Redian新闻
>
这个中印捆绑到底是怎么回事?准备给希拉里奥巴马每周写信
avatar
这个中印捆绑到底是怎么回事?准备给希拉里奥巴马每周写信# EB23 - 劳工卡
s*5
1
担心巨额债务,越来越多的学生选择弃藤校而不上而去公立大学。这是今天的华尔街时
报文章。我也认识好几个这样的学生,不知道他们以后会不会后悔。
Fearing Massive Debt, More Students Are Choosing to Enroll at Public
Colleges Over Elite Universities.
Is an Ivy League Diploma Worth It?
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405297020373350457702389
By MELISSA KORN
Daniel Schwartz could have attended an Ivy League school if he wanted to. He
just doesn't see the value.
Mr. Schwartz, 18 years old, was accepted at Cornell University but enrolled
instead at City University of New York's Macaulay Honors College, which is
free.
Mr. Schwartz says his family could have afforded Cornell's tuition, with
help from scholarships and loans. But he wants to be a doctor and thinks
medical school, which could easily cost upward of $45,000 a year for a
private institution, is a more important investment. It wasn't "worth it to
spend $50,000-plus a year for a bachelor's degree," he says.
As student-loan default rates climb and college graduates fail to land jobs,
an increasing number of students are betting they can get just as far with
a degree from a less-expensive school as they can with a diploma from an
elite school—without having to take on debt.
More students are choosing lower-cost public colleges or commuting to
schools from home to save on housing expenses. Twenty-two percent of
students from families with annual household incomes above $100,000 attended
public, two-year schools in the 2010-2011 academic year, up from 12% the
previous year, according to a report from student-loan company Sallie Mae.
Natasha Pearson, 19, attends Hunter College in New York City. She turned
down an offer from Boston College after the school said her family would
need to pitch in $30,000 annually.
.
Such choices meant families across all income brackets spent 9% less—an
average of $21,889 in cash, loans, scholarships and other methods—on
college in 2010-11 than in the previous year, according to the report. High-
income families cut their college spending by 18%, to $25,760. The report,
which is released annually, was based on a survey of about 1,600 students
and parents.
Some students are growing more skeptical of the investment return of an
undergraduate college education, discouraged as they see recent graduates
struggle to find jobs and increasingly default on their loans. Melissa Korn
has details on Lunch Break.
.
The approach has risks. Top-tier colleges tend to attract recruiting visits
from companies that have stopped visiting elsewhere. A diploma from an elite
school can look better to many recruiters and graduate schools, as well.
And overcrowding at state schools means students could be locked out of
required courses and have difficulty completing their degrees in four years.
Mr. Schwartz started at the Macaulay Honors program at Queens College this
fall with "nagging" disappointment but has come to terms with his decision.
"I have to grow up. I have to incorporate what I want and what I can have,"
he says. "Even though people say money shouldn't be everything, in this
situation, money was the most important thing."
He says he had grown enamored with the "prestige" of an Ivy League degree.
His teachers cited the networking opportunities and academic rigor. It didn'
t help that his father attended Princeton University and his uncle, Columbia
University.
"I thought that the Ivy League title would really, really boost my chances
of getting into a good med school," Mr. Schwartz says. Now, he is aiming for
top grades at Macaulay to remain competitive with Ivy League candidates.
There is little question that having a college degree gives candidates an
edge in the job market. The unemployment rate for people with a bachelor's
degree was 4.9% last month, compared with 10.5% for high-school graduates
with no degree, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
But a degree from a private college also is expensive and piles on debt. The
average debt load for students who took out loans hit a record $27,200 for
the class that graduated this year, says Mark Kantrowitz, publisher of
student-aid websites Fastweb.com and FinAid.org. That comes as general per
capita debt reached $47,260 in the second quarter, a figure that has been
dropping in recent years, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.
The U.S. jobs recovery has been the slowest since the Great Depression.
Eight million jobs were lost during the last recession, but after more than
a year of steady growth, we're still more than six million in the hole. WSJ'
s Phil Izzo explains
.
Jesse Yeh, a 20-year-old California resident, chose the University of
California at Berkeley over Stanford University. Tuition at Berkeley, a
state school, is about $14,460 for in-state students. At Stanford, it's $40,
050.
Now he worries about graduating on time, having been locked out of some
overcrowded courses, including Spanish and a public-policy elective.
Berkeley says 71% of students who entered in 2006, the latest period
available, graduated within four years. At Stanford, that number is closer
to 80%.
Attending a private university still can pay off. Schools with large
endowments have beefed up their aid programs in recent years, which can make
them less expensive than their public, cash-strapped counterparts. Brown
University, for example, offers grants instead of loans for students whose
families earn less than $100,000 a year. Harvard College doesn't expect any
contribution from families with annual incomes below $60,000.
But Carl Van Horn, director of the John J. Heldrich Center for Workforce
Development at Rutgers University, says graduate outcomes often have more to
do with major and how a student takes advantage of networking and
internship opportunities, than with school choice.
Natasha Pearson, 19, questions her decision to attend the City University of
New York's Hunter College. She says she turned down an offer from Boston
College after the school said her family would need to pitch in $30,000
annually.
She says there's a "wide variety" of academic ability among her Hunter
classmates and that many of her courses are taught by graduate students,
rather than by full professors.
"I can't help but wonder, had I gone to BC, where that could have taken me,"
she says.
Write to Melissa Korn at m**********[email protected]
avatar
a*z
2
一直有人说老印几万,中国只有不到十分之一
那为什么要捆绑,是什么逻辑?
大家这里有没有确凿的数据和证词。
如果逻辑明显没有道理,我妈的每周都奥巴马,希拉里,USCIS的头写封信,烦死他们也要把这个改过来
avatar
f*u
3
逻辑就是:SO不分国别只按PD先后分配。有人研究过,他们这样做并不违法。
如果你写好了信的话,能否顺便发到版上一份?

