sriswam
06-29 03:36 PM
As per the blog from www.immigration-law.com, today is the last day USCIS will accept any Premium Processing requests for I-140s...
06/29/2007: Today Will be the Last Date for I-140 PPS Filing
USCIS has confirmed that the last day when they will accept the I-907 premium processing request for I-140 petition is today, June 29, 2007. Obviously "accept" means physically received or e-filed within today. Again, it is uncertain when the PPS was delivered to the postal station today but not picked up today. This is the risk involving delivery of documents to the Service Center via U.S. Express Mail. Such Express Mail remains in the postal station until it is picked up by the Service Center crew.
I mailed Matthew OH about that. He has corrected the part about e-filing PPS (that's not an option)
He says thats USCIS told him that they have to be *received* today. However, the customer service rep I called said its the *postmark* date. I guess it doesnt hurt to try mailing docs today. At worst, they return it.
vkxml- I dont think that the act of opting to go PP would cause an RFE. Every case goes through the same process. It's not as if there are different rules for processing regular vs premium.
06/29/2007: Today Will be the Last Date for I-140 PPS Filing
USCIS has confirmed that the last day when they will accept the I-907 premium processing request for I-140 petition is today, June 29, 2007. Obviously "accept" means physically received or e-filed within today. Again, it is uncertain when the PPS was delivered to the postal station today but not picked up today. This is the risk involving delivery of documents to the Service Center via U.S. Express Mail. Such Express Mail remains in the postal station until it is picked up by the Service Center crew.
I mailed Matthew OH about that. He has corrected the part about e-filing PPS (that's not an option)
He says thats USCIS told him that they have to be *received* today. However, the customer service rep I called said its the *postmark* date. I guess it doesnt hurt to try mailing docs today. At worst, they return it.
vkxml- I dont think that the act of opting to go PP would cause an RFE. Every case goes through the same process. It's not as if there are different rules for processing regular vs premium.
wallpaper kate middleton hot pics. hot
letstalklc
11-23 05:17 PM
I have used ICICI money2india 3 years back, but stopped using their serivice because they are not honest in terms of conversion rate always below SBI, so I have switched to SBI's global link services ( SBI Global Link Services - US (http://www.onlinesbi.com/glsus) ), it's really cool thing, rate is better and also they will not float the rate during the day time, just in the morning time, whatever rate you see, they will gives you that, I have verified many times, all the time it matched...I really liked......
panks
04-02 12:07 PM
Thank you gc28262. It's just that my attorney havent seen this issue with Pre PERM cases. May be it is because PERM had more specific questions to answer so that there is little flexibility. Form 750 which was used before PERM did not have that many specific questions regarding labor conditions. So there was room for interpretation.
Thanks for murthy's link. Yes, It makes sense Gald I extended my H1 after returning on AP. So I am better positioned there.
Yes, actually the USCIS has argued the same in their revocation response which is that my labor requirements on Form 9089 aren't flexible enough to transfer me to EB3.
----
Regarding your H1B status, please read the following newsletter from murthy.com
Effect of Travel While in H1B / L-1 Status and Pending I-485 (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_efftrv.html)
Traveling on AP doesn't necessarily switch you out of H1B. If you are working for the same employer after entering on AP, you can still extend your H1 and continue to be on H1 status.
Based on my limited understanding, your lawyer is wrong when he says "3 year degree issue is mostly with PERM applications and not with others". 3 year degree issue comes up during I-140 stage. Nowadays USCIS has a strict requirement that the degree should be a "single source" 4 year degree for EB2 applications.
As for the successful outcome of trying to downgrade your application to EB3, your labor certification should be flexible enough to allow your application to be downgraded to EB3.
IMO it is better to get a second opinion/consultation with a reputed lawyer. If I were you I wouldn't trust your current lawyer.
Thanks for murthy's link. Yes, It makes sense Gald I extended my H1 after returning on AP. So I am better positioned there.
Yes, actually the USCIS has argued the same in their revocation response which is that my labor requirements on Form 9089 aren't flexible enough to transfer me to EB3.
