5 ms·

So, everyone will switch to GC faster then?

by ex3ndr 6y ago

product50 6y ago
Shut up and read before you start asking your racist questions.
- gauravphoenix 6y ago
  I think you are reading too much into his or her comment. That doesn't appear to be a racist comment.
  - product50 6y ago
    Literally, the person has provided no context here. Which makes me wonder what were the instincts behind them making this comment.
    - gauravphoenix 6y ago
      No need to assume the worst. Perhaps he or she is genuinely curious about GC. There was nothing in the comment which can be remotely construed as racist.
      - product50 6y ago
        Have you read the main article? It has nothing to say about green card at all - literally no mention of green card. Please stop defending folks for defending sake. The OP can step in and do it themselves.
    - lizardking 6y ago
      Looks more like a baseless accusation than wondering
- ex3ndr 6y ago
  What's racist in my comment? o_O
ra7 6y ago
No? This bill isn't changing GC quotas.
- ex3ndr 6y ago
  I meaning that L1 and friends are quite often could be changed to GC soon. If they put limit on number of L1 visas, they will simply became GC very fast. I think they don't have quotes, this is not a lottery.
  - ra7 6y ago
    There's already a massive GC backlog for some countries (India, for example). In some distant future where backlog is cleared, fewer number of H1B/L1 visas could mean faster GC. Until then, this won't have any real impact on GC timelines.
    - ex3ndr 6y ago
      it seems that quotes is for India and China mostly. They are quite special since they account for most of applications.
ianmcgowan 6y ago
Which would solve some of the problems with H1B - you're effectively an indentured servant with very few options. Becoming a green card holder means you are able to switch jobs, negotiate for better pay/conditions, and eventually apply for citizenship without your employer's support. All things that shift the balance of power to the employee, and the employer may decide it's not worth that hassle.

So, everyone will switch to GC faster then?

by ex3ndr 6y ago

So, everyone will switch to GC faster then?

product50 6y ago

Shut up and read before you start asking your racist questions.

gauravphoenix 6y ago
I think you are reading too much into his or her comment. That doesn't appear to be a racist comment.
- product50 6y ago
  Literally, the person has provided no context here. Which makes me wonder what were the instincts behind them making this comment.
  - gauravphoenix 6y ago
    No need to assume the worst. Perhaps he or she is genuinely curious about GC. There was nothing in the comment which can be remotely construed as racist.
    - product50 6y ago
      Have you read the main article? It has nothing to say about green card at all - literally no mention of green card. Please stop defending folks for defending sake. The OP can step in and do it themselves.
  - lizardking 6y ago
    Looks more like a baseless accusation than wondering
ex3ndr 6y ago
What's racist in my comment? o_O

ra7 6y ago

No? This bill isn't changing GC quotas.

ex3ndr 6y ago
I meaning that L1 and friends are quite often could be changed to GC soon. If they put limit on number of L1 visas, they will simply became GC very fast. I think they don't have quotes, this is not a lottery.
- ra7 6y ago
  There's already a massive GC backlog for some countries (India, for example). In some distant future where backlog is cleared, fewer number of H1B/L1 visas could mean faster GC. Until then, this won't have any real impact on GC timelines.
  - ex3ndr 6y ago
    it seems that quotes is for India and China mostly. They are quite special since they account for most of applications.

ianmcgowan 6y ago

Which would solve some of the problems with H1B - you're effectively an indentured servant with very few options. Becoming a green card holder means you are able to switch jobs, negotiate for better pay/conditions, and eventually apply for citizenship without your employer's support. All things that shift the balance of power to the employee, and the employer may decide it's not worth that hassle.