GCwaitforever
05-26 10:36 PM
Guy, we can send a small hand written card to our senators and to QGA(if we are thankful enough). Thi is what I'm going to do:cool:
Amen to that.
Amen to that.
wallpaper nike: Pokemon Cards for Trade
gulute
03-16 06:31 PM
why is it denied?
Hi,
My wife's H4 visa got denied and her I94 got expired. Can she stay for 30 days if so will she be having any problem while coming back with valid status?
Hi,
My wife's H4 visa got denied and her I94 got expired. Can she stay for 30 days if so will she be having any problem while coming back with valid status?
purgan
01-22 11:35 AM
http://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/5585.html
The Immigrant Technologist:
Studying Technology Transfer with China
Q&A with: William Kerr and Michael Roberts
Published: January 22, 2007
Author: Michael Roberts
Executive Summary:
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain? Professor William Kerr discusses the phenomena of technology transfer and implications for U.S.-based businesses and policymakers.
The trend of Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs staying home rather than moving to the United States is a trend that potentially offers both harm and opportunity to U.S.-based interests.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S. and are strong contributors to American technology development. It is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group.
U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries, around 15 percent today. U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain?
Q: Describe your research and how it relates to what you observed in China.
A: My research focuses on technology transfer through ethnic scientific and entrepreneurial networks. Traditional models of technology diffusion suggest that if you have a great idea, people who are ten feet away from you will learn about that idea first, followed by people who are 100 miles away, and so forth in concentric circles. My research on ethnic networks suggests this channel facilitates faster knowledge transfer and faster adoption of foreign technologies. For example, if the Chinese have a strong presence in the U.S. computer industry, relative to other ethnic groups, then computer technologies diffuse faster to China than elsewhere. This is true even for computer advances made by Americans, as the U.S.-based Chinese increase awareness and tacit knowledge development regarding these advances in their home country.
Q: Is your research relevant to other countries as well?
China is at a tipping point for entrepreneurship on an international scale.A: Yes, I have extended my empirical work to include over thirty industries and nine ethnicities, including Indian, Japanese, Korean, and Hispanic. It is very important to develop a broad sample to quantify correctly the overall importance of these networks. The Silicon Valley Chinese are a very special case, and my work seeks to understand the larger benefit these networks provide throughout the global economy. These macroeconomic findings are important inputs to business and policy circles.
Q: What makes technology transfer happen? Is it entrepreneurial opportunity in the home country, a loyalty to the home country, or government policies that encourage or require people to come home?
A: It's all of those. Surveys of these diasporic communities suggest they aid their home countries through both formal business relationships and informal contacts. Formal mechanisms run the spectrum from direct financial investment in overseas businesses that pursue technology opportunities to facilitating contracts and market awareness. Informal contacts are more frequent�the evidence we have suggests they are at least twice as common�and even more diverse in nature. Ongoing research will allow us to better distinguish these channels. A Beijing scholar we met on the trip, Henry Wang, and I are currently surveying a large population of Chinese entrepreneurs to paint a more comprehensive picture of the micro-underpinnings of this phenomena.
Q: What about multinational corporations? How do they fit into this scenario?
A: One of the strongest trends of globalization is that U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries. About 5 percent of U.S.-sponsored R&D was done in foreign countries in the 1980s, and that number is around 15 percent today. We visited Microsoft's R&D center in Beijing to learn more about its R&D efforts and interactions with the U.S. parent. This facility was founded in the late 1990s, and it has already grown to house a third of Microsoft's basic-science R&D researchers. More broadly, HBS assistant professor Fritz Foley and I are working on a research project that has found that U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals like Microsoft help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Q: Does your research have implications for U.S. policy?
A: One implication concerns immigration levels. It is interesting to note that while immigrants account for about 15 percent of the U.S. working population, they account for almost half of our Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers. Even within the Ph.D. ranks, foreign-born individuals have a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes, elections to the National Academy of Sciences, patent citations, and so forth. They are a very strong contributor to U.S. technology development, so it is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group. It is one of the easiest policy levers we have to influence our nation's rate of innovation.
Q: Are countries that send their scholars to the United States losing their best and brightest?
A: My research shows that having these immigrant scientists, entrepreneurs, and engineers in the United States helps facilitate faster technology transfer from the United States, which in turn aids economic growth and development. This is certainly a positive benefit diasporas bring to their home countries. It is important to note, however, that a number of factors should be considered in the "brain drain" versus "brain gain" debate, for which I do not think there is a clear answer today.
Q: Where does China stand in relation to some of the classic tiger economies that we've seen in the past in terms of technology transfer?
