Nicki Minaj Style

Tuesday, August 2, 2011

hairstyle long in front short in back

images photo front short wearing hairstyle long in front short in back. Short Hair Cuts long well
  • Short Hair Cuts long well

  • sdrblr
    03-23 11:57 AM
    I just wanted to point out that please be careful of what personal information you give as this is a "Incoming Call" and it is hard to verify the authenticity of it.

    wallpaper Short Hair Cuts long well hairstyle long in front short in back. include short hairstyle
  • include short hairstyle

  • GCOP
    07-13 09:36 AM
    Does IV want to change the format of the letter ? If so, modified letter from IV will be appreciated. I thank pani_6 and IV's effort to address the EB-3 situation. If necessary, IV can also arrange meeting with Department of State for discussion of EB-3 Visa allotment and delays. EB-3 situation is really dier. IV is requested to please arrange meeting with DOS.

    hairstyle long in front short in back. new short haircut, originally
  • new short haircut, originally

  • Macaca
    02-22 11:39 AM
    Lou Dobbs makes 6+ Mils and gives his opinions on the best news network at close to prime time. We are rotting in retrogression. Most of us are tiger on IV forums but can not even wimper on non-IV forums.

    The utility of these opinions on IV forums is debatable, at best. However, It will help us if we can convince others that they are not getting the facts from Lou Dobbs and give them the facts.

    Please post fact based opinions at non-IV forums.

    2011 include short hairstyle hairstyle long in front short in back. front and long in the ack
  • front and long in the ack

  • DallasBlue
    09-29 07:22 PM
    USINPAC and AJC should support us for talented future lobbyists. :-)

    Forget the Israel Lobby. The Hill's Next Big Player Is Made in India ( By Mira Kamdar ( | Washington Post, September 30, 2007

    Mira Kamdar, a fellow at the World Policy Institute and the Asia Society, is the author of "Planet India: How the Fastest-Growing Democracy is Transforming America and the World."

    The fall's most controversial book is almost certainly "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy," in which political scientists John Mearsheimer and Stephen Walt warn that Jewish Americans have built a behemoth that has bullied policymakers into putting Israel's interests in the Middle East ahead of America's. To Mearsheimer and Walt, AIPAC, the main pro-Israel lobbying group, is insidious. But to more and more Indian Americans, it's downright inspiring.

    With growing numbers, clout and self-confidence, the Indian American community is turning its admiration for the Israel lobby and its respect for high-achieving Jewish Americans into a powerful new force of its own. Following consciously in AIPAC's footsteps, the India lobby is getting results in Washington -- and having a profound impact on U.S. policy, with important consequences for the future of Asia and the world.

    "This is huge," enthused Ron Somers, the president of the U.S.-India Business Council, from a posh hotel lobby in Philadelphia. "It's the Berlin Wall coming down. It's Nixon in China."

    What has Somers so energized is a landmark nuclear cooperation deal between India and the United States, which would give India access to U.S. nuclear technology and deliver fuel supplies to India's civilian power plants in return for placing them under permanent international safeguards. Under the deal's terms, the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty -- for decades the cornerstone of efforts to limit the spread of nuclear weapons -- will in effect be waived for India, just nine years after the Clinton administration slapped sanctions on New Delhi for its 1998 nuclear tests. But the Bush administration, eager to check the rise of China by tilting toward its massive neighbor, has sought to forge a new strategic alliance with India, cemented by the civil nuclear deal.

    On the U.S. side, the pact awaits nothing more than one final up-or-down vote in Congress. (In India, the situation is far more complicated; India's left-wing parties, sensitive to any whiff of imperialism, have accused Prime Minister Manmohan Singh of surrendering the country's sovereignty -- a broadside that may yet scuttle the deal.) On Capitol Hill, despite deep divisions over Iraq, immigration and the outsourcing of American jobs to India, Democrats and Republicans quickly fell into line on the nuclear deal, voting for it last December by overwhelming bipartisan majorities. Even lawmakers who had made nuclear nonproliferation a core issue over their long careers, such as Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), quickly came around to President Bush's point of view. Why?

    The answer is that the India lobby is now officially a powerful presence on the Hill. The nuclear pact brought together an Indian government that is savvier than ever about playing the Washington game, an Indian American community that is just coming into its own and powerful business interests that see India as perhaps the single biggest money-making opportunity of the 21st century.

    The nuclear deal has been pushed aggressively by well-funded groups representing industry in both countries. At the center of the lobbying effort has been Robert D. Blackwill, a former U.S. ambassador to India and deputy national security adviser who's now with a well-connected Republican lobbying firm, Barbour, Griffith & Rogers LLC. The firm's Web site touts Blackwill as a pillar of its "India Practice," along with a more recent hire, Philip D. Zelikow, a former top adviser to Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice who was also one of the architects of the Bush administration's tilt toward India. The Confederation of Indian Industry paid Blackwill to lobby various U.S. government entities, according to the Boston Globe. And India is also paying a major Beltway law firm, Venable LLP.

