acecupid
08-16 11:29 AM
simply racial profiling.
i dont think SRK is over reacting.. many desis who are accepting that its a way of life suffer from "Slave Mentality".
When was the last time.. a US diplomat or US socialite was frisked and detained for 2 hrs in indian airports?
To all the jocks who argue "its part of life"..my advise grow some balls and realize one thing.. no matter how long u live here.. no matter whether u have GC or PC...u will always be treated like third class citizens.
In the end its the color.. do you know beta.
for the record.i am no SRK fan.
Mamooty.. who is he?
This is racial profiling no doubt, but for good reason after what happened on 9/11. This is an unfortunate aftermath of 9/11 and IMHO a welcome one. If it wasnt for this kind of security we would have had many more 9/11ish incidents. I am glad this is a "part of life" now, otherwise I am not have a life. When you ask "When was the last time.. a US diplomat or US socialite was frisked and detained for 2 hrs in indian airports?", that is a big problem with the state of security in India. Not just US diplomat or US socialite even our own Indian ministers and celebrities dont get frisked or detained. You feel that is right when you hear about so many scandals of the underworld-bollywood nexus or politician-mafia nexus ? Forget about the nexus, its not right even if there was no connection with mafia. Rules should apply the same to everyone.
The balls you need to grow should be to ask politicians and celebrities to go through security like everyone else back home in India.
i dont think SRK is over reacting.. many desis who are accepting that its a way of life suffer from "Slave Mentality".
When was the last time.. a US diplomat or US socialite was frisked and detained for 2 hrs in indian airports?
To all the jocks who argue "its part of life"..my advise grow some balls and realize one thing.. no matter how long u live here.. no matter whether u have GC or PC...u will always be treated like third class citizens.
In the end its the color.. do you know beta.
for the record.i am no SRK fan.
Mamooty.. who is he?
This is racial profiling no doubt, but for good reason after what happened on 9/11. This is an unfortunate aftermath of 9/11 and IMHO a welcome one. If it wasnt for this kind of security we would have had many more 9/11ish incidents. I am glad this is a "part of life" now, otherwise I am not have a life. When you ask "When was the last time.. a US diplomat or US socialite was frisked and detained for 2 hrs in indian airports?", that is a big problem with the state of security in India. Not just US diplomat or US socialite even our own Indian ministers and celebrities dont get frisked or detained. You feel that is right when you hear about so many scandals of the underworld-bollywood nexus or politician-mafia nexus ? Forget about the nexus, its not right even if there was no connection with mafia. Rules should apply the same to everyone.
The balls you need to grow should be to ask politicians and celebrities to go through security like everyone else back home in India.
wallpaper Octomom#39;s Nadya Suleman
knowDOL
05-19 09:44 AM
August 2003 is a good PD if it were EB2 and you could have stayed with your company. I heard in this forum from someone that, if the person is Masters graduate and worked in related for three years they are exempt from cap even though they applied in EB3 category. If this is true, it is good for you to stay in your current company and not try substitution. If this is not true and if I were you I would have gone for substitution.
What ever you do, do it with good terms with your current employer, so you can come back and join them and be able to use the 2003 PD, if some thing goes wrong with your substitution. If you leave the company and join something else, if you think that you cannot join them back, then it may not worth it. Again, it depends on your personal situation, if you don't have a spouse who is waiting for EAD to work, you should not be risking this.
What ever you do, do it with good terms with your current employer, so you can come back and join them and be able to use the 2003 PD, if some thing goes wrong with your substitution. If you leave the company and join something else, if you think that you cannot join them back, then it may not worth it. Again, it depends on your personal situation, if you don't have a spouse who is waiting for EAD to work, you should not be risking this.
LostInGCProcess
09-23 04:24 PM
Hey! I like the idea and totally agree with you.