A: Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and similar smaller economies have achieved a full transition from agriculture-based economies to industrialized economies. In those situations, technology transfer increases labor productivity and wages directly. The interesting thing about China and also India is that about half of their populations are still employed in the agricultural sector. In this scenario, technology transfer may lead to faster sector reallocation�workers moving from agriculture to industry�which can weaken wage growth compared with the classic tiger economy example. This is an interesting dynamic we see in China today.
Q: The export growth that technology may engender is only one prong of the mechanism that helps economic development. Does technology also make purely domestic industries more productive?
A: Absolutely. My research shows that countries do increase their exports in industries that receive large technology infusions, but non-exporting industries also benefit from technology gains. Moreover, the technology transfer can raise wages in sectors that do not rely on technology to the extent there is labor mobility across sectors. A hairdresser in the United States, for example, makes more money than a hairdresser in China, and that is due in large part to the wage equilibrium that occurs across occupations and skill categories within an economy. Technology transfer may alter the wage premiums assigned to certain skill sets, for example, increasing the wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers, but the wage shifts can feed across sectors through labor mobility.
Q: What are the implications for the future?
A: Historically, the United States has been very successful at the retention of foreign-born, Ph.D.-level scientists, inventors, and entrepreneurs. As China and India continue to develop, they will become more attractive places to live and to start companies. The returnee pattern may accelerate as foreign infrastructures become more developed for entrepreneurship. This is not going to happen over the next three years, but it is quite likely over the next thirty to fifty years. My current research is exploring how this reverse migration would impact the United States' rate of progress.
About the author
Michael Roberts is a senior lecturer in the Entrepreneurial Management unit at Harvard Business School.
The Immigrant Technologist:
Studying Technology Transfer with China
Q&A with: William Kerr and Michael Roberts
Published: January 22, 2007
Author: Michael Roberts
Executive Summary:
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain? Professor William Kerr discusses the phenomena of technology transfer and implications for U.S.-based businesses and policymakers.
The trend of Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs staying home rather than moving to the United States is a trend that potentially offers both harm and opportunity to U.S.-based interests.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S. and are strong contributors to American technology development. It is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group.
U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries, around 15 percent today. U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Immigrants account for almost half of Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers in the U.S., and are prime drivers of technology development. Increasingly, however, Chinese technologists and entrepreneurs are staying home to pursue opportunities. Is this a brain drain?
Q: Describe your research and how it relates to what you observed in China.
A: My research focuses on technology transfer through ethnic scientific and entrepreneurial networks. Traditional models of technology diffusion suggest that if you have a great idea, people who are ten feet away from you will learn about that idea first, followed by people who are 100 miles away, and so forth in concentric circles. My research on ethnic networks suggests this channel facilitates faster knowledge transfer and faster adoption of foreign technologies. For example, if the Chinese have a strong presence in the U.S. computer industry, relative to other ethnic groups, then computer technologies diffuse faster to China than elsewhere. This is true even for computer advances made by Americans, as the U.S.-based Chinese increase awareness and tacit knowledge development regarding these advances in their home country.
Q: Is your research relevant to other countries as well?
China is at a tipping point for entrepreneurship on an international scale.A: Yes, I have extended my empirical work to include over thirty industries and nine ethnicities, including Indian, Japanese, Korean, and Hispanic. It is very important to develop a broad sample to quantify correctly the overall importance of these networks. The Silicon Valley Chinese are a very special case, and my work seeks to understand the larger benefit these networks provide throughout the global economy. These macroeconomic findings are important inputs to business and policy circles.
Q: What makes technology transfer happen? Is it entrepreneurial opportunity in the home country, a loyalty to the home country, or government policies that encourage or require people to come home?
A: It's all of those. Surveys of these diasporic communities suggest they aid their home countries through both formal business relationships and informal contacts. Formal mechanisms run the spectrum from direct financial investment in overseas businesses that pursue technology opportunities to facilitating contracts and market awareness. Informal contacts are more frequent�the evidence we have suggests they are at least twice as common�and even more diverse in nature. Ongoing research will allow us to better distinguish these channels. A Beijing scholar we met on the trip, Henry Wang, and I are currently surveying a large population of Chinese entrepreneurs to paint a more comprehensive picture of the micro-underpinnings of this phenomena.
Q: What about multinational corporations? How do they fit into this scenario?
