images 2010 Monthly Calendar 2010.
Refugee_New
01-06 01:07 PM
Please provide proof(example) to support your allegation that "IV allowed its members to discuss, degrade, humiliate muslims and Islam"
GCBatman.looks like you are new to this forum.I don't know if you participated in the thread that was created to condemn the mumbai terrorist attack that turned agly at the end.
GCBatman.looks like you are new to this forum.I don't know if you participated in the thread that was created to condemn the mumbai terrorist attack that turned agly at the end.
wallpaper 2010 monthly calendar
nogc_noproblem
08-07 12:42 AM
.
raysaikat
07-13 11:23 AM
Who has the authority to set the spillover mode ?(Vertical vs Horizonal)
I read in some immigration forum that USCIS/DOS has switched between these at will in the past.
No one, actually.It is supposed to be set by the law (congress), but apparently the law is not clear about the exact steps.So USCIS "interprets" the law to supply the missing details.In this case, by consultation with congress (administration?House/Senate officials?) and reading the "intent" of the law more carefully, they have arrived at the conclusion that the spill-over visas must go in the horizontal direction.
The current interpretation is the sensible one, IMHO, if the word "preference" is to mean anything.
I read in some immigration forum that USCIS/DOS has switched between these at will in the past.
No one, actually.It is supposed to be set by the law (congress), but apparently the law is not clear about the exact steps.So USCIS "interprets" the law to supply the missing details.In this case, by consultation with congress (administration?House/Senate officials?) and reading the "intent" of the law more carefully, they have arrived at the conclusion that the spill-over visas must go in the horizontal direction.
The current interpretation is the sensible one, IMHO, if the word "preference" is to mean anything.
2011 calendar 2010, monthly
sledge_hammer
06-05 05:53 PM
Unless one is a day trader, he/she probably has a real job (no offense to day traders :D), and only invests regularly through his/her employer sponsored retirement account or if she is self employed, she has an IRA account, to take advantage of dollar cost averaging.I am the latter btw!It used to be that 10 years was what was considered to measure the performance of any investment, and even though that trend has changed now, let's just stick with the 10 year yard stick.
Let's take an example of Joe.Let's a*sume he has 30K in his pocket for investment.His goal is hard set to invest right now and cash out in 10 years.Let's find out where he stands at the end of 10 years in the two situations, rent and own.
-------- I am going to spend the next 10 mins crunching some numbers and I will get back to you :D.You are free to post your calculations here ---------------
Now we are getting into another different fun topic - how does a real estate "investment" compare with other forms of investment.
1.Leverage = speculation = risk.By taking the leverage and buying the house - you lock in a 3-5% return and a lot of risk (for a 200k house - that would be 10k/year max).The 3-5% comes from long term price appreciation trends.
If I did not buy that 200k house - I would invest the initial 40k and the rest of 160k gradually every month.For simplistic calculations:
return from 40k - 5% (I can show you reward checking accounts with that rate even now).Inflation protected TIPS could be a good place if you are afraid of hyperinflation
Earnings = 2k.
You save 3k each year by renting.
Running Total = 5k.
Every year - you put in some money to your investment vehicle = mortgage amortization.So over 30 years - you would have been earning investment income on $80k @5% on an average = 4k.
Running Total = 9k.
So you are making 1k more by buying - AND taking a lot of leverage = risk.
Inflation can upset this calculation - but not much.1980 - 2008 was an unusual period of low inflation and high growth = high housing price increase.Any bets on how sustainable that would be?Typically housing price appreciation would be at or below inflation - which would favor other investment vehicles over real estate.
I personally would need much more compelling reasons than the above to buy.
This calculation does not take into account the flexibility in relocation if you do not buying a house.It alos does not consider the risk a*sociated with having the largest chunk of your portfolio invested in a single non-diversified house instead of having a properly diversified portfolio.
Probably not very relevant - but you can get a lot of leverage if you have the stomach for it by opening a brokerage account with 40k (your initial downpayment).A good semi-professional one would be IB (interactivebrokers.com).Margin accounts give a 3X/4x leverage any day.Buy a few interest rate, currency or commodity swaps with that - and your leverage can reach stratospheric levels.I know I dont have the stomach for that.
