Legal
07-04 09:10 PM
[QUOTE=nixstor]Excellent analysis but it does have flaws
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
"Essentially, the numbers are spread out during the first three quarters and whatever is left is available during the last quarter"
On reading the Murthy article it appears that the biggest mistake USCIS committed was using up the visa numbers before the 4th qtr began on 7/2/07.
USCIS did it other way around...desparately rushed to use up the numbers before the 4th qtr began....only explanation is to avoid doing additional paperwork for the July filers...
I am sure you might have read this from murthy's website (http://www.murthy.com/news/n_dosebn.html) or not, but DOS/CA/VO officials shared this piece with them. As per the above article, final quarter quota should not open until Jul 2nd. I understand that agencies can implement and interpret certain stuff, but you cannot interpret and implement one thing on Jun 13th and another on Jul 2nd. If its written into law, that the quarterly allocation is a must, USCIS is in violation and DOS/CA/VO as well for not policing them of visa number usage.
"Essentially, the numbers are spread out during the first three quarters and whatever is left is available during the last quarter"
On reading the Murthy article it appears that the biggest mistake USCIS committed was using up the visa numbers before the 4th qtr began on 7/2/07.
USCIS did it other way around...desparately rushed to use up the numbers before the 4th qtr began....only explanation is to avoid doing additional paperwork for the July filers...
wallpaper quotes about tears and pain.
lvinaykumar
07-16 07:40 PM
Can we sue them for spreading false information
EkAurAaya
09-26 03:10 PM
Dear Reader,
Thank you for your interest in FSB. We admit that there was a
mischaracterization of the Capitol Hill rally in the story and it was
corrected as soon we realized the error.
We have changed the story to correctly identify the mission as a protest of
the long delays in securing green cards for highly-skilled workers already
in the U.S.
We will work to avoid errors like this in the future.
Best regards,
FSB
In response to....
"Last week 1,000 protestors-mostly legal immigrants-drew attention to the
situation of highly skilled foreigners who want to work for companies in the
U.S. by marching on Capitol Hill."
Above statement is totally wrong! you are seriously misguiding readers by your above statement... the rally was for clearing up backlog of petitions filed
for Green Cards not for increasing H1b. You should really contact the source, in this case Immigration Voice to learn what was the rally about. info@immigrationvoice.org
Thank you for your interest in FSB. We admit that there was a
mischaracterization of the Capitol Hill rally in the story and it was
corrected as soon we realized the error.
We have changed the story to correctly identify the mission as a protest of
the long delays in securing green cards for highly-skilled workers already
in the U.S.
We will work to avoid errors like this in the future.
Best regards,
FSB
In response to....
"Last week 1,000 protestors-mostly legal immigrants-drew attention to the
situation of highly skilled foreigners who want to work for companies in the
U.S. by marching on Capitol Hill."
Above statement is totally wrong! you are seriously misguiding readers by your above statement... the rally was for clearing up backlog of petitions filed
for Green Cards not for increasing H1b. You should really contact the source, in this case Immigration Voice to learn what was the rally about. info@immigrationvoice.org
2011 quotes about tears and pain.
Ramba
07-04 07:25 PM
Everyone blaming CIS/DOS needs to understand some basics behind this mess. Before going to conclude anything, first, one should read all the ombudsman reports for last 3 or 4 years. Former INS or current USCIS�s functions and operations were not questionable and not known to public till ombudsman office was established. Ombudsman has helped customers and keep helping to improve efficiency of CIS. Ombudsman main concern (or goal) have been over the 4 years are
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories �current� for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories �current� ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of �current� there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making �current� for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as �current� in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
1. Primarily reducing backlogs in any application type particularly 485 and timely approval of any application.
2. Abolish the need for interim benefits like EAD, AP etc. If they approve 485 in 6 months, then most of us do not require EAD and AP.
3. Reduce the wastage of EB visas, as unused EB visas can not be carried over to next year (use it or lose it). Since 1992, about 200,000 EB visas were lost permanently. In 2003 alone, they issued only 64,000 EB visas and lost 88,000.