----
Regarding your H1B status, please read the following newsletter from murthy.com
Effect of Travel While in H1B / L-1 Status and Pending I-485 (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_efftrv.html)
Traveling on AP doesn't necessarily switch you out of H1B. If you are working for the same employer after entering on AP, you can still extend your H1 and continue to be on H1 status.
Based on my limited understanding, your lawyer is wrong when he says "3 year degree issue is mostly with PERM applications and not with others". 3 year degree issue comes up during I-140 stage. Nowadays USCIS has a strict requirement that the degree should be a "single source" 4 year degree for EB2 applications.
As for the successful outcome of trying to downgrade your application to EB3, your labor certification should be flexible enough to allow your application to be downgraded to EB3.
IMO it is better to get a second opinion/consultation with a reputed lawyer. If I were you I wouldn't trust your current lawyer.
2011 kate middleton hot. kate middleton hot or not kate
a_yaja
01-06 10:30 AM
I will be using AP first time. What documentation do we need to enter (other than passport and un-expired AP)? I will be visiting India for about 1 month? Is there any limitation as to for how long you can leave the country? I got 2 copies of AP. We just need "one" right?
Also while leaving which I-94 should we surrender? The one which I got when I entered last time - a couple of years ago, or the one which I received with last H1b renewal documentation. Right now I am not using H1b. I am "on" EAD.
Please share your experiences.
Thanks in advance!
You need both copies of the AP. The IO will keep one copy and stamp the other one and return it. When I got back to the USA in December 2008, my POE was Miami. My lawyer had told me to take both copies of the AP with me.
When I was in the Secondary room, there was another person who had only one copy of the AP. The IO asked him for the other copy. The dude told the IO that he had only one copy and the lawyer had told him that one copy is enough (you could see that he was nervous). The IO sarcastically told him to change his lawyer. The dude then said that he was not planning on traveling anytime before the expiry of the AP and said that the IO could keep the copy he had submitted. The IO again wryly told him that things don't work that way. He told the dude to take a seat and he wold see what he could do (the IO was actually polite all the time to this dude - even thought he sounded sarcastic at times - especially when he said "I would not waste any more money on this lawyer"). To make a long story short, I saw him get his stamped AP back and we left the room at around the same time).
My advise to you is - take both the copies - you will not regret it.
Also while leaving which I-94 should we surrender? The one which I got when I entered last time - a couple of years ago, or the one which I received with last H1b renewal documentation. Right now I am not using H1b. I am "on" EAD.
Please share your experiences.
Thanks in advance!
You need both copies of the AP. The IO will keep one copy and stamp the other one and return it. When I got back to the USA in December 2008, my POE was Miami. My lawyer had told me to take both copies of the AP with me.
When I was in the Secondary room, there was another person who had only one copy of the AP. The IO asked him for the other copy. The dude told the IO that he had only one copy and the lawyer had told him that one copy is enough (you could see that he was nervous). The IO sarcastically told him to change his lawyer. The dude then said that he was not planning on traveling anytime before the expiry of the AP and said that the IO could keep the copy he had submitted. The IO again wryly told him that things don't work that way. He told the dude to take a seat and he wold see what he could do (the IO was actually polite all the time to this dude - even thought he sounded sarcastic at times - especially when he said "I would not waste any more money on this lawyer"). To make a long story short, I saw him get his stamped AP back and we left the room at around the same time).
My advise to you is - take both the copies - you will not regret it.
more...
raj3078
04-27 11:08 AM
This looks like a hoax to me. Could you quote a credible news story or a link on a enforcement site where there is any advisory?
Pappu,
This is the hoax and seems like an attempt to discredit India Law system. Please close the thread. We should not be party to such attempts. I get tons of emails like that including the one which talks about getting 10 million of lottery prize money. If I start believeing them then god save me....Please close this immediately.:mad:
Pappu,
This is the hoax and seems like an attempt to discredit India Law system. Please close the thread. We should not be party to such attempts. I get tons of emails like that including the one which talks about getting 10 million of lottery prize money. If I start believeing them then god save me....Please close this immediately.:mad:
suriajay12
05-13 07:11 AM
We're all impacted by retrogression and each person comes up with different reasons such as labor substitution or porting from EB3 to EB2 etc. I think that the unemployment rate is a key factor that might be influencing the movement of visa dates. With a double digit unemployment rate for US workers, why will the government want to give green cards to foreign workers.