2011 Nadya Suleman #39;Octomum#39;
Googler
02-13 01:01 PM
The problem here not every country gets equal or equitable piece of pie. The probelm is Part of the pie gets thrown out and not given to people in the line because too many of them happen to be from one country.
How about facts? In 2006, Philippines received 23,733 EB visas, India - 17,169. No other country received more. China received 9,484.
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/yearbook/2006/table10d.xls
One thing to note in this dicussion is that this reallocation to oversubscribed countries is far from seamless. If cutoff dates for oversubscribed countries are not moved up in the 3rd quarter (as opposed to the fourth quarter of the fiscal year), part of the pie DOES get thrown out, as it has in recent years 2003 (88.4K), 2004 (47,3K), 2006 (10.2k) [see 2007 Ombudsmans Report, p. 34 which gives the data for these years and going back to 1992]. This is absolutely infuriating since 2003-2004 these were also the years that largely created the present backlog of applicants with early PDs. How on earth can you justify throwing out 10.2K greencards in 2006 (FY 2007) EVEN AFTER the June 2007 greencard free for all??
How about facts? In 2006, Philippines received 23,733 EB visas, India - 17,169. No other country received more. China received 9,484.
http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/statistics/yearbook/2006/table10d.xls
One thing to note in this dicussion is that this reallocation to oversubscribed countries is far from seamless. If cutoff dates for oversubscribed countries are not moved up in the 3rd quarter (as opposed to the fourth quarter of the fiscal year), part of the pie DOES get thrown out, as it has in recent years 2003 (88.4K), 2004 (47,3K), 2006 (10.2k) [see 2007 Ombudsmans Report, p. 34 which gives the data for these years and going back to 1992]. This is absolutely infuriating since 2003-2004 these were also the years that largely created the present backlog of applicants with early PDs. How on earth can you justify throwing out 10.2K greencards in 2006 (FY 2007) EVEN AFTER the June 2007 greencard free for all??
more...
Green_Always
08-16 03:52 PM
By taking on this subject we are providing good coverage for SRK and talking negative about US Immigraiton we are making them corrupt we should not put pressure on them ( US Immigration ) let them do there duty.
By putting pressure and talking about all these and getting influence from Obama and all is wrong our Indian govt and policies are corrupt and we are pushing these people there now by doing all these things.
Let us look at our future and Jobs over here. Let SRK resolve his headache himself.
Note -- I am not against SRK, I like him and I am fan of him and have seen his movies multiple times and I have full respect to him.
my 2 cents.
By putting pressure and talking about all these and getting influence from Obama and all is wrong our Indian govt and policies are corrupt and we are pushing these people there now by doing all these things.
Let us look at our future and Jobs over here. Let SRK resolve his headache himself.
Note -- I am not against SRK, I like him and I am fan of him and have seen his movies multiple times and I have full respect to him.
my 2 cents.
TeddyKoochu
09-15 02:23 PM
Here is what I researched and found out-
From the data for India
For Permanent applications 2004 => Reduction in Recruitment (EB2 cases)
From 1 April 1004 to 16 August 2004 => 430 appox(All countries)
No data from 17 August 2004 to 28 February 2005.
From 01 March 2005 to 30 September 2005, For Level III- 263 For Level IV-271
= 500 approx.
For 01 October 2005 to March 2006, For Level III- 2500, Level IV-1770
= 4300 approx.
Now, of the GCs approved last Aug.08 and Sept.08 were from the Texas Service Center.
That meant Atlanta Processing Center was the Labor Approval Center.
So, For 01 October 2005 to March 2006
For Level III- 1100, Level IV-770.
So, total left = (2500-1100) + (1770-770) = 1400 + 1100= 2500
Therefore toatl from 01 April 2004 to Mar. 2006=>
430(2004) + 400(mystery number from 16 Aug. 04 to 01 March 2005) + 500(2005) +2500(2006)= 3900 principal applicants.
Multiply by 2 for dependents = 7800 EB2 India pending before Mar. 06.