The recent report to congress, the ombudsman scolded the CIS left and right for its inefficiency and highlighted how many EB visas were lost for ever, in last 10 years despite the very heavy demand for employment based green cards. Based on his report, both CIS and DOS try to obey the direction of ombudsman and modifying the 485 adjudication procedure. The reason for loss of EB visas in previous years not only due to inefficiency in processing the 485s on time, it is also due to lengthy background check delay by FBI, where USCIS has no control. For example, in 2003 they could approve about 64,000 485s only. It is partially due to USCIS inefficiency and partially due to lengthy FBI check. There are 300,000 (AOS+ Naturalization applicants) cases are pending with FBI for name check. Out of which, about 70,000 cases are pending more than 2 years. Out of 300,000 victims of name check delay, how many are really threat to the country? Perhaps none or may be few! Remember that lot of Indians also victims of name check and all the victims of name check delay already living in USA.
The big problem is the timing when USCIS takes the visa number for a 485 applicant. Till 1982, INS took visa number for a 485 applicant as soon as they receive the application. Visa number assigned to a 485 applicant without processing his/her application. He/She may not be a qualified applicant to approve 485. Still they assign to them. If they found, the applicant is ineligible, they suppose to return the number back to DOS. However, this practice was modified after 1982. USCIS is taking visa number only at the time of approval of 485, after processing the 485 for a lengthy period. For some people, particularly victims of name check, 485 processing time vary between 2 to 5 years. Though, it is a good practice it is not the ideal or efficient process, due to name check delay. Let us assume about 150,000 are victim of name check in 2003. If they assigned all the numbers to these 150,000 applicants at the time they filed 485, the 88,000 visa numbers might have not been lost in 2003. Now what happens, those who filed 485 in 2003 (victim of name check delay) will take EB numbers from 2007 or 2008 quota, if FBI clears his/her file in 2007 or 2008. This will push back those who are going to file 485 in 2007 or 2008.
That why, ombudsman in his 2007 yearly report to Congress recommended to practice the old way of assigning visa number to 485 applicants, to minimize the loss of visa numbers.
Now lets come to July Visa bulletin mess.
Because of tight holding of visa cutoff dates for EB3 and EB2 for the first 8 months of 2007 (From Oct 2006 to May 2007) USCIS approved only 66,000 485s. For the next 4 months they have about 60K to 70K numbers available. If they approve the pending 485s with slower speed or old cut off dates, there is a potential estimated loss of 40,000 EB visas by Sep 2007. Thats why, based on ombudsman recommendation, DOS moved considerably the cut off date for June. When they took inventory in May, there are about 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications were pending due to non-availability of visa numbers. The �documentarily qualified 485 applications� mean the application filed long time back and processed by USCIS and cleared the FBI name and criminal check, and found eligible for green card. Apart from 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications, there is thousands of 485 applications (documentarily not yet qualified) pending due to name check. When DOS checked with USCIS they found only 40,000 documentarily qualified 485 applications (in all EB categories put together) are pending. However, the available visas are more than 40,000 (60to 70K). Then they made with out consulting properly with USCIS they made �current� for all EB categories. This is how they determine �current� or �over-subscribed� and how they establish cutoff dates.
If there are sufficient numbers in a particular category to satisfy all reported documentarily qualified demand, the category is considered �Current.�
Whenever the total of documentarily qualified applicants in a category exceeds the supply of numbers available for allotment for the particular month, the category is considered to be �oversubscribed� and a visa availability cut-off date is established.
There is nothing wrong with DOS to make all categories �current� for a July bulletin as per they definition of demand vs supply estimation to meet the numerical limitations per year. Perhaps the DOS did not aware of other impact of making all categories �current� ie fresh guys entering into I-485 race. Because of �current� there will be additional tons and tons of new filings. The rough estimation is about 500K to 700K new 485s and same amount of EAD and AP applications will be filed in July. But the available number is just 60K, and there are already 40K documentarily qualified 485s are pending more than 6 months to 3 years to take the numbers from remaining 60K pool. That leaves just 20K to fresh 485 filings. If 700K new 485 filed in July, it will choke the system. People have to live only in EAD and AP for next 5 to 10 years.