Even if you get the green card, you could lose your job and apply for unemployment benefits. The US government does not want increase in the numbers of those claiming unemployment benefits or welfare programs. These benefits are not available to workers on temporary visas.Social security and medicare are also going to be tapped out within the next 10-20 years. These factors could have made them influence the USCIS/DOS to roll the dates back and make it U for all EB3 and to past 2000 for EB2 India. EB2 is current for other countries due to low demand.
Until the unemployment rate falls to reasonably low (in their view) levels, they have no inclination to act on immigration reform.
Notwithstanding the DOS explanation for the retrogression, there might be political factors in the background that are not made public.How do we know that this wasn't happening behind the scenes?
Its not unemployment, but swine flu thats responsible for this retrogression mess. They could imagine this flu will strike in 2009 and hence wanted to discourage people to come to US or to adjust status here. They know immigrants travel more than citizens out of country and to Mexico and hence more chance to get that virus to US.
Even if you get the green card, you could lose your job and apply for unemployment benefits. The US government does not want increase in the numbers of those claiming unemployment benefits or welfare programs. These benefits are not available to workers on temporary visas.Social security and medicare are also going to be tapped out within the next 10-20 years. These factors could have made them influence the USCIS/DOS to roll the dates back and make it U for all EB3 and to past 2000 for EB2 India. EB2 is current for other countries due to low demand.
Until the unemployment rate falls to reasonably low (in their view) levels, they have no inclination to act on immigration reform.
Notwithstanding the DOS explanation for the retrogression, there might be political factors in the background that are not made public.How do we know that this wasn't happening behind the scenes?
Its not unemployment, but swine flu thats responsible for this retrogression mess. They could imagine this flu will strike in 2009 and hence wanted to discourage people to come to US or to adjust status here. They know immigrants travel more than citizens out of country and to Mexico and hence more chance to get that virus to US.
more...
ganeshpv
05-01 12:40 PM
Folks,
I have to visit India in June and I need to revalidate my visa that expired in April. I received my H1B extention last week, so that's no problem.
Do I have to go to one of the 4 visa application centers (mumbai, delhi, calcutta, chennai) Or can I just drop by any of the other centers (drop centers I believe, there is one in Bangalore). Website is not clear about this. There is an alluding reference in FAQ that says :
Qn: I am a returning H1-B/L-1 visa applicant, how do I apply for a revalidation?
You need to schedule an appointment for a visa interview through our website www.vfs-usa.co.in or at a visa application centre nearest to your area of residence.
Has anyone done this before? How long is it going to take? Is it similar to the drop-box that existed before?
I got an appointment in Delhi last year (7th year extention in New Delhi) But this time I can't get an appointment in any of the 4 centers.
Ganesh.
ps: I can't get appointments before June in Canada or Mexico either. :(
I have to visit India in June and I need to revalidate my visa that expired in April. I received my H1B extention last week, so that's no problem.
Do I have to go to one of the 4 visa application centers (mumbai, delhi, calcutta, chennai) Or can I just drop by any of the other centers (drop centers I believe, there is one in Bangalore). Website is not clear about this. There is an alluding reference in FAQ that says :
Qn: I am a returning H1-B/L-1 visa applicant, how do I apply for a revalidation?
You need to schedule an appointment for a visa interview through our website www.vfs-usa.co.in or at a visa application centre nearest to your area of residence.
Has anyone done this before? How long is it going to take? Is it similar to the drop-box that existed before?
I got an appointment in Delhi last year (7th year extention in New Delhi) But this time I can't get an appointment in any of the 4 centers.
Ganesh.
ps: I can't get appointments before June in Canada or Mexico either. :(
2010 kate middleton hot ody.
maine_gc
04-21 08:51 AM
I recently renewed our passports at Indian Embassy, Washington D.C . I sent 2"X2" size photographs and there was no problem in passport renewal.
How long did it take for you to renew the passport. My appointment date is on Apr 03 and they received my documents on March 31st. I did not get the passport yet. Do you have a number to call them. I called all the numbers listed on the website and no one answers.