【在 a******z 的大作中提到】
: 一直有人说老印几万,中国只有不到十分之一
: 那为什么要捆绑,是什么逻辑?
: 大家这里有没有确凿的数据和证词。
: 如果逻辑明显没有道理,我妈的每周都奥巴马,希拉里,USCIS的头写封信,烦死他们也要把这个改过来

avatar
a*z
4
也就是说,每年申请人如果超过了本国应得的,就要排了
但这个排又是全世界拉通了一起排,是吧?
但是现在只有中国和印度的EB2超过,所以中印就一起排了
他本来这个按照国别的依据,本来的目的是为了控制人口种别平衡,是吧?
那实际上中国只有2800个,印度也只应该有2800个?
我还是没太搞明白,有人出来说一下是怎么回事么?
这种不违法有可能,但是不合逻辑。
想着给他讲逻辑,搞烦他们为止

【在 f**u 的大作中提到】
: 逻辑就是:SO不分国别只按PD先后分配。有人研究过,他们这样做并不违法。
: 如果你写好了信的话,能否顺便发到版上一份?

avatar
a*d
5
这个松绑很多人努力过,都失败了。
这次奥傻有意放水,仍然不放过老中,坚持中印捆绑。除了讨好他的烙印
上司之外,实在想不出任何理由。
avatar
a*z
6
先别说泄气话,先能否把数据或者理由什么的给个链接,或者普及一下
大家用的方式都不同,不见得就成不了功

【在 a*******d 的大作中提到】
: 这个松绑很多人努力过,都失败了。
: 这次奥傻有意放水,仍然不放过老中,坚持中印捆绑。除了讨好他的烙印
: 上司之外,实在想不出任何理由。

avatar
o*a
7
为什么第二次分配quote,全世界一起排,而第一次分配quote,按国别呢?这不是违背
了consistent的原则吗? 要么从头就全世界一起排;要么就第二次分配时,所有名额
不够的国家均分;有余额的,继续SO给他国。