For example, an EB3-Indian whose LC approved through fast PERM on July 30th 2007, can apply 140 and 485 on July 31st 2007 as per July visa bulletin. For his PD, it will take another 10 years for the approval of 485. During this 10 year period, he/she has to live in EAD and AP and need to go for finger print every 15 month.
Therefore by making �current� for all EB categories is a billion dollar mistake by both DOS and CIS first part.. Another mistake is timing of rectifying mistake. USCIS and DOS and law firms should have discussed immediately about the potential chaos about making current and rectified move the cut-off to reasonable period to accommodate additional 20K 485s. If they modified the VB, with in couple of days after July 13, then there wont be a this much stress, time and wastage of money.
There is nothing wrong in issuing additional advisory notice or modified visa bulletin to control the usage of visa numbers. The only mistake both USCIS and DOS is made is the timing of issuance of modified visa bulletin or advisory notice. It indicates poor transparency in the system and bad customer service. Now, they used all 140K visas this year. Assigning remaining 20K visa numbers to already pending 485s which are not yet documentarily (name check delayed cases) qualified is not the violation of law. It was old practice. In fact, ombudsman recommends it. They have the trump card which is Ombudsman report and recommendations. Therefore they are immune to lawsuit. Therefore, filing the law-suit is not going to help. The only two mistakes I see is 1) making all categories as �current� in June 13 and second is modifying VB only on July 2.
My recommendation is to IV is capitalize the situation in constructive way. Law suit only bring media attention with the expense of money and time. The constructive approach is getting an immediate interim relief by legislation to recapture unused visas in previous years to balance the supply vs demand difference.
more...
onemorecame
09-21 03:58 PM
I hope approval and not denial or other RFE. My RFE is posted on 1st page of this thread and it took lot of documents. so hopefully we will hear good news...
How many days it took you to receive physical RFE after Online status update?
Thanks
How many days it took you to receive physical RFE after Online status update?
Thanks
desixp
06-11 02:26 PM
Done!
more...
vandanaverdia
09-11 04:51 PM
ACT NOW!!
Come now to DC... GO IV!!!
Come now to DC... GO IV!!!
2010 quotes about tears and crying
xyz2005
07-18 10:37 AM
Its getting dicey here
My attorney says so far I have not received your rejection but not to say USCIS might have mailed one and we have not received it. If we get it then we will resubmit..if not then you will get receipt notice.
He did not address whether we will be able to retain our July 2nd queue number or not.
We all should be worried now.! Don't know what to say or recommend.
My attorney says so far I have not received your rejection but not to say USCIS might have mailed one and we have not received it. If we get it then we will resubmit..if not then you will get receipt notice.
He did not address whether we will be able to retain our July 2nd queue number or not.
We all should be worried now.! Don't know what to say or recommend.
more...
lahiribaba
02-05 11:35 PM
like minded folks, please post your ideas.
This time to ombudsman office and to the white house. I have seen no other campaign been so successful like what we did in July 2007 that made USCIS reverse their decision.The whole point of this is to make a point to the ones who have the power to change things.
This time to ombudsman office and to the white house. I have seen no other campaign been so successful like what we did in July 2007 that made USCIS reverse their decision.The whole point of this is to make a point to the ones who have the power to change things.
hair Tears andor Crying Quotes
meera_godse
01-31 05:23 PM
Well excuse me, but people having queries other than the reason why this thread was started, please create a new thread.
Sorry to say so, but my query for travel has been sidelined because of other issues.
thanks in advance for your cooperation.
Sorry to say so, but my query for travel has been sidelined because of other issues.
thanks in advance for your cooperation.
more...
immig4me
03-08 10:17 AM
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
hot looks like crying with no
amitjoey
01-18 12:36 PM
I've been following this Forum daily for more than
two years and never seen any achievement by Core group or
their lobbysts!
Why should I contribute this time?
Thanks
The question to ask is what should/can I do to help the core with this effort.
Not be a arm-chair critic. I know, you seem to be just frustrated, I am sure you are not questioning the core and their efforts. This is our year and we are going to be successfull this year. Nothing meaningfull can be achieved without struggle.
two years and never seen any achievement by Core group or
their lobbysts!