How long did it take for you to renew the passport. My appointment date is on Apr 03 and they received my documents on March 31st. I did not get the passport yet. Do you have a number to call them. I called all the numbers listed on the website and no one answers.
more...
vkannan
03-12 11:25 PM
Received a mail for myself and my wife. welcome to USA. But no email from CRIS.
:):):):):):)
CONGRATULATIONS on your GREEN! Tried to make you green , by adding to your reputation......;) but I guess with so many reds.....still you will not make it into GREEN....
but hey, you got the GREEN Which really matters......Enjoy
:):):):):):)
CONGRATULATIONS on your GREEN! Tried to make you green , by adding to your reputation......;) but I guess with so many reds.....still you will not make it into GREEN....
but hey, you got the GREEN Which really matters......Enjoy
hair Kate Middleton Hot Photos
senthil1
03-05 08:53 PM
We cannot justify the opposition to price increase as INS expects the fees to be paid by employer. So if needed employers can oppose not the employees. Only fees the candidates expect to pay is citizenship fees and all other immigration related fees should be paid by Employers as they are sponsoring gc
USCIS fees cover none of the activities you mentioned.
USCIS fees cover none of the activities you mentioned.
more...
logiclife
04-06 01:28 AM
As of 10:25 PM PST wednesday, here is where the Senate stands:
1. Bill Frist has proposed a 3-tier solution for 11 million undocumented immigrants.
Tier 1:
Illegals who have been here 5+ years can apply for guestworker program and GC(later) without returning home. Plus the usual - fines, back-taxes, english learning, apologizing to Uncle Sam (ok, I made the last one up ;))
Tier 2:
Illegals who have been here between 2-5 years have to go to port-of-entry to get guest-worker visa and then re-enter and eventually apply for GC.
Tier 3:
Illegals who have been here for less than 2 years have to go back to home country and apply for guest-worker visa (Back to the end of the line). In other words, deportation.
Bill Frist worked this compromise arrangement for the undocumented. Main players behind the scenes are supposed to be Chuck Hagel, Mel Martinez, John McCain and Lindsey Graham on this 3-tier approach of compromise bill.
2. Parliamentary Procedures:
Frist:
Bill Frist went to the Senate floor Wednesday night (around 9:30 PM EST) with a parliamentary motion to send the compromise to the Judiciary Committee for ratification, then scheduled a vote for Friday to cut off debate on that motion.
Reid
Harry Reid has filed a motion to invoke cloture, scheduled for 10:30 AM EST on Thursday. If the cloture succeeds then the debate on SJC version of the bill will be over and a final vote will follow. The SJC bill goes pretty much as-is to a final vote where a simple majority(51 votes) will be enough for it to pass the Senate.
3. The analysis:
The whole thing started when Kyl proposed an amendment to exclude illegals who had felonies to gaining permenant residency or citizenship. That would exclude hundred of thousands who had deportation orders pending or who had been deported by again re-entered.
Democrats, afraid that the original intent of SJC version - mainly to bring people out of shadows will fail if republicans keep chipping away at the provisions with amendments like Kyl's amendment.
So Reid, in a high-risk game, filed a motion for cloture. He probably has 38-40 Democrats on his side plus around 18 republicans. However, nothing is guaranteed. Most of media articles say that his motion will fail. In a rare chance that he succeeds, he will have the "Bargaining power" because of 60 senators' support for him and the SJC version and he will have a lot of fun at the expense of Kyl/Cronyn/Sessions etc. This is highly unusual. Cloture is usually filed by the majority party that wants the minority to shut up and force an up-or-down vote. In this case, THE MINORITY leader has filed a motion for cloture. A total reversal of roles.
4. Our Interest
First of all, from view-point of immigration voice, we would ideally want Reid's cloture to fail, Bill Frists' latest compromise to get ratified in SJC, come back to floor for debates and amendments and succeed on Friday. Dems and Republicans "Kiss and make-up" and everyone gets something. Here's why: If the motion of Reid succeeds, the scope of getting it changed for 485 filing and removing hard-cap gets smaller as SJC version will be popular with 60-plus senators and Reid would be unwilling to play with delicate balance. On the other side, if Dems fail, then Frist's bill would be open for debates and amendments, making it possible to get provisions to make OUR lives better.