Please comment on my analysis or feel free to ask questions.
Correct me if Iam wrong I believe that the zone does not map directly to category, for those with bachelors only Zone - 5 maps to EB2, so most of level 3 and 4 that you mention could be EB3.
From the data for India
For Permanent applications 2004 => Reduction in Recruitment (EB2 cases)
From 1 April 1004 to 16 August 2004 => 430 appox(All countries)
No data from 17 August 2004 to 28 February 2005.
From 01 March 2005 to 30 September 2005, For Level III- 263 For Level IV-271
= 500 approx.
For 01 October 2005 to March 2006, For Level III- 2500, Level IV-1770
= 4300 approx.
Now, of the GCs approved last Aug.08 and Sept.08 were from the Texas Service Center.
That meant Atlanta Processing Center was the Labor Approval Center.
So, For 01 October 2005 to March 2006
For Level III- 1100, Level IV-770.
So, total left = (2500-1100) + (1770-770) = 1400 + 1100= 2500
Therefore toatl from 01 April 2004 to Mar. 2006=>
430(2004) + 400(mystery number from 16 Aug. 04 to 01 March 2005) + 500(2005) +2500(2006)= 3900 principal applicants.
Multiply by 2 for dependents = 7800 EB2 India pending before Mar. 06.
Please comment on my analysis or feel free to ask questions.
Correct me if Iam wrong I believe that the zone does not map directly to category, for those with bachelors only Zone - 5 maps to EB2, so most of level 3 and 4 that you mention could be EB3.
more...
samay
08-07 12:27 PM
Hi
Is it ok to work part time (say 10 hrs a week) for a different company using EAD, while working for a primary company on H1B ?
Thanks
Yes.
Is it ok to work part time (say 10 hrs a week) for a different company using EAD, while working for a primary company on H1B ?
Thanks
Yes.
2010 On Octomom Nadya Suleman
NKR
02-14 08:49 AM
[[Bestia,
This is bigotry. Stop using other countries (Sierra Leone or Kongo (spelled Congo FYI) as scapegoats. Obviously, your country isn't so great or you wouldn't be on this forum trying to immigrate to the U.S. Plenty of people do immigrate to the Congo and Sierra Leone FYI...I am not attacking you but it is incredibly insensitive and ridiculous to point to other countries in that way - where are you from that's so perfect?
]]
First it was fighting between Indian/Chinese and ROW, now there is fighting within ROW. Come on Guys, today is valentine's day. Let there be Love and Peace. Let's unite...
This is bigotry. Stop using other countries (Sierra Leone or Kongo (spelled Congo FYI) as scapegoats. Obviously, your country isn't so great or you wouldn't be on this forum trying to immigrate to the U.S. Plenty of people do immigrate to the Congo and Sierra Leone FYI...I am not attacking you but it is incredibly insensitive and ridiculous to point to other countries in that way - where are you from that's so perfect?
]]
First it was fighting between Indian/Chinese and ROW, now there is fighting within ROW. Come on Guys, today is valentine's day. Let there be Love and Peace. Let's unite...
more...
delax
07-26 06:36 PM
However, these students are not completely exempted from the H1B quota for each year. Whatever, if PERM filing in year 2008 has witnessed 46% drop since 2007 ... it tells us a lot.
Thats true - students were not exempt until a couple of years ago - but the point I am trying to make is that they add to the EB - India count thereby retrogressing it further.
Looking at only BIG IT sponsored H1b's may result in a much reduced EB number
Thats true - students were not exempt until a couple of years ago - but the point I am trying to make is that they add to the EB - India count thereby retrogressing it further.
Looking at only BIG IT sponsored H1b's may result in a much reduced EB number
hair Mother Nadya Suleman
TeddyKoochu
09-15 06:26 PM
Friends what are the predictions for the coming bulletins (Maybe it�s too early). My 2 cents, Iam assuming quarterly spillover to happen in December, believe that all residual 2003 / 2004 folks will get approval in the next 2 months (I hope Iam not being too optimistic).