A: One of the strongest trends of globalization is that U.S. multinationals are placing larger shares of their R&D into foreign countries. About 5 percent of U.S.-sponsored R&D was done in foreign countries in the 1980s, and that number is around 15 percent today. We visited Microsoft's R&D center in Beijing to learn more about its R&D efforts and interactions with the U.S. parent. This facility was founded in the late 1990s, and it has already grown to house a third of Microsoft's basic-science R&D researchers. More broadly, HBS assistant professor Fritz Foley and I are working on a research project that has found that U.S.-based ethnic scientists within multinationals like Microsoft help facilitate the operation of these foreign direct investment facilities in their home countries.
Q: Does your research have implications for U.S. policy?
A: One implication concerns immigration levels. It is interesting to note that while immigrants account for about 15 percent of the U.S. working population, they account for almost half of our Ph.D.-level scientists and engineers. Even within the Ph.D. ranks, foreign-born individuals have a disproportionate number of Nobel Prizes, elections to the National Academy of Sciences, patent citations, and so forth. They are a very strong contributor to U.S. technology development, so it is in the United States' interest to attract and retain this highly skilled group. It is one of the easiest policy levers we have to influence our nation's rate of innovation.
Q: Are countries that send their scholars to the United States losing their best and brightest?
A: My research shows that having these immigrant scientists, entrepreneurs, and engineers in the United States helps facilitate faster technology transfer from the United States, which in turn aids economic growth and development. This is certainly a positive benefit diasporas bring to their home countries. It is important to note, however, that a number of factors should be considered in the "brain drain" versus "brain gain" debate, for which I do not think there is a clear answer today.
Q: Where does China stand in relation to some of the classic tiger economies that we've seen in the past in terms of technology transfer?
A: Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong, and similar smaller economies have achieved a full transition from agriculture-based economies to industrialized economies. In those situations, technology transfer increases labor productivity and wages directly. The interesting thing about China and also India is that about half of their populations are still employed in the agricultural sector. In this scenario, technology transfer may lead to faster sector reallocation�workers moving from agriculture to industry�which can weaken wage growth compared with the classic tiger economy example. This is an interesting dynamic we see in China today.
Q: The export growth that technology may engender is only one prong of the mechanism that helps economic development. Does technology also make purely domestic industries more productive?
A: Absolutely. My research shows that countries do increase their exports in industries that receive large technology infusions, but non-exporting industries also benefit from technology gains. Moreover, the technology transfer can raise wages in sectors that do not rely on technology to the extent there is labor mobility across sectors. A hairdresser in the United States, for example, makes more money than a hairdresser in China, and that is due in large part to the wage equilibrium that occurs across occupations and skill categories within an economy. Technology transfer may alter the wage premiums assigned to certain skill sets, for example, increasing the wage gaps between skilled and unskilled workers, but the wage shifts can feed across sectors through labor mobility.
Q: What are the implications for the future?
A: Historically, the United States has been very successful at the retention of foreign-born, Ph.D.-level scientists, inventors, and entrepreneurs. As China and India continue to develop, they will become more attractive places to live and to start companies. The returnee pattern may accelerate as foreign infrastructures become more developed for entrepreneurship. This is not going to happen over the next three years, but it is quite likely over the next thirty to fifty years. My current research is exploring how this reverse migration would impact the United States' rate of progress.
About the author
Michael Roberts is a senior lecturer in the Entrepreneurial Management unit at Harvard Business School.
2011 Pokemon Card - Crystal
snathan
03-31 01:42 PM
You were one of them, if I remember right..
However, I appreciate the rest of your post. It makes a lot of sense. We should talk only about things that benefit EB community. Leave things like this to the anti's.
When anti's strike, we should counter-strike by saying: So solution is, grant GC etc :D
Care to explain...? I never used this in any argument.
However, I appreciate the rest of your post. It makes a lot of sense. We should talk only about things that benefit EB community. Leave things like this to the anti's.
When anti's strike, we should counter-strike by saying: So solution is, grant GC etc :D
Care to explain...? I never used this in any argument.
more...
nashim
04-07 02:35 PM
gcisadawg,
I am unable to answer your question since I do not know, anyway I am also planning to invite my mother-in-law, what are documents required for B-2 visa? Do I need to send original birth certificate? Thanks
I am unable to answer your question since I do not know, anyway I am also planning to invite my mother-in-law, what are documents required for B-2 visa? Do I need to send original birth certificate? Thanks
americandesi
08-11 05:39 PM
That is not a flaw in the system and in the USCIS manual, they know it. Since the previous I-140 is already approved and you've stayed more than 6 months in that I-140, then there's no need for the ability to pay. USCIS is treating your case as if you already have a GC, it is just that it is pending.