However, on the flip side, if Reid fails then whatever Frist brings to table will have almost no support of Dems. Then he too risks getting filibustered when HE files for cloture on his 3-tier version. He wont have 60 votes of his own to beat fillibuster because Dems would oppose him for being tough on illegals and Republicans like Cornyn-Kyl-Sessions etc would also oppose him because the 3-tier version would still have traces of Amnesty and its "Loose" on illegals.
5. What's Happening Wednesday night:
Harry Reid has promised he will be up all night in his PJs and review Frist's 3-tier solution. Cookes and milk are on the way from IV to him for some midnight reading. But he makes no promises. Cornyn and Kyl are still unhappy as 3-tier bill still smells of amnesty. McCain is angry at Reid and will support his party's stand and oppose Reid's motion for cloture. (edited)
Harry Reid
http://www.grassrootspa.com/uploaded_images/HarryRedi44333-734905.jpg
Bill Frist
http://skaroff.com/blog/wp-content/photos/images389071_Frist.jpg
1. Bill Frist has proposed a 3-tier solution for 11 million undocumented immigrants.
Tier 1:
Illegals who have been here 5+ years can apply for guestworker program and GC(later) without returning home. Plus the usual - fines, back-taxes, english learning, apologizing to Uncle Sam (ok, I made the last one up ;))
Tier 2:
Illegals who have been here between 2-5 years have to go to port-of-entry to get guest-worker visa and then re-enter and eventually apply for GC.
Tier 3:
Illegals who have been here for less than 2 years have to go back to home country and apply for guest-worker visa (Back to the end of the line). In other words, deportation.
Bill Frist worked this compromise arrangement for the undocumented. Main players behind the scenes are supposed to be Chuck Hagel, Mel Martinez, John McCain and Lindsey Graham on this 3-tier approach of compromise bill.
2. Parliamentary Procedures:
Frist:
Bill Frist went to the Senate floor Wednesday night (around 9:30 PM EST) with a parliamentary motion to send the compromise to the Judiciary Committee for ratification, then scheduled a vote for Friday to cut off debate on that motion.
Reid
Harry Reid has filed a motion to invoke cloture, scheduled for 10:30 AM EST on Thursday. If the cloture succeeds then the debate on SJC version of the bill will be over and a final vote will follow. The SJC bill goes pretty much as-is to a final vote where a simple majority(51 votes) will be enough for it to pass the Senate.
3. The analysis:
The whole thing started when Kyl proposed an amendment to exclude illegals who had felonies to gaining permenant residency or citizenship. That would exclude hundred of thousands who had deportation orders pending or who had been deported by again re-entered.
Democrats, afraid that the original intent of SJC version - mainly to bring people out of shadows will fail if republicans keep chipping away at the provisions with amendments like Kyl's amendment.
So Reid, in a high-risk game, filed a motion for cloture. He probably has 38-40 Democrats on his side plus around 18 republicans. However, nothing is guaranteed. Most of media articles say that his motion will fail. In a rare chance that he succeeds, he will have the "Bargaining power" because of 60 senators' support for him and the SJC version and he will have a lot of fun at the expense of Kyl/Cronyn/Sessions etc. This is highly unusual. Cloture is usually filed by the majority party that wants the minority to shut up and force an up-or-down vote. In this case, THE MINORITY leader has filed a motion for cloture. A total reversal of roles.
4. Our Interest
First of all, from view-point of immigration voice, we would ideally want Reid's cloture to fail, Bill Frists' latest compromise to get ratified in SJC, come back to floor for debates and amendments and succeed on Friday. Dems and Republicans "Kiss and make-up" and everyone gets something. Here's why: If the motion of Reid succeeds, the scope of getting it changed for 485 filing and removing hard-cap gets smaller as SJC version will be popular with 60-plus senators and Reid would be unwilling to play with delicate balance. On the other side, if Dems fail, then Frist's bill would be open for debates and amendments, making it possible to get provisions to make OUR lives better.