Nov VB - 01-MAR-2005
Dec VB - 01-JUN-2005
If we stay on stable ground i.e. the dates don't go back (Its better they move slowly then go back, seeing the dates go back is the most painful thing) then we can visualize the spillover (this is our only lifeline) better.
Nov VB - 01-MAR-2005
Dec VB - 01-JUN-2005
If we stay on stable ground i.e. the dates don't go back (Its better they move slowly then go back, seeing the dates go back is the most painful thing) then we can visualize the spillover (this is our only lifeline) better.
more...
ganguteli
04-02 12:08 PM
Why I don't like Congress..
There is no use of good academic record if you are a shameless chaprasi.
What do you have to say about all well educated and intelligent bureaucrat IAS, IPS etc..
There is no use of good academic record if you are a shameless chaprasi.
What do you have to say about all well educated and intelligent bureaucrat IAS, IPS etc..
hot nadya suleman children 2011. Nadya Suleman, mother of
hopefulgc
02-13 07:39 PM
this is an out of the box thinking .. deserves consideration.
Why should we give big bucks to big names? Instead we can pay 50% to 75% of that to a bunch of fresh law school grads from Harvard or some other top law school and see what they can do?
This way we would help young talent and also give them a platform to get their name in the front and at the same time we are not under cutting on their fees. Saving money but cutting unnecessary cost is the name of the game.
Any thoughs or counter arguments?
Why should we give big bucks to big names? Instead we can pay 50% to 75% of that to a bunch of fresh law school grads from Harvard or some other top law school and see what they can do?
This way we would help young talent and also give them a platform to get their name in the front and at the same time we are not under cutting on their fees. Saving money but cutting unnecessary cost is the name of the game.
Any thoughs or counter arguments?
more...
house Nadya Suleman has stated
Macaca
06-27 06:52 AM
this depends on the number of approvals and not on the number of applications received. Even if there are tons of applications received, unless there are enough approvals happening simultaneously, dates would not retrogress in the middle of the month.
USCIS had approvals before dates moved. USCIS knows the number of such approvals.
These approvals are getting GC before approval of current applicants. If earlier approvals use up quotas, retrogression does not have to wait for current approvals.
USCIS had approvals before dates moved. USCIS knows the number of such approvals.
These approvals are getting GC before approval of current applicants. If earlier approvals use up quotas, retrogression does not have to wait for current approvals.
tattoo Nadya Suleman is the Mom of
Ramba
12-14 12:19 AM
One cannot challange the content of the INA. Immigration is a privilage not a right. US citizens/lawmakers decides who they or how many they want to allow per year through INA. One can not challange this. For example, before 1960, US allowed only europians not asians. Though, US immigration has a history of 200 years, Indians were not allowed before 1960 in EB catagories. One could not challange then. Tommorow if they amend the INA, by saying no asians allowed in EB catagories, one cannot challange that.
One can challage only if any branch of government violates the law. One can not challange why the law do not have some other provision or why it has only 7%?. It was determiend by congress and signed by president. For example, in H1B, they have special quota for Singapore/Australian nationals. One can not question that. Now, Newzland citizes can not ask/sue, why australians and why not newzlanders in special quota? The same situation in GC system.
There is no ethics/rights in immigration. For example, a janitor/unskilled worker can become citizen after 3 years of LPR(GC) status if his/her spouse is a US citizen and he/she got the GC thro US spouse FB sponsership. At the same time, if a nobel prize winner got GC through EB1 catagory, he/she has to wait 5 years to become citizen after LPR status. This is what the law says. So, this nobel prize winner can not sue the government why the INA is not favorable to him.