Why should I contribute this time?
Thanks
The question to ask is what should/can I do to help the core with this effort.
Not be a arm-chair critic. I know, you seem to be just frustrated, I am sure you are not questioning the core and their efforts. This is our year and we are going to be successfull this year. Nothing meaningfull can be achieved without struggle.
more...
house The bitterest tears shed over
GCOP
07-11 02:07 PM
How many applications are pending for EB-3 (I). ?
Currently the tunnel is closed at the end for EB-3 :mad: and the only way out I see is for us EB-3 folks to dig through. No one cares about EB-3 I folks. That's the way I see it.
Currently the tunnel is closed at the end for EB-3 :mad: and the only way out I see is for us EB-3 folks to dig through. No one cares about EB-3 I folks. That's the way I see it.
tattoo hairstyles quotes about tears
vdlrao
09-26 02:43 PM
Dear Reader,
Thank you for your interest in FSB. We admit that there was a
mischaracterization of the Capitol Hill rally in the story and it was
corrected as soon we realized the error.
We have changed the story to correctly identify the mission as a protest of
the long delays in securing green cards for highly-skilled workers already
in the U.S.
We will work to avoid errors like this in the future.
Best regards,
FSB
Thank you for your interest in FSB. We admit that there was a
mischaracterization of the Capitol Hill rally in the story and it was
corrected as soon we realized the error.
We have changed the story to correctly identify the mission as a protest of
the long delays in securing green cards for highly-skilled workers already
in the U.S.
We will work to avoid errors like this in the future.
Best regards,
FSB
more...
pictures wallpaper I hide my tears when
nitlsu
06-12 08:45 AM
Done for me and spouse. We also had ~20 other people in my neighborhood including citizens/GC send this.
dresses crying. quotes about tears
vina92
01-16 02:19 PM
I just signed up for monthly $20.00 contribution.
Vina92
.
Vina92
.
more...
makeup quotes about tears and
rpat1968
12-28 11:20 AM
We cannot save for our children's college in college savings plan as every plan needs a GC.
I am on H1B with approved I140 and I was able to open a College savings (529) plan for my daughter. I told them that I am a non resident alien and my GC is in process. Also I was able to get Life and Variable Life insurance on my non immigrant status.
(FYI : The plan is brokered through Farmers. Investment company is Putnam Investments)
I am on H1B with approved I140 and I was able to open a College savings (529) plan for my daughter. I told them that I am a non resident alien and my GC is in process. Also I was able to get Life and Variable Life insurance on my non immigrant status.
(FYI : The plan is brokered through Farmers. Investment company is Putnam Investments)
girlfriend your tears Youre crying
BharatPremi
03-12 08:49 AM
It is safe that your I40 be approved but not necessary.
In theory you are right. But practically Very big corporations/companies have recently started a practice not to hire a person on EAD if I-140 is not clearly approved. Why? Lawyers advise them to do so. I have been hired by very prestigious company recently of course on EAD and first thing they wanted to make a check was on whether I have I-140 approved or not. Secondly they ask if I could submit 3 years audit report for "previous employer". That could make sense to me as it was a clear hint that they wanted to check whether I am coming from good financial based company or not... Why? The reason is that if that would not have been the case then there could be the chance of denying I-140 although it was approved. At least in my network of friends I am the third person who experienced this level of scrutiny before hiring on EAD. The reason is simple. They do not want to hire a guy who can not work at some time of the initial period due to I-140 related problems. So bottom line, I-140 approval is must nowadays for working in big corporations with EAD.
In theory you are right. But practically Very big corporations/companies have recently started a practice not to hire a person on EAD if I-140 is not clearly approved. Why? Lawyers advise them to do so. I have been hired by very prestigious company recently of course on EAD and first thing they wanted to make a check was on whether I have I-140 approved or not. Secondly they ask if I could submit 3 years audit report for "previous employer". That could make sense to me as it was a clear hint that they wanted to check whether I am coming from good financial based company or not... Why? The reason is that if that would not have been the case then there could be the chance of denying I-140 although it was approved. At least in my network of friends I am the third person who experienced this level of scrutiny before hiring on EAD. The reason is simple. They do not want to hire a guy who can not work at some time of the initial period due to I-140 related problems. So bottom line, I-140 approval is must nowadays for working in big corporations with EAD.
hairstyles beautiful life quote
h1b_forever
03-09 01:10 PM
I am getting Red for this. Great.
