H******i
发帖数: 4704 | 1 Thank you for looking into this issue. I'm very disappointed with the reply
from DOS, which should implement both the literal and the spirit of the law
rather than play with only the literal meanings of the law to fool congress
.
The real reason why there's only a limit but no minimum visa numbers to be
issued to each country are: There're very few immigrants from some small
countries and some developed countries. U.S. can not attract 7% of the total
140,000 global quota from each of these countries.
However, in the case of Chinese and Indian employment-based immigration
petitioners, there're huge backlogs that will take several years to clear,
or the backlogs will never be cleared if DOS continues to fool congress by
playing with the literal meanings of "no minimum only maximum".
Thank you! |
a***x
发帖数: 26368 | 2 仿佛俺又回到了小学抄老师范文的年代。怀念那。
reply
law
congress
total
【在 H******i 的大作中提到】
: Thank you for looking into this issue. I'm very disappointed with the reply
: from DOS, which should implement both the literal and the spirit of the law
: rather than play with only the literal meanings of the law to fool congress
: .
: The real reason why there's only a limit but no minimum visa numbers to be
: issued to each country are: There're very few immigrants from some small
: countries and some developed countries. U.S. can not attract 7% of the total
: 140,000 global quota from each of these countries.
: However, in the case of Chinese and Indian employment-based immigration
: petitioners, there're huge backlogs that will take several years to clear,
|
H******i
发帖数: 4704 | 3 国会最恨行政部门愚弄他们，把他们当傻子。
Hold the law made by the congress against congress!
简直把我们议员不当干部嘛！ |
r*******3
发帖数: 711 | 4 yeah,yeah, O has said that it is "limit", not a "quota".
which means nobody should say anything regardless.
i get it. but any limit on illegal mexican? they should set a limit
on them, right? but where is it? |
n***s
发帖数: 10056 | 5 You can say 'no minimum only maximum' makes sense when there are not many
demands. when there are huge demands and delays are so significant, stick to
that 'principle' is just silly. |
H******i
发帖数: 4704 | 6 simply copy my draft for you and send it back. |
S*******r
发帖数: 11017 | 7 奥傻当年那个国别7%就一直强调说是限额而不是配额了
实在难以想象 对于一个有漫长排期的国家
还把7%或者27%当作限额是多么的愚蠢--当然 如果有人有意为之 那就另当别论了
to
【在 n***s 的大作中提到】
: You can say 'no minimum only maximum' makes sense when there are not many
: demands. when there are huge demands and delays are so significant, stick to
: that 'principle' is just silly.
|
H******i
发帖数: 4704 | |
c**l
发帖数: 1022 | 9 I just did. thanks!
【在 H******i 的大作中提到】
: simply copy my draft for you and send it back.
|
H******i
发帖数: 4704 | 10 Thank you!
As I said, DOS is really fooling the congressmen! We need to give them some
color see see.
【在 c**l 的大作中提到】
: I just did. thanks!
|
|
|
w*****g
发帖数: 3922 | 11 just ask，如果申请人数和7%不能决定一个国家能拿到的最终名额的话，那DOS通过什么
来确定每个国家能拿到的名额。任何其它的方法都会产生歧视。
reply
law
congress
total
【在 H******i 的大作中提到】
: Thank you for looking into this issue. I'm very disappointed with the reply
: from DOS, which should implement both the literal and the spirit of the law
: rather than play with only the literal meanings of the law to fool congress
: .
: The real reason why there's only a limit but no minimum visa numbers to be
: issued to each country are: There're very few immigrants from some small
: countries and some developed countries. U.S. can not attract 7% of the total
: 140,000 global quota from each of these countries.
: However, in the case of Chinese and Indian employment-based immigration
: petitioners, there're huge backlogs that will take several years to clear,
|
H******i
发帖数: 4704 | 12 Thank you for looking into this issue. I'm very disappointed with the reply
from DOS, which should implement both the literal and the spirit of the law
rather than play with only the literal meanings of the law to fool congress
.
The real reason why there's only a limit but no minimum visa numbers to be
issued to each country are: There're very few immigrants from some small
countries and some developed countries. U.S. can not attract 7% of the total
140,000 global quota from each of these countries.
However, in the case of Chinese and Indian employment-based immigration
petitioners, there're huge backlogs that will take several years to clear,
or the backlogs will never be cleared if DOS continues to fool congress by
playing with the literal meanings of "no minimum only maximum".
Thank you! |
a***x
发帖数: 26368 | 13 仿佛俺又回到了小学抄老师范文的年代。怀念那。
reply
law
congress
total
【在 H******i 的大作中提到】
: Thank you for looking into this issue. I'm very disappointed with the reply
: from DOS, which should implement both the literal and the spirit of the law
: rather than play with only the literal meanings of the law to fool congress
: .
: The real reason why there's only a limit but no minimum visa numbers to be
: issued to each country are: There're very few immigrants from some small
: countries and some developed countries. U.S. can not attract 7% of the total
: 140,000 global quota from each of these countries.
: However, in the case of Chinese and Indian employment-based immigration
: petitioners, there're huge backlogs that will take several years to clear,
|
H******i
发帖数: 4704 | 14 国会最恨行政部门愚弄他们，把他们当傻子。
Hold the law made by the congress against congress!
简直把我们议员不当干部嘛！ |
r*******3
发帖数: 711 | 15 yeah,yeah, O has said that it is "limit", not a "quota".
which means nobody should say anything regardless.
i get it. but any limit on illegal mexican? they should set a limit
on them, right? but where is it? |
n***s
发帖数: 10056 | 16 You can say 'no minimum only maximum' makes sense when there are not many
demands. when there are huge demands and delays are so significant, stick to
that 'principle' is just silly. |
H******i
发帖数: 4704 | 17 simply copy my draft for you and send it back. |
S*******r
发帖数: 11017 | 18 奥傻当年那个国别7%就一直强调说是限额而不是配额了
实在难以想象 对于一个有漫长排期的国家
还把7%或者27%当作限额是多么的愚蠢--当然 如果有人有意为之 那就另当别论了
to
【在 n***s 的大作中提到】
: You can say 'no minimum only maximum' makes sense when there are not many
: demands. when there are huge demands and delays are so significant, stick to
: that 'principle' is just silly.
|
H******i
发帖数: 4704 | |
c**l
发帖数: 1022 | 20 I just did. thanks!
【在 H******i 的大作中提到】
: simply copy my draft for you and send it back.
|
H******i
发帖数: 4704 | 21 Thank you!
As I said, DOS is really fooling the congressmen! We need to give them some
color see see.
【在 c**l 的大作中提到】
: I just did. thanks!
|
w*****g
发帖数: 3922 | 22 just ask，如果申请人数和7%不能决定一个国家能拿到的最终名额的话，那DOS通过什么
来确定每个国家能拿到的名额。任何其它的方法都会产生歧视。
reply
law
congress
total
【在 H******i 的大作中提到】
: Thank you for looking into this issue. I'm very disappointed with the reply
: from DOS, which should implement both the literal and the spirit of the law
: rather than play with only the literal meanings of the law to fool congress
: .
: The real reason why there's only a limit but no minimum visa numbers to be
: issued to each country are: There're very few immigrants from some small
: countries and some developed countries. U.S. can not attract 7% of the total
: 140,000 global quota from each of these countries.
: However, in the case of Chinese and Indian employment-based immigration
: petitioners, there're huge backlogs that will take several years to clear,
|