However, on the flip side, if Reid fails then whatever Frist brings to table will have almost no support of Dems. Then he too risks getting filibustered when HE files for cloture on his 3-tier version. He wont have 60 votes of his own to beat fillibuster because Dems would oppose him for being tough on illegals and Republicans like Cornyn-Kyl-Sessions etc would also oppose him because the 3-tier version would still have traces of Amnesty and its "Loose" on illegals.
5. What's Happening Wednesday night:
Harry Reid has promised he will be up all night in his PJs and review Frist's 3-tier solution. Cookes and milk are on the way from IV to him for some midnight reading. But he makes no promises. Cornyn and Kyl are still unhappy as 3-tier bill still smells of amnesty. McCain is angry at Reid and will support his party's stand and oppose Reid's motion for cloture. (edited)
Harry Reid
http://www.grassrootspa.com/uploaded_images/HarryRedi44333-734905.jpg
Bill Frist
http://skaroff.com/blog/wp-content/photos/images389071_Frist.jpg
hot Kate Middleton — an
WaldenPond
05-25 06:57 AM
Thanks for sending the webfaxes. But that would not be enough. Please make phone calls as well. Please tell/email all your friends to do the same.
more...
house Kate Middleton Hot Bikini
rajuseattle
08-04 01:23 PM
Sorry to hear about your friend's situation.
From your answers it looks like she is on H-4 which is dependent spouse for H1B.
If she is qualified enough ask her to find a new employer who is willing to sponsor her a H1B.
She can transfer her status from H-4 to H1B and it will not be counted against the annual H1B quota.
Once she finds new employer she can start her GC process.
If she cant find job here and be in H1B status, the only option is to go back to her Home country...or another option is to remarry with someone who has legal status here and then she can derive the dependent status.
From your answers it looks like she is on H-4 which is dependent spouse for H1B.
If she is qualified enough ask her to find a new employer who is willing to sponsor her a H1B.
She can transfer her status from H-4 to H1B and it will not be counted against the annual H1B quota.
Once she finds new employer she can start her GC process.
If she cant find job here and be in H1B status, the only option is to go back to her Home country...or another option is to remarry with someone who has legal status here and then she can derive the dependent status.
tattoo kate middleton hot bikini.
shahuja
02-04 05:50 AM
Its been over 3 weeks since my wife have H4 interview and the passport is still under "admin processing". This week her AP came and I have mailed it to her and now we want to get the passport back and travel on AP.
Now if anyone knows or done the process of getting the passport back from Delhi Consulate, can they please explain?
Thx
Hello raju6855,
I went for my H1B renewal at New Delhi on jan 14th and i am still waiting. Today is the 22nd calendar day. Has your wife got the pp back ? she appeared at ND as well ? Has she got any information from consulate or VFS ? what should we be doing in such a situation ?
Appreciate your reply.
Now if anyone knows or done the process of getting the passport back from Delhi Consulate, can they please explain?
Thx
Hello raju6855,
I went for my H1B renewal at New Delhi on jan 14th and i am still waiting. Today is the 22nd calendar day. Has your wife got the pp back ? she appeared at ND as well ? Has she got any information from consulate or VFS ? what should we be doing in such a situation ?
Appreciate your reply.
more...
pictures hot kate middleton hot body.
alkg
08-13 08:41 PM
see the paragraph in bold letters.................
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
Greenspan Sees Bottom
In Housing, Criticizes Bailout
August 14, 2008
WASHINGTON -- Alan Greenspan usually surrounds his opinions with caveats and convoluted clauses. But ask his view of the government's response to problems confronting mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and he offers one word: "Bad."
In a conversation this week, the former Federal Reserve chairman also said he expects that U.S. house prices, a key factor in the outlook for the economy and financial markets, will begin to stabilize in the first half of next year.
"Home prices in the U.S. are likely to start to stabilize or touch bottom sometime in the first half of 2009," he said in an interview. Tracing a jagged curve with his finger on a tabletop to underscore the difficulty in pinpointing the precise trough, he cautioned that even at a bottom, "prices could continue to drift lower through 2009 and beyond."
A long-time student of housing markets, Mr. Greenspan now works out of a well-windowed, oval-shaped office that is evidence of his fascination with the housing market. His desk, couch, coffee table and conference table are strewn with print-outs of spreadsheets and multicolored charts of housing starts, foreclosures and population trends siphoned from government and trade association sources.