    The U.S.-India Business Council has lavished big money on lobbyists, too. With India slated to spend perhaps $60 billion over the next few years to boost its military capabilities, major U.S. corporations are hoping that the nuclear agreement will open the door to some extremely lucrative opportunities, including military contracts and deals to help build nuclear power plants. According to a recent MIT study, Lockheed Martin is pushing to land a $4 billion to $9 billion contract for more than 120 fighter planes that India plans to buy. "The bounty is enormous," gushed Somers, the business council's president.

    So enormous, in fact, that Bonner & Associates created an India lobbying group last year to make sure that U.S. companies reap a major chunk of it. Dubbed the Indian American Security Leadership Council, the group was underwritten by Ramesh Kapur, a former trustee of the Democratic National Committee, and Krishna Srinivasa, who has been backing GOP causes since his 1984 stint as co-chair of Asian Americans for Reagan-Bush. The council has, oddly, "recruited groups representing thousands of American veterans" to urge Congress to pass the nuclear deal.

    The India lobby is also eager to use Indian Americans to put a human face -- not to mention a voter's face and a campaign contributor's face -- on its agenda. "Industry would make its business case," Somers explained, "and Indian Americans would make the emotional case."

    There are now some 2.2 million Americans of Indian origin -- a number that's growing rapidly. First-generation immigrants keenly recall the humiliating days when India was dismissed as an overpopulated, socialist haven of poverty and disease. They are thrilled by the new respect India is getting. Meanwhile, a second, American-born generation of Indian Americans who feel comfortable with activism and publicity is just beginning to hit its political stride. As a group, Indian Americans have higher levels of education and income than the national average, making them a natural for political mobilization.

    One standout member of the first generation is Sanjay Puri, who founded the U.S. India Political Action Committee in 2002. (Its acronym, USINPAC, even sounds a bit like AIPAC.) He came to the United States in 1985 to get an MBA at George Washington University, staying on to found an information-technology company. A man of modest demeanor who wears a lapel pin that joins the Indian and American flags, Puri grew tired of watching successful Indian Americans pony up money just so they could get their picture taken with a politician. "I thought, 'What are we getting out of this?', " he explains.

    In just five years, USINPAC has become the most visible face of Indian American lobbying. Its Web site boasts photos of its leaders with President Bush, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, and presidential candidates from Fred Thompson to Barack Obama. The group pointedly sports a New Hampshire branch. It can also take some credit for ending the Senate career of Virginia Republican George Allen, whose notorious taunt of "macaca" to a young Indian American outraged the community. Less publicly, USINPAC claims to have brought a lot of lawmakers around. "You haven't heard a lot from Dan Burton lately, right?" Puri asked, referring to a Republican congressman from Indiana who has long been perceived as an India basher.

    USINPAC is capable of pouncing; witness the incident last June when Obama's campaign issued a memo excoriating Hillary Rodham Clinton for her close ties to wealthy Indian Americans and her alleged support for outsourcing, listing the New York senator's affiliation as "D-Punjab." Puri personally protested in a widely circulated open letter, and Obama quickly issued an apology. "Did you see? That letter was addressed directly to Sanjay," Varun Mehta, a senior at Boston University and USINPAC volunteer, told me with evident admiration. "That's the kind of clout Sanjay has."

    Like many politically engaged Indian Americans, Puri has a deep regard for the Israel lobby -- particularly in a country where Jews make up just a small minority of the population. "A lot of Jewish people tell me maybe I was Jewish in my past life," he jokes. The respect runs both ways. The American Jewish Committee, for instance, recently sent letters to members of Congress supporting the U.S.-India nuclear deal.

    "We model ourselves on the Jewish people in the United States," explains Mital Gandhi of USINPAC's new offshoot, the U.S.-India Business Alliance. "We're not quite there yet. But we're getting there."


    hairstyle long in front short in back. Bob Short At Back Long At
  • Bob Short At Back Long At

  • ItIsNotFunny
    12-17 03:11 PM
    Looks like his initial intentions were not bad but discussion went on wrong direction.

    Shanti! Shanti!


    In the recent past, I have expressed my views about the same subject on this forum. I was very angry with what happened in Mumbai. The desire to fix the wrong has not gone away, but now that I look back, I regret some of the things I said at that time. My comments did not do any good and some of the coments offend few others on this forum. Those who felt offended by my comments are just as entitled to these forums as I am. I am not trying to be politically correct, just trying to say that it doesn't serves any purpose to dicsuss this issue on IV fourms.

    Branding all people from a specific faith doesn't help in anyways. For too long men have fought because of religion and each such time was avoidable.

    I do have a suggestion. To get some perspective, I suggest you watch the bollywood movie "New York", although I am not a big fan of bollywood movies.



    hairstyle long in front short in back. short medium layered
  • short medium layered

  • NKR
    03-25 03:12 PM
    I have brought a house 4 years back after 2 years in this country. It is $500K house. Ss it really "Rent Apartment vs Buy House" ?
    How about renting a home to provide something good to your family?

