and then there'd have to be some very good reason for an exception."
Krikorian acknowledged that some people might find a ban on pregnant visitors "outrageous," but questions the rationality of the alternative.
"Do you really think that's right that somebody here visiting Disneyland should have their children be U.S. citizens, which they'll then inevitably use to get access to the U.S.?" he asked.
Krikorian and others call the offspring of birth tourists "anchor babies," because they can serve as a foothold for future legal immigration of an entire family.
Ali Noorani, executive director of the National Immigration Forum, said he sees the debate about birth tourists in a different light, however, noting that arguments about citizenship of children ignore a fundamental question of humanity.
"If we're a country that cares about families and family values, then why are we blaming the children for a decision the parents made. Their only decision was to take a first breath," he said.
"What is the State Department going to do? To fill out a visa application have a woman pee on a stick?"
The United States is one of the few remaining countries to grant citizenship to all children born on its soil. The United Kingdom, Ireland, India and Australia, among others, have since revised their birthright laws, no longer allowing every child born on their soil to get citizenship.
This news is not only ridiculous but also looks down on people from other country and the writer lives in the illusion that the US is the greatest country in the world.
People in other country have a life too (probably a better one) and I dont think any sane person will consider spending 15K to come to USA just to give birth and get the advantage of US citizenship. People in other countries are just like people in this country and any normal family will celebrate the birth of a kid and not worry about something as sickening as this.
After all USA is a great country but it is not the ONLY great country. Every country has their share of advantages and disadvantages.
more...
pictures Rick - Teddy Bears
khans02
11-11 02:22 PM
We went home after my wife started working using the EAD. After we came back we applied for your H1 and H4 extension and one we got that now we are in H status instead of EAD status. It is a little tricky. When we came back we entered as parolee but once we applied and extended our H1\H4 status we ar eback to H1\H4 status. Your lawyer would be able to explain it better.
My lawyer suggetsed that it is better to be in H status as it gives some manuvering time and opportunity in case the 485 is denied.
Thanks
My lawyer suggetsed that it is better to be in H status as it gives some manuvering time and opportunity in case the 485 is denied.
Thanks
dresses on Valentine#39;s Day or
gc28262
12-10 03:02 PM
The idea here could be to give tough time for people who do not have valid visas. If they cannot get drivers license because they are on expired visa they cannot drive.
Illegals will anyway figure out a way to drive. They may even drive without a drivers license.
We are the ones who have to bear the brunt of all these illogical rules.
Can't we do anything about this ?
I read somewhere in IV that employers can't even ask for the type of work authorization when giving a job.
How come DMVs can ask our immigration status for drivers license ?
There may be scope for some action here.
Illegals will anyway figure out a way to drive. They may even drive without a drivers license.
We are the ones who have to bear the brunt of all these illogical rules.
Can't we do anything about this ?
I read somewhere in IV that employers can't even ask for the type of work authorization when giving a job.
How come DMVs can ask our immigration status for drivers license ?
There may be scope for some action here.
more...
makeup teddy bear — a Valentine#39;s
Steven-T
January 30th, 2004, 10:32 AM
How confident can Nikon users be that Nikon can maintain pace in the professional DSLR arena?
While pros are buyers for high-end DSLR, there are many serious hobbyists and rich individuals (majority?) for that market too.
What does a MAP $4,500 1D-II meant to me, a long time Nikon loyalist waiting anxiously to switch to Canon? I don't expect to get a 1D-II lower than the MAP price before 2004 year end. If I need the pixs, a $2,600 14MP Kodak 14n is extremely attractive for landscape now. I can opt for a used D1x around $2,000 too.
For a cost sensitive person like me (not can't but don't), I am NOT getting the 1D-II, and switch, not soon. Am I the extreme minority? George, the manufacturing jobs have gone to China, and more IT jobs are going to India. We are bleeding; come down here and see it yourself!
Steven
While pros are buyers for high-end DSLR, there are many serious hobbyists and rich individuals (majority?) for that market too.
What does a MAP $4,500 1D-II meant to me, a long time Nikon loyalist waiting anxiously to switch to Canon? I don't expect to get a 1D-II lower than the MAP price before 2004 year end. If I need the pixs, a $2,600 14MP Kodak 14n is extremely attractive for landscape now. I can opt for a used D1x around $2,000 too.
For a cost sensitive person like me (not can't but don't), I am NOT getting the 1D-II, and switch, not soon. Am I the extreme minority? George, the manufacturing jobs have gone to China, and more IT jobs are going to India. We are bleeding; come down here and see it yourself!
Steven
girlfriend VALENTINE#39;s Plush Teddy Bear
qualified_trash
10-09 08:59 PM
Thanks for responding!!! Kisses (free beer if you are a guy):) :) :)
I can actually move!!!!
I will take the beer thanks!!
and my profile is on the Team IV page :-))
I can actually move!!!!
I will take the beer thanks!!
and my profile is on the Team IV page :-))
hairstyles Valentine#39;s Day Teddy Bear
dressking
09-20 10:50 PM
I think the spirit of those who have got their Green Cards and still come can be summed up as "Fight for what is right first. Fight for our rights second."
I think those who are having a fight inside the camp do not have that spirit. That is why they can not agree on things.
I think those who are having a fight inside the camp do not have that spirit. That is why they can not agree on things.
amsgc
06-20 02:26 PM
Dude,
The update was posted last night for members who signed up: http://groups.google.com/group/goivgaiv?hl=en
Same here. GA chapter google groups member
The update was posted last night for members who signed up: http://groups.google.com/group/goivgaiv?hl=en
Same here. GA chapter google groups member
telekinesis
05-23 05:57 PM
About to leave to Best Buy to pick up my new 17" notebook PC. I'll have to load some stuff onto and finish something for a client, but it will be finished tonight.
Sorry about the delay.
Sorry about the delay.
No comments:
Post a Comment