If one has a GC, he can transfer to another employer. It is your risk if your new employer has not the ability to pay you. The same is true with portability, USCIS doesn't care anymore if you transfer to an employer with no ability to pay you because the first I-140 is already approved and you worked for it already. They are concerned now about your I-485 (AOS) and your qualifications under it.
What you say holds good only if employer A had already paid the proffered wage during those 6 months.
Suppose employer A is currently paying 70K and the wage for the proposed GC position is 80K and if employer A is able to prove that his Net Income or Net Assets is >=80K then it’s sufficient to prove ability to pay. In such a case, he is bound to pay 80K only after I-485 approval.
Going by above, the employee wasn’t paid 80K at anytime. Even then, USCIS approves his I-485 if he is able to provide an offer letter from employer C with similar roles, responsibilities and wage as the proposed GC position with Company A, though the abilty to pay 80K by employer C is in question.
If one has a GC, he can transfer to another employer. It is your risk if your new employer has not the ability to pay you. The same is true with portability, USCIS doesn't care anymore if you transfer to an employer with no ability to pay you because the first I-140 is already approved and you worked for it already. They are concerned now about your I-485 (AOS) and your qualifications under it.
What you say holds good only if employer A had already paid the proffered wage during those 6 months.
Suppose employer A is currently paying 70K and the wage for the proposed GC position is 80K and if employer A is able to prove that his Net Income or Net Assets is >=80K then it’s sufficient to prove ability to pay. In such a case, he is bound to pay 80K only after I-485 approval.
Going by above, the employee wasn’t paid 80K at anytime. Even then, USCIS approves his I-485 if he is able to provide an offer letter from employer C with similar roles, responsibilities and wage as the proposed GC position with Company A, though the abilty to pay 80K by employer C is in question.
more...
tnite
07-26 03:11 PM
My company filed my green card and have applied for 485 for me and my wife on July 19 with July visa bulletin reinstated. We have also applied for AP and EAD for my wife. We both are on H1 at this time. My wife' job is going to end by month end.
Does she need to file change of status to H4 or it is fine to stay in US with AOS pending status.
My 140 is still pending
What do you mean by job ending this month? Is she not interested in looking for other projects or is she planning to change to H4?
If she's not planning to continue working then she has to change to H4.
Does she need to file change of status to H4 or it is fine to stay in US with AOS pending status.
My 140 is still pending
What do you mean by job ending this month? Is she not interested in looking for other projects or is she planning to change to H4?
If she's not planning to continue working then she has to change to H4.
2010 Gale#39;s Pokemon Card by
glus
05-31 10:37 AM
Thank you once again for contributing guys. We will achieve our success very soon.
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
:D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D :D
more...
veereddy
03-13 12:20 PM
Congratulations and Best Wishes to you and your family.
hair Legendary pokemon cards 1#
sri1309
09-20 09:11 PM
Hi... Can any one tell me which are the afforable places in California to buy home. It can be town home or single family homes, Bet 300k to 400k.
Sunset Blvd, Los Angeles, CA :).
Its close to LA and with good jobs.
Sunset Blvd, Los Angeles, CA :).
Its close to LA and with good jobs.
more...
indio0617
12-13 12:53 PM
Surprising right? May be this is the first time anyone would have posted this kind of post but yes I am in that situation.
I am EB2 and retrogressed with I-140 cleared. I am working for a client and they are willing to take me in and process my fresh green card. I am not too keen about it because they said they can file only on EB3.
My PD is Sept 2005. Now can you guys give our your honest opinion in what you would have done if you were in similar situation. The client is a good top 10 client and you will have a stable job that is garunteed.
Appreciate your thoughts to help my plan.
Given the gross uncertainity about retrogression and GC, I would not give undue importance to the GC timeline factor. Eventually job / skills are more important than the distant GC.
I was in a similar situation a few months back. I abandoned my GC process with my former employer for a new and much more promising job. I am yet to start the GC process with the new employer. For me JOB was the deciding factor.
My reasoning was simple:
In the current scenario with a broken immigration system if we are to maintain our sanity and move on in our careers , we have to stop thinking that GC is above everything. Work on it as much as you can, but do not miss out on good career moves.
Do what you feel is best for you and what you can make peace with. My 2 cents..
I am EB2 and retrogressed with I-140 cleared. I am working for a client and they are willing to take me in and process my fresh green card. I am not too keen about it because they said they can file only on EB3.
My PD is Sept 2005. Now can you guys give our your honest opinion in what you would have done if you were in similar situation. The client is a good top 10 client and you will have a stable job that is garunteed.
Appreciate your thoughts to help my plan.
Given the gross uncertainity about retrogression and GC, I would not give undue importance to the GC timeline factor. Eventually job / skills are more important than the distant GC.