【在 a******z 的大作中提到】
: 也就是说,每年申请人如果超过了本国应得的,就要排了
: 但这个排又是全世界拉通了一起排,是吧?
: 但是现在只有中国和印度的EB2超过,所以中印就一起排了
: 他本来这个按照国别的依据,本来的目的是为了控制人口种别平衡,是吧?
: 那实际上中国只有2800个,印度也只应该有2800个?
: 我还是没太搞明白,有人出来说一下是怎么回事么?
: 这种不违法有可能,但是不合逻辑。
: 想着给他讲逻辑,搞烦他们为止

avatar
a*z
8
本来逻辑上就说不通
我知道版上很多人做了很多research
能否share一下,不要那么自私
就直接写信给USCIS,希拉里,和奥巴马了。
不要从奥本那里过,没啥用。
写上个一年,这三个部门每周一封,都handwriting。看看有没有反应。

【在 o***a 的大作中提到】
: 为什么第二次分配quote,全世界一起排,而第一次分配quote,按国别呢?这不是违背
: 了consistent的原则吗? 要么从头就全世界一起排;要么就第二次分配时,所有名额
: 不够的国家均分;有余额的,继续SO给他国。

avatar
g*n
9
感谢楼主的努力。只是楼主写的信,奥巴马和希拉里未必亲自去读。他俩会过问此事
的可能性太小了。
avatar
a*d
10
我不是说泄气话,剩余名额的分配解释权在奥本手上,他所作的并无违法行为,
只是做了有利烙印的解读而已。当然他也可以做有利中国人的解读,但是中国
移民总数位居第二,中国工作类移民是小头,加上奥傻的烙印上司,结果
可想而知了。详细的讨论可以参看NIU的版面讨论。
http://www.niunational.com/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=371
XeK9YAQrIl9O
avatar
g*n
11
中国职业移民力量太弱,美国政府里没有为咱们说话的人。一个人名义写抗议信,是不
起作用的。
avatar
j*g
12


【在 g*****n 的大作中提到】
: 中国职业移民力量太弱,美国政府里没有为咱们说话的人。一个人名义写抗议信,是不
: 起作用的。

avatar
g*n
13
从打击烙印的ICC这方面着手,是否更有效一些?要不也发起一个白宫请愿?
avatar
A*e
14
不是有一些白宫的请愿网站吗?大家有没有想过去这些网站弄一些请愿,然后号召大家
去签名啊?这样总是比一个人单打独斗要好很多。而且这样可以联合很多同胞一起来做
这件事情。
avatar
L*P
15
A 现在的做法,按pd分配so不违法 not illegal
B 但是假如按国别分配so也不违法 not illegal
那在两个不违法的做法A和B中应该选哪个?
A似乎是照顾了个人条件的公平原则,但是个人条件的公平原则体现在了140阶段
485阶段的名额分配是不应该考虑个人条件公平原则,为什么如此说?
1.事实上在485阶段分配名额是考虑国家公平原则,不然那为什么要有国家名额限制?
2.so也是名额分配,也应该遵循国家公平原则
3.Four major principles underlie U.S. policy on permanent immigration: the
reunification of families, the admission of immigrants with needed skills,
the
protection of refugees, and the diversity of admissions by country of origin.
个人条件根本就不会基本原则之一
所以A做法是legal但是不illegitimate,有违移民法的根本精神
B做法是legal而且legitimate,更合理
个人看法,仅供参考而已

【在 f**u 的大作中提到】
: 逻辑就是:SO不分国别只按PD先后分配。有人研究过,他们这样做并不违法。
: 如果你写好了信的话,能否顺便发到版上一份?

avatar
g*n
16

有道理。不过说实话,没处讲理。白宫请愿的话,凭中国的一般散沙,很难凑到足够的
人数。

【在 L**P 的大作中提到】
: A 现在的做法,按pd分配so不违法 not illegal
: B 但是假如按国别分配so也不违法 not illegal
: 那在两个不违法的做法A和B中应该选哪个?
: A似乎是照顾了个人条件的公平原则,但是个人条件的公平原则体现在了140阶段
: 485阶段的名额分配是不应该考虑个人条件公平原则,为什么如此说?
: 1.事实上在485阶段分配名额是考虑国家公平原则,不然那为什么要有国家名额限制?
: 2.so也是名额分配,也应该遵循国家公平原则
: 3.Four major principles underlie U.S. policy on permanent immigration: the
: reunification of families, the admission of immigrants with needed skills,
: the

avatar
L*P
17
是啊,讲理是没啥用,而且白宫就是凑了人数也没啥用,上次请的两愿,网上预约和提
前交140,回复的就是些屁话
还是得有自己人啊,所以大家的子女以后都多参加社会和政治活动,难混,但是也得混
啊,不然永远都是难混