One can challage only if any branch of government violates the law. One can not challange why the law do not have some other provision or why it has only 7%?. It was determiend by congress and signed by president. For example, in H1B, they have special quota for Singapore/Australian nationals. One can not question that. Now, Newzland citizes can not ask/sue, why australians and why not newzlanders in special quota? The same situation in GC system.
There is no ethics/rights in immigration. For example, a janitor/unskilled worker can become citizen after 3 years of LPR(GC) status if his/her spouse is a US citizen and he/she got the GC thro US spouse FB sponsership. At the same time, if a nobel prize winner got GC through EB1 catagory, he/she has to wait 5 years to become citizen after LPR status. This is what the law says. So, this nobel prize winner can not sue the government why the INA is not favorable to him.
more...
pictures Nadya Suleman and her abies
chintu25
02-13 10:22 AM
:mad:BUMP:mad:
dresses TaggedNadya SulemanOctomom
Pineapple
12-14 05:10 PM
I can understand your concerns.. and no, I do no resent your comment. I rather welcome a different viewpoint! IV, I emphatically maintain is made up ordinary people, like you and me, regardless of nationality and culture. I'm not a core member, but that, in itself, is the point - there is no top-down hierarchy, no "party line". IV is us. It is the very embodiment of the philosophy, "Of the people, by the people, and for the people" .
If it were any different, I would not be here.
That said, let me address your concerns. You (and anyone else) is free to disagree.
Let us say all country quotas are removed. In that case, yes, you will see a majority of GCs going to people of Indian and Chinese extraction. But to say that the removal of country quota is going to disadvantage people of other countries is a mathematical fallacy.
Let me explain it this way, using an analogy. Suppose you take part in a lotto game. The prizes (GC) are limited. Say there is only one prize and you have 100 participants. Also, further, let us say 80 are from California and 20 are from Pennsylvania.
If you play the game several times, you will see that 80 % of the prizes go to people from California.
But, that does not mean that you will improve your chances of winning if you move from Pennsylvania to California!!
Your odds are exactly the same - 1 in 100.
Removing country quotas would have the same consequence: If would actually give everyone a level playing field, and everyone would have the same shot at making the coveted quota of 140,000 EB GCs.
But when you have quotas, the probabilities are severely distorted. Especially when you have arbitrary quotas. (Why 7 %? Why not 9 %? Why not 5.247 %?).
In this case, if you are from India or China, you are seriously disadvantaged, while someone from a smaller country gets an unfair advantage. This is not complex political philosophy. It is school boy arithmetic.
You see what I mean?
When an Indian or Chinese asks for no country quotas, he/she is not asking for more.. He/she can no more control the wind as control where he/she is born. He/she is just asking to have a fair chance just as anyone else in the world. Why should he/she be penalized for being born in a big country?
I hope you see what I mean.
Anyway, the thread is about whether we can make a constitutionality argument in the court. The issue of "fairness" is quite settled as I explained above.
I know what I am about to say will trigger a lot of reaction and some resentment, but it has to be said on behalf of those who are not Indian. I think the per country limit is to ensure that people of all nationalities and races have an equal opportunity to obtain a green card and to ensure that no one nationality, group, or even sector (i.e. IT) monopolizes the so few visas that are available. In fact, in the visa lottery, countries become excluded when the number of immigrants from them reach a certain point, so we are lucky they do not do that in the Employment-based system!
I think that by wanting to remove the per country limit so more Indians can avail of the green card quota is both asking for "special treatment" and a slap in the face for all the non-Indian IV members. The more I read the threads on this site, the more I feel that this organization is geared just to one ethnic group. I am sure that Indians probably make up the majority of members, but the founders of IV (I hope) did not want this organization to become one-sided! Please be considerate of ALL members and try to come up with suggestions that would benefit ALL members!!!:mad:
If it were any different, I would not be here.
That said, let me address your concerns. You (and anyone else) is free to disagree.
Let us say all country quotas are removed. In that case, yes, you will see a majority of GCs going to people of Indian and Chinese extraction. But to say that the removal of country quota is going to disadvantage people of other countries is a mathematical fallacy.