An end to the decline in house prices, he explained, matters not only to American homeowners but is "a necessary condition for an end to the current global financial crisis" he said.
"Stable home prices will clarify the level of equity in homes, the ultimate collateral support for much of the financial world's mortgage-backed securities. We won't really know the market value of the asset side of the banking system's balance sheet -- and hence banks' capital -- until then."
At 82 years old, Mr. Greenspan remains sharp and his fascination with the workings of the economy undiminished. But his star no longer shines as brightly as it did when he retired from the Fed in January 2006.
Mr. Greenspan has been criticized for contributing to today's woes by keeping interest rates too low too long and by regulating too lightly. He has been aggressively defending his record -- in interviews, in op-ed pieces and in a new chapter in his recent book, included in the paperback version to be published next month. Mr. Greenspan attributes the rise in house prices to a historically unusual period in which world markets pushed interest rates down and even sophisticated investors misjudged the risks they were taking.
His views remain widely watched, however. Mr. Greenspan's housing forecast rests on two pillars of data. One is the supply of vacant, single-family homes for sale, both newly completed homes and existing homes owned by investors and lenders. He sees that "excess supply" -- roughly 800,000 units above normal -- diminishing soon. The other is a comparison of the current price of houses -- he prefers the quarterly S&P Case Shiller National Home Price Index because it includes both urban and rural areas -- with the government's estimate of what it costs to rent a single-family house. As other economists do, Mr. Greenspan essentially seeks to gauge when it is rational to own a house and when it is rational to sell the house, invest the money elsewhere and rent an identical house next door.
"It's the imbalance of supply and demand which causes prices to go down, but it's ultimately the valuation process of the use of the commodity...which tells you where the bottom is," Mr. Greenspan said, recalling his days trading copper a half century ago. "For example, the grain markets can have a huge excess of corn or wheat, but the price never goes to zero. It'll stabilize at some level of prices where people are willing to hold the excess inventory. We have little history, but the same thing is surely true in housing as well. We will get to the point where there will be willing holders of vacant single-family dwellings, and that will no longer act to depress the price level."
The collapse in home prices, of course, is a major threat to the stability of Fannie and Freddie. At the Fed, Mr. Greenspan warned for years that the two mortgage giants' business model threatened the nation's financial stability. He acknowledges that a government backstop for the shareholder-owned, government-sponsored enterprises, or GSEs, was unavoidable. Not only are they crucial to the ailing mortgage market now, but the Fed-financed takeover of investment bank Bear Stearns Cos. also made government backing of Fannie and Freddie debt "inevitable," he said. "There's no credible argument for bailing out Bear Stearns and not the GSEs."
His quarrel is with the approach the Bush administration sold to Congress. "They should have wiped out the shareholders, nationalized the institutions with legislation that they are to be reconstituted -- with necessary taxpayer support to make them financially viable -- as five or 10 individual privately held units," which the government would eventually auction off to private investors, he said.
Instead, Congress granted Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson temporary authority to use an unlimited amount of taxpayer money to lend to or invest in the companies. In response to the Greenspan critique, Mr. Paulson's spokeswoman, Michele Davis, said, "This legislation accomplished two important goals -- providing confidence in the immediate term as these institutions play a critical role in weathering the housing correction, and putting in place a new regulator with all the authorities necessary to address systemic risk posed by the GSEs."
But a similar critique has been raised by several other prominent observers. "If they are too big to fail, make them smaller," former Nixon Treasury Secretary George Shultz said. Some say the Paulson approach, even if the government never spends a nickel, entrenches current management and offers shareholders the upside if the government's reassurance allows the companies to weather the current storm. The Treasury hasn't said what conditions it would impose if it offers Fannie and Freddie taxpayer money.
Fear that financial markets would react poorly if the U.S. government nationalized the companies and assumed their approximately $5 trillion debt is unfounded, Mr. Greenspan said. "The law that stipulates that GSEs are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government is disbelieved. The market believes the government guarantee is there. Foreigners believe the guarantee is there. The only fiscal change is for someone to change the bookkeeping."