【在 g*****n 的大作中提到】
:
: 有道理。不过说实话,没处讲理。白宫请愿的话,凭中国的一般散沙,很难凑到足够的
: 人数。

avatar
A*e
18
怎么还没有试就自己给自己泄气了呢。这种东西不试谁也不知道。一般来说多少人数才
算过关(引起重视)?

【在 g*****n 的大作中提到】
:
: 有道理。不过说实话,没处讲理。白宫请愿的话,凭中国的一般散沙,很难凑到足够的
: 人数。

avatar
g*n
19

5千以上才可能有回复,还很可能是些官话空话。烙印是肯定反对的,只有火急火燎的
中国Eb2有诉求,很难凑齐。

【在 A****e 的大作中提到】
: 怎么还没有试就自己给自己泄气了呢。这种东西不试谁也不知道。一般来说多少人数才
: 算过关(引起重视)?

avatar
K*G
20
支持楼主,不试过怎么知道?烙印那么理亏都要去搞3012,我们写个信,最起码表达一
下自己的观点。有没有用不是我们能决定的,但是写不写,是我们能决定的。
avatar
K*G
21
这个很难说,我有个朋友的个人事件,就是拖了几年,政府都没有回复,写信给当时的
劳拉布什,1个月内解决了。
不一定是劳拉自己弄的,但是她的众多秘书说句话,也比我们强很多倍啊。

【在 g*****n 的大作中提到】
: 感谢楼主的努力。只是楼主写的信,奥巴马和希拉里未必亲自去读。他俩会过问此事
: 的可能性太小了。

avatar
g*n
22

烙印的3012至少还有多数老中支持。老中想跟烙印脱钩,只与EB2C有关,加上烙印坚决
反对,力量实在是弱。

【在 K******G 的大作中提到】
: 支持楼主,不试过怎么知道?烙印那么理亏都要去搞3012,我们写个信,最起码表达一
: 下自己的观点。有没有用不是我们能决定的,但是写不写,是我们能决定的。

avatar
L*P
23
单说老中的支持率,应该还是支持脱钩的多多了
所有eb2c都支持脱钩
不是所有eb2c都支持3012,部分支持,但是这部分到底是多少%,没数字猜测不确定
eb1的老中对脱钩也没啥兴趣吧?
eb1的老中对3012应该没兴趣吧?
eb3态度如何不知道

【在 g*****n 的大作中提到】
:
: 烙印的3012至少还有多数老中支持。老中想跟烙印脱钩,只与EB2C有关,加上烙印坚决
: 反对,力量实在是弱。

avatar
g*n
24

eb3不与烙印捆绑,不会有兴趣。关键是只有EB2C有诉求,而势力强大的烙印坚决反对
,还没有任何大佬支持,有难度。如果打击烙印的ICC造假和滥用EB1C,部分烙印支持,还有老格会支持。

【在 L**P 的大作中提到】
: 单说老中的支持率,应该还是支持脱钩的多多了
: 所有eb2c都支持脱钩
: 不是所有eb2c都支持3012,部分支持,但是这部分到底是多少%,没数字猜测不确定
: eb1的老中对脱钩也没啥兴趣吧?
: eb1的老中对3012应该没兴趣吧?
: eb3态度如何不知道

avatar
o*a
25
我英语不好,谁写个草稿,给参议院众议院发信,让他们过问。不一定马上起作用,但
问的议员多了,奥本也会有压力。

【在 g*****n 的大作中提到】
: 从打击烙印的ICC这方面着手,是否更有效一些?要不也发起一个白宫请愿?
avatar
a*d
26
想要改变这个,只能以打假的名义搞烙印。奥傻的做法并无违法也无违规,加上老中
的家庭移民人数太多,合并避难和工作类后移民总数位居全美移民第二位,我们的诉
求很难获得同情。