Let me explain it this way, using an analogy. Suppose you take part in a lotto game. The prizes (GC) are limited. Say there is only one prize and you have 100 participants. Also, further, let us say 80 are from California and 20 are from Pennsylvania.
If you play the game several times, you will see that 80 % of the prizes go to people from California.
But, that does not mean that you will improve your chances of winning if you move from Pennsylvania to California!!
Your odds are exactly the same - 1 in 100.
Removing country quotas would have the same consequence: If would actually give everyone a level playing field, and everyone would have the same shot at making the coveted quota of 140,000 EB GCs.
But when you have quotas, the probabilities are severely distorted. Especially when you have arbitrary quotas. (Why 7 %? Why not 9 %? Why not 5.247 %?).
In this case, if you are from India or China, you are seriously disadvantaged, while someone from a smaller country gets an unfair advantage. This is not complex political philosophy. It is school boy arithmetic.
You see what I mean?
When an Indian or Chinese asks for no country quotas, he/she is not asking for more.. He/she can no more control the wind as control where he/she is born. He/she is just asking to have a fair chance just as anyone else in the world. Why should he/she be penalized for being born in a big country?
I hope you see what I mean.
Anyway, the thread is about whether we can make a constitutionality argument in the court. The issue of "fairness" is quite settled as I explained above.
I know what I am about to say will trigger a lot of reaction and some resentment, but it has to be said on behalf of those who are not Indian. I think the per country limit is to ensure that people of all nationalities and races have an equal opportunity to obtain a green card and to ensure that no one nationality, group, or even sector (i.e. IT) monopolizes the so few visas that are available. In fact, in the visa lottery, countries become excluded when the number of immigrants from them reach a certain point, so we are lucky they do not do that in the Employment-based system!
I think that by wanting to remove the per country limit so more Indians can avail of the green card quota is both asking for "special treatment" and a slap in the face for all the non-Indian IV members. The more I read the threads on this site, the more I feel that this organization is geared just to one ethnic group. I am sure that Indians probably make up the majority of members, but the founders of IV (I hope) did not want this organization to become one-sided! Please be considerate of ALL members and try to come up with suggestions that would benefit ALL members!!!:mad:
more...
makeup Octomom Nadya Suleman Gets Her
eb3India
10-23 02:02 PM
as name suggests, you find a company with a already approved labour, they will apply your 1-140 with that labour, if you I-140 is approved you get to keep his PD and get a free ride,
while myself, has to wait 2 years for labour and another few years till my PD becomes current
in labor sub case, if one can find approved labour before 2001 (if you happen to be from India). you can get 1140 approval and apply for 485 if you everthing goes well you have your GC in 6-12 months
and did I mention this perfectly legal.
lot of guys cry sour grape about labour sub. if you ask me, if you have opporunity use it, I would
while myself, has to wait 2 years for labour and another few years till my PD becomes current
in labor sub case, if one can find approved labour before 2001 (if you happen to be from India). you can get 1140 approval and apply for 485 if you everthing goes well you have your GC in 6-12 months
and did I mention this perfectly legal.
lot of guys cry sour grape about labour sub. if you ask me, if you have opporunity use it, I would
girlfriend Nadya Suleman has stated
snathan
08-16 11:28 AM
I never worship any actor. But now I dont even have any respect for this stupid SRK. If he doesnt like to step on american soil again, I am very glad. This moron thinks american economy will plunge into recession again if he is not coming to america. Atleast salman kahn makes some sensible comment.
hairstyles Nadya Suleman has secretly
shree19772000
03-27 02:23 PM
Love to see narendra modi as PM but I know that's far from happening. I would bet on LK for now.
gjoe
02-14 04:20 PM
[QUOTE=paskal;223415]
I could be a member of drink-raw-milk Club. Am I supposed to declare that on I-485? ;)
Yes, I guess so. If the drink raw milk club is a registered orginization.