I was in a similar situation a few months back. I abandoned my GC process with my former employer for a new and much more promising job. I am yet to start the GC process with the new employer. For me JOB was the deciding factor.
My reasoning was simple:
In the current scenario with a broken immigration system if we are to maintain our sanity and move on in our careers , we have to stop thinking that GC is above everything. Work on it as much as you can, but do not miss out on good career moves.
Do what you feel is best for you and what you can make peace with. My 2 cents..
hot Aquapolis Pokemon Fan Club
skumar9
04-13 03:20 PM
In my Query it states as 30 days...
more...
house Zapdos Pokemon Card (Fossil
nk2
06-17 12:15 PM
There are a lot of IV members whose labor is not approved yet (like me) or did not have their 140 filed as of May 15.
tattoo the Pokémon Trading Card
spicy_guy
03-31 06:18 PM
congrats! Enjoy your Freedom with Green :-)
A LONG way to go for us. Maybe a decade. For EB3
A LONG way to go for us. Maybe a decade. For EB3
more...
pictures Discard all Energy cards
pcs
04-17 12:54 PM
Do it yourself & do not depend on your lawyer. Call them. I filed in Aug'05 & got it in 45 days. I used to call their IT guy in DC office & he was very prompt in fixing issues ( which could be IT related)
dresses Mantine Pokemon Card
CCC2006
09-12 10:06 AM
A friend of mine sent me this link to find ur status after the 45 day letter.
http://www.pbls.doleta.gov/pbls_pds.cfm
The site says : The backlog public disclosure system only accepts Case numbers beginning with either a D or P.
Please enter the case number with all dashes.
Where the # represents a number
(e.g. P-#####-##### OR D-#####-##### ).
Unfortunately I dont have the number and the lawyer is not giving it to me. If this can help u guyz please do use it.
http://www.pbls.doleta.gov/pbls_pds.cfm
The site says : The backlog public disclosure system only accepts Case numbers beginning with either a D or P.
Please enter the case number with all dashes.
Where the # represents a number
(e.g. P-#####-##### OR D-#####-##### ).
Unfortunately I dont have the number and the lawyer is not giving it to me. If this can help u guyz please do use it.
more...
makeup costliest Pokemon card?
michael_trs
05-13 10:06 AM
Here are my concerns:
1) I put only 1 year of experience. I guess a senior position requires 3-5 years of experience but it will exceed SVP for sure. On the other hand I don�t want to answer NO to H.12 (requirements normal for the occupation) because requirements look pretty normal and NO automatically triggers audit.
2) Do I have to specify that alternative education and experience is allowed (quest. 8/8A)? (For example BS + 5 years) I don�t really need it because I have Master�s. But I don�t want DOL to decide that requirements are too high or restrictive.
What do you think?
Thank you,
1) I put only 1 year of experience. I guess a senior position requires 3-5 years of experience but it will exceed SVP for sure. On the other hand I don�t want to answer NO to H.12 (requirements normal for the occupation) because requirements look pretty normal and NO automatically triggers audit.
2) Do I have to specify that alternative education and experience is allowed (quest. 8/8A)? (For example BS + 5 years) I don�t really need it because I have Master�s. But I don�t want DOL to decide that requirements are too high or restrictive.
What do you think?
Thank you,
girlfriend Pokemon Cards $0.10 each - For
prem_goel
11-22 10:11 PM
Hi, is anyone planning for H1b stamping at Tijuana mexico on 30th November. If so, please contact and we shall plan together. I am in LA area. Thanks!
hairstyles My pokemon cards by ~TimmyB123
immi2006
10-21 11:48 PM
Husband + Wife - 1 Application
Wife - Seperate Appln. ( Will do follow to join incase by chance the first one gets stuck
Wife - Seperate Appln. ( Will do follow to join incase by chance the first one gets stuck
Dhundhun
11-21 04:12 PM
#1. Usually duration, designation and salary to be provided by company.
#2. The role or work related description can be provided by co-worker.
If RFE is related to #1, and company is closed, then lawyer (or yourself) has to present your case with whatever evidences are there (e.g. company is closed, follow up with ex-management to get certificates, etc).
#2. The role or work related description can be provided by co-worker.
If RFE is related to #1, and company is closed, then lawyer (or yourself) has to present your case with whatever evidences are there (e.g. company is closed, follow up with ex-management to get certificates, etc).
h4visa
07-27 12:37 PM
Can someone go fr 2 jobs after EAD approval( i will use my EAD). Is is required that the job description of these jobs has to be same as filed in the application ? appreciate your help
No comments:
Post a Comment