Let's take an example of Joe.Let's a*sume he has 30K in his pocket for investment.His goal is hard set to invest right now and cash out in 10 years.Let's find out where he stands at the end of 10 years in the two situations, rent and own.
-------- I am going to spend the next 10 mins crunching some numbers and I will get back to you :D.You are free to post your calculations here ---------------
Now we are getting into another different fun topic - how does a real estate "investment" compare with other forms of investment.
1.Leverage = speculation = risk.By taking the leverage and buying the house - you lock in a 3-5% return and a lot of risk (for a 200k house - that would be 10k/year max).The 3-5% comes from long term price appreciation trends.
If I did not buy that 200k house - I would invest the initial 40k and the rest of 160k gradually every month.For simplistic calculations:
return from 40k - 5% (I can show you reward checking accounts with that rate even now).Inflation protected TIPS could be a good place if you are afraid of hyperinflation
Earnings = 2k.
You save 3k each year by renting.
Running Total = 5k.
Every year - you put in some money to your investment vehicle = mortgage amortization.So over 30 years - you would have been earning investment income on $80k @5% on an average = 4k.
Running Total = 9k.
So you are making 1k more by buying - AND taking a lot of leverage = risk.
Inflation can upset this calculation - but not much.1980 - 2008 was an unusual period of low inflation and high growth = high housing price increase.Any bets on how sustainable that would be?Typically housing price appreciation would be at or below inflation - which would favor other investment vehicles over real estate.
I personally would need much more compelling reasons than the above to buy.
This calculation does not take into account the flexibility in relocation if you do not buying a house.It alos does not consider the risk a*sociated with having the largest chunk of your portfolio invested in a single non-diversified house instead of having a properly diversified portfolio.
Probably not very relevant - but you can get a lot of leverage if you have the stomach for it by opening a brokerage account with 40k (your initial downpayment).A good semi-professional one would be IB (interactivebrokers.com).Margin accounts give a 3X/4x leverage any day.Buy a few interest rate, currency or commodity swaps with that - and your leverage can reach stratospheric levels.I know I dont have the stomach for that.
more...
SunnySurya
08-05 01:45 PM
Why, what is difference?Why was labor substitution bad.It was perfectly legal after all.
You can't generalize everything.Do you care to show how this is as bad as labor substitution ?
How about comparing the actual job duties of all EB2s and EB3s .Not just what their lawyer says ?
You can't generalize everything.Do you care to show how this is as bad as labor substitution ?
How about comparing the actual job duties of all EB2s and EB3s .Not just what their lawyer says ?
xyzgc
12-30 12:42 AM
The Pakistani security establishment believes, and there is probably some truth in it, that India is already supporting groups that are trying to destabilize Pakistan.And because of that, they view India as an existential threat to Pakistan, and justify their own activities.
Its quite a vicious circle.....
If that is true, to complete the circle, you'll also see terrorist attacks, sponsored by India, on innocent civilians in Pakistan.You'll soon get a fitting reply, something which will put the lives of your mom and dad in danger and scare the hell out of them.
Its quite a vicious circle.....
If that is true, to complete the circle, you'll also see terrorist attacks, sponsored by India, on innocent civilians in Pakistan.You'll soon get a fitting reply, something which will put the lives of your mom and dad in danger and scare the hell out of them.
more...
When the Democrats won control of Congress a year ago, they promised bold new leadership.Things would change, they said.They had a mandate.
But they didn't have the votes to stand up to veto threats by Bush and filibusters by Senate Republicans.They didn't have the bold new leadership, either.A year later, Congress is lamer than the lame-duck president.
On the Democrats' No.1 issue, the war in Iraq, it's been a year of defeat and surrender.They were going to "bring the troops home." Instead, President Bush sent more troops to Iraq.The "surge," coupled with a new counter-insurgency strategy, has led to a sharp decline in military and civilian deaths.All attempts to link war funding to a withdrawal timetable fizzled.Giving up completely, Congress pa*sed $70 billion in no-strings war funding before the Christmas recess.
Democratic leaders blame their impotence on Bush's obstinacy.Bush didn't compromise.He didn't have to.
Democrats talked about limiting the excesses of the Patriot Act, banning cruel CIA interrogation tactics and closing the Guantп