Disclosure : I am not a lawyer, please check with your legal ......no just save that money for a rainy day
:)
I could be a member of drink-raw-milk Club. Am I supposed to declare that on I-485? ;)
Yes, I guess so. If the drink raw milk club is a registered orginization.
Disclosure : I am not a lawyer, please check with your legal ......no just save that money for a rainy day
:)
snathan
08-17 01:14 PM
It happens everywhere. Politicans bank on these stars - stars get along well with businessmen, politicians fight and then kiss each other. Stars marry, divorce, remarry - and the list goes on.
Come on, it happens everywhere, not only in India. How many times do you not see 80 year old rich businessman marrying 26 year old beautiful model?
Look at how the bailout money has gone to those people who screwwed the economy.
The reason you think India has issues that other countries do not have is because you are still not stepping out of your Indian shoes.
Go out with your American friends for a drink and discuss these issues - for every issue you discuss - you will get a parallel American counter issue that is similar in nature.
There is nothing called "absolute" in this world and you will realise it now or later. Live in a country side with a constant income and you will find life peaceful because you are not bothered by what is happening.
Or try helping people - and do social service - you will realise that it is a dangerous and thankless job.
Democracy is "not exactly" how it sounds. Unfortunately, life is not fair to anyone and one has to live in within his/her means.
Crying foul over all such stuff will not bring changes. Working within parameters to bring about changes is "unfortunately" the only way how changes have come to the "Mother Earth"
snathan - you are a very strong vocal person and have great thoughts. You must utilize your "good hearted nature" not to point fingers but to see how best you can utilize and grab opportunities for betterment.
There are worse things happening in places like congo and African countries, small girls being raped , civil wars , and so many things.
Diseases are spreading, sanitation is bad, farmers are facing drought - so many things happening. Lets not blame SOME PEOPLE for all this. it is us collectovely who can bring about change.
Do you mean to say if one american actor/actress is frisked away at Mumbai or delhi airport, americans will go to street and burn the indian flag..? GOA will go after the indian security and customs...? I am not blaming anything about SRK. I am blaming common man, GOI....most importantly the OP who started the thread for SRK....well this is my last post here and I dont want to waste my time on a useless issue.
Come on, it happens everywhere, not only in India. How many times do you not see 80 year old rich businessman marrying 26 year old beautiful model?
Look at how the bailout money has gone to those people who screwwed the economy.
The reason you think India has issues that other countries do not have is because you are still not stepping out of your Indian shoes.
Go out with your American friends for a drink and discuss these issues - for every issue you discuss - you will get a parallel American counter issue that is similar in nature.
There is nothing called "absolute" in this world and you will realise it now or later. Live in a country side with a constant income and you will find life peaceful because you are not bothered by what is happening.
Or try helping people - and do social service - you will realise that it is a dangerous and thankless job.
Democracy is "not exactly" how it sounds. Unfortunately, life is not fair to anyone and one has to live in within his/her means.
Crying foul over all such stuff will not bring changes. Working within parameters to bring about changes is "unfortunately" the only way how changes have come to the "Mother Earth"
snathan - you are a very strong vocal person and have great thoughts. You must utilize your "good hearted nature" not to point fingers but to see how best you can utilize and grab opportunities for betterment.
There are worse things happening in places like congo and African countries, small girls being raped , civil wars , and so many things.
Diseases are spreading, sanitation is bad, farmers are facing drought - so many things happening. Lets not blame SOME PEOPLE for all this. it is us collectovely who can bring about change.
Do you mean to say if one american actor/actress is frisked away at Mumbai or delhi airport, americans will go to street and burn the indian flag..? GOA will go after the indian security and customs...? I am not blaming anything about SRK. I am blaming common man, GOI....most importantly the OP who started the thread for SRK....well this is my last post here and I dont want to waste my time on a useless issue.