In the past, to be sure, Mr. Greenspan's crystal ball has been cloudy. He didn't foresee the sharp national decline in home prices. Recently released transcripts of Fed meetings do record him warning in November 2002: "It's hard to escape the conclusion that at some point our extraordinary housing boom...cannot continue indefinitely into the future."
Publicly, he was more reassuring. "While local economies may experience significant speculative price imbalances, a national severe price distortion seems most unlikely in the United States, given its size and diversity," he said in October 2004. Eight months later, he said if home prices did decline, that "likely would not have substantial macroeconomic implications." And in a speech in October 2006, nine months after leaving the Fed, he told an audience that, though housing prices were likely to be lower than the year before, "I think the worst of this may well be over." Housing prices, by his preferred gauge, have fallen nearly 19% since then. He says he was referring not to prices but to the downward drag on economic growth from weakening housing construction.
Mr. Greenspan urges the government to avoid tax or other policies that increase the construction of new homes because that would delay the much-desired day when home prices find a bottom.
He did offer one suggestion: "The most effective initiative, though politically difficult, would be a major expansion in quotas for skilled immigrants," he said. The only sustainable way to increase demand for vacant houses is to spur the formation of new households. Admitting more skilled immigrants, who tend to earn enough to buy homes, would accomplish that while paying other dividends to the U.S. economy.
He estimates the number of new households in the U.S. currently is increasing at an annual rate of about 800,000, of whom about one third are immigrants. "Perhaps 150,000 of those are loosely classified as skilled," he said. "A double or tripling of this number would markedly accelerate the absorption of unsold housing inventory for sale -- and hence help stabilize prices."
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB121865515167837815.html?mod=hpp_us_whats_news
dresses kate middleton hot legs kate
jayz
07-02 11:59 PM
This is the only mode of silent protest. We need to act on it and everyone needs to send the same message...
"ALLTHE BEST FOR FUTURE EB VISA ESTIMATES"
Truly,
A victim of revised July 07 visa bulletin
"ALLTHE BEST FOR FUTURE EB VISA ESTIMATES"
Truly,
A victim of revised July 07 visa bulletin
more...
makeup kate middleton bikini photo is
newfoundland
08-04 03:48 PM
Hello,
How can I inform the USCIS (I-485 pending) that my lawyer is not representing me any more? Do I need to fill up any form (like G28)?
I do not want USCIS to send ant document to my ex-lawyer anymore.
Thanks so much
EB2-NIW
PD march 2003
RD - august 2003
I-485 pending
How can I inform the USCIS (I-485 pending) that my lawyer is not representing me any more? Do I need to fill up any form (like G28)?
I do not want USCIS to send ant document to my ex-lawyer anymore.
Thanks so much
EB2-NIW
PD march 2003
RD - august 2003
I-485 pending
girlfriend kate middleton hot photos kate
emmNemm
07-16 08:57 AM
I agree. I am EB2 and my Prevailing_Wage_Level is Level II
hairstyles Kate Middleton Hair Style
meridiani.planum
04-07 01:05 AM
It is worse than that.. :)
Please watch the following youtube video to understand how USCIS works
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-30BZtpvaTY
that was amazing. Is the maker of that video an IV member?
Please watch the following youtube video to understand how USCIS works
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-30BZtpvaTY
that was amazing. Is the maker of that video an IV member?
plassey
07-28 11:35 AM
One more expert...:D
My thinking is that this mad rush of dates being current, should not have much effect on the retrogression in Oct 07, because either way most of us will get green cards only after date becomes current....granted we'll get EAD and AP.....Since last retrogression for EB-2 was April 04, my guess is going to be somewhere like Jan 04.........Please share ur thoughts....
My thinking is that this mad rush of dates being current, should not have much effect on the retrogression in Oct 07, because either way most of us will get green cards only after date becomes current....granted we'll get EAD and AP.....Since last retrogression for EB-2 was April 04, my guess is going to be somewhere like Jan 04.........Please share ur thoughts....
aj1234567
12-21 12:40 PM
Hi-
Can any body please tell me how to start new thread in this forum..
Thanks
Aj
Can any body please tell me how to start new thread in this forum..
Thanks
Aj
No comments:
Post a Comment