Some people seem to feel better by giving others red.
Some people seem to feel better by giving others red.
nojoke
09-18 10:54 PM
Reading the posts about the economy has just shown me how ignorant many of the IV members are.
The economy is just going through it's ~10-year cycle. While it is a concern, it is NOT the end of the world. It just strenghtens USA's position in the world. Once again, it has proved that "if USA sneezes, the world catches the cold". The 10-years economic cycle follows a kind of Darwin's Law of the Fittest. The firms that are bubbled up get washed away, the economy cleans up and rebounds back. The 1990s saw it, the year ~2001 saw it with the dot.com burst and ~2009-2010 is seeing it with the mortgage burst.
While it is each one's perogative as to what you want to invest into (good time to buy stocks, or buy gold), another thing to understand is FDIC does NOT insure just 100K per account in each bank. There are multiple ways to increase this insurance to over $2 million in the same bank by opening different type of accounts or having different beneficiaries. Consult your bank for details.
No amount of govt. intervention can change the economy. It has it's own mind and will take it's own course.
There is no need to panic, pack and run.
Let the economy go through it's colon flush.
Everybody understands that we get this ups and down. The cycles once in a while gets bad. Very bad. We had great depression. This could be a great depression for the financial market. Lehman, which has survived 150 years and many economic cycles closed 2 days ago. So did Bear strerns fold. The dotcom bubble is what - 100 billion max? 200 billion? Here we are talking about trillion dollars.
FDIC has only 50 billion. It can cover a big bank like washington mutual. Can it take another big bank? Wachovia?
This time it is not going to strengthen US position. China is talking about creating a separate world currency and they are not happy with US currency. If china dumps, dollars, a lot of countries will follow.
This is just financial institues. It will have ripple effect on rest of the economy.
FDIC doesn't protect more than 100K if you open different accounts in the same bank. However joint accounts and beneficiary can get you protected for 200K.
The economy is just going through it's ~10-year cycle. While it is a concern, it is NOT the end of the world. It just strenghtens USA's position in the world. Once again, it has proved that "if USA sneezes, the world catches the cold". The 10-years economic cycle follows a kind of Darwin's Law of the Fittest. The firms that are bubbled up get washed away, the economy cleans up and rebounds back. The 1990s saw it, the year ~2001 saw it with the dot.com burst and ~2009-2010 is seeing it with the mortgage burst.
While it is each one's perogative as to what you want to invest into (good time to buy stocks, or buy gold), another thing to understand is FDIC does NOT insure just 100K per account in each bank. There are multiple ways to increase this insurance to over $2 million in the same bank by opening different type of accounts or having different beneficiaries. Consult your bank for details.
No amount of govt. intervention can change the economy. It has it's own mind and will take it's own course.
There is no need to panic, pack and run.
Let the economy go through it's colon flush.
Everybody understands that we get this ups and down. The cycles once in a while gets bad. Very bad. We had great depression. This could be a great depression for the financial market. Lehman, which has survived 150 years and many economic cycles closed 2 days ago. So did Bear strerns fold. The dotcom bubble is what - 100 billion max? 200 billion? Here we are talking about trillion dollars.
FDIC has only 50 billion. It can cover a big bank like washington mutual. Can it take another big bank? Wachovia?
This time it is not going to strengthen US position. China is talking about creating a separate world currency and they are not happy with US currency. If china dumps, dollars, a lot of countries will follow.
This is just financial institues. It will have ripple effect on rest of the economy.
FDIC doesn't protect more than 100K if you open different accounts in the same bank. However joint accounts and beneficiary can get you protected for 200K.
feedfront
09-14 12:21 PM
Current PD folks, if you get RFE please share your RFE here..
0 comments:
Post a Comment