【在 o***a 的大作中提到】
: 我英语不好,谁写个草稿,给参议院众议院发信,让他们过问。不一定马上起作用,但
: 问的议员多了,奥本也会有压力。

avatar
g*n
27

对,以打假的名义,效果更好,至少会获得一些大佬(像老格)的支持。如果只是就中
印捆绑提抗议,恐怕连老格都不会理睬。

【在 a*******d 的大作中提到】
: 想要改变这个,只能以打假的名义搞烙印。奥傻的做法并无违法也无违规,加上老中
: 的家庭移民人数太多,合并避难和工作类后移民总数位居全美移民第二位,我们的诉
: 求很难获得同情。

avatar
a*d
28
关键是要给格老弹药来打击烙印,前几天不是有人说他们公司雇佣的烙印外包公司
招聘广告造假吗,怎么没有下文了?

【在 g*****n 的大作中提到】
:
: 对,以打假的名义,效果更好,至少会获得一些大佬(像老格)的支持。如果只是就中
: 印捆绑提抗议,恐怕连老格都不会理睬。

avatar
F*n
29
没有“中印”捆绑,大家按PD分SO. 怎么分SO是USCIS的事,跟O基本没关系
现在这个法律下,按国家分SO是违法的,USCIS真要这么搞才是会被告
avatar
g*n
30

按国家分SO,还是按PD分SO,各有道理,解释权在奥傻那里(USCIS)。

【在 F****n 的大作中提到】
: 没有“中印”捆绑,大家按PD分SO. 怎么分SO是USCIS的事,跟O基本没关系
: 现在这个法律下,按国家分SO是违法的,USCIS真要这么搞才是会被告

avatar
f*u
31
奥是DOS的职员,不是USCIS的。

【在 g*****n 的大作中提到】
:
: 按国家分SO,还是按PD分SO,各有道理,解释权在奥傻那里(USCIS)。

avatar
a*k
32
It's a waste of time to argue spill over this year.
There will be no more SO this year! This is clearly stated in so many
announcements: there is no visa for EB2-IC before Oct.
EB2-IC have used much much more than any possible spill over. Just on
trackit, there are 1,500 EB2-I approved this year. It is 3000 visa used.
Assume 20% people update their status on trackit, 15,000 visa were used by
Eb2-I. Plus Eb2-C, at least 20,000 visa were used by Eb2-IC, while this
year EB2-IC is supposed to get less than 10,000 spill over. This means EB2-
IC used visa from EB2-ROW, and this is why EB2-ROW might have cutoff later
this year.

们也要把这个改过来

【在 a******z 的大作中提到】
: 一直有人说老印几万,中国只有不到十分之一
: 那为什么要捆绑,是什么逻辑?
: 大家这里有没有确凿的数据和证词。
: 如果逻辑明显没有道理,我妈的每周都奥巴马,希拉里,USCIS的头写封信,烦死他们也要把这个改过来

avatar
F*n
33
第一奥傻不是USCIS
第二怎么分是法律规定的,
每个国家的限制是移民法规定的
PD的分配无专门法律规定,归宪法管
按国家分SO违反宪法

【在 g*****n 的大作中提到】
:
: 按国家分SO,还是按PD分SO,各有道理,解释权在奥傻那里(USCIS)。

avatar
a*d
34
大潮之前,奥傻的SO分配是先分给EB3的,后来才意识到错误,自我纠正
了,07过后才按照今天的SO方法分配给EB2CI的。
相关阅读
logo
联系我们隐私协议©2024 redian.news
Redian新闻
Redian.news刊载任何文章,不代表同意其说法或描述,仅为提供更多信息,也不构成任何建议。文章信息的合法性及真实性由其作者负责,与Redian.news及其运营公司无关。欢迎投稿,如发现稿件侵权,或作者不愿在本网发表文章,请版权拥有者通知本网处理。