    With the home values declining I think it makes way more sense to rent the same house (at least in the area I live). If your mortgage payment is only $500 above apartment rent I would say buy. But if you are looking at paying double as mortgage I think its really inflated.

    I would like to read more about buying foreclosed properties. I hear there are some good deals out there.

    It all depends on the situation, if a person who started this thread can afford to buy a house, wants to buy one, has found a good house in a good location, has got a good deal and if he thinks that not having a GC is the only hurdle, then my suggestion for him would be to buy the house.

    Of course every people�s situation is not the same. If I was in CA, probably I would be living in an apartment now. If you can rent a home and think that makes more sense then buying a house, that�s fine too. If someone can buy a house and give it on rent, that�s even better :o)


    hairstyle long in front short in back. Stacked bob hairstyles are
  • Stacked bob hairstyles are

  • xyzgc
    12-22 11:35 PM
    Muslims have a very proud history (along with issues like most religions/races). Lets hope the people on all sides tone down the rheotric and live and let live

    Hindus also have a history and we are proud of it.
    Despite all the agressions by the barbaric islamic hordes, Hinduism has not only survived, it has actually flourished.
    We are proud of the fact that we didn't attack other countries and pillage other lands.

    2010 new short haircut, originally hairstyle long in front short in back. photo front short wearing
  • photo front short wearing

  • nojoke
    01-03 04:22 PM
    Listen to this, The US attacked Iraq and that accomplished exactly what the terrorists want. Terrorists want to see chaos and disruption. I believe the US is losing the war on terror and the results from the failed Iraq invasion can get worse, since that may have generated one dozen Jihad style attackers to be unveiled in 5-20 years from now.

    India should not attack Pak and spend tons of money like the US did. Instead, invest all that money in secret services and let them penetrate the enemy line. Let the secret service perform a detailed investigation of sources, then apply snipers or other ways to take perpetrators down.

    The last thing we need now with this dreadful economy is another war. Palestinians are already starting the whole fire again. We do not need one more war.

    Wrong. First iraq war is not war against terrorist.
    Second, pakistan already is doing Jihad against India. They don't need a reason to start a Jihad. Their obsession to destroy India is so much poisoned in their blood and they really don't need a reason for the Jihad.
    Third- It is easy only in movies to use snipers to take down these men. Plus there are thousands and it is virtually impossible.
    I agree that war is a tough choice and probably our politicians use the drum beat to get votes. And probably there won't be a war. But some of the rationalizations give here in this forum is funny.


    hairstyle long in front short in back. Shorter Emo hair styles
  • Shorter Emo hair styles

  • brad_sk2
    01-06 03:03 PM
    Thats why Indian Govt. freed ruthless terrorists to save innocent civilians?
    Don't write crap just for the sake of argument.

    When Indian government can release ruthless terrorists in order to save Indians, Do you think people belong to Palestinian govt. elected by Palestinians will hide in schools in order to get killed by ruthless enemy?

    Don't you hear the same lie again and again year over year? If Hamas is using school kids as thier shield, then how do you think Palestenian people have elected the same people who cause their kids death rule their country?

    Don't you think?

    Dude, why don't you stop the crap comparing Palestine situation to situation in India. They are different. Hamas is terrorist organization elected by the people & so they (Hamsas) are responsible for their civilian deaths as they use civilians as shield, PERIOD.

    hair front and long in the ack hairstyle long in front short in back. This is a hairstyle that is
  • This is a hairstyle that is

  • validIV
    06-25 03:42 PM
    You just gave an example of a guy who owns his own house.

    Rich guys first make their money and then buy houses. Reverse is not necessarily true. They are not rich because they bought houses. If money was no object for me I too will go ahead and buy house even it did not make strict financial sense. I'm not there yet.

    As for naming names, Warren Buffet who is plenty rich does not favor real estate as an investment vehicle. Real estate has has 1-2% average rate of return over the last 60 years barely keeping up with inflation barring crazy speculative booms like we recently had which quickly go bust. This is to be expected since house is an unproductive asset and unlike businesses (stocks/bonds) does not "produce" anything so in the long run it's price will roughly track the inflation.


    hairstyle long in front short in back. Hairstyle amp; Haircut Collection
  • Hairstyle amp; Haircut Collection

  • Green4Ev1
    06-25 04:09 PM
    Since most comments in here are against buying a house, I'd like to show one positive/lucky experience.

    I bought my house in 2003 while I was on Labor stage, RIR.
    I bought the house for the benefit of my kids as well as investment. We needed a bigger house as my kids grew and all my kids' friends lived in their own houses.
    I chose the house in the best school zone from the area.

    Luckily my house price went up about 50% since I bought, even 5% from last year.
    I live in one of those few cities in the nation where the price went up.
    And we got our GC last year, august.
    Yes, Very lucky.

    Well, sometimes, you just have to take a chance, and stop calculating and see what happens.

    hot Bob Short At Back Long At hairstyle long in front short in back. Long in the front and short in
  • Long in the front and short in

  • mariner5555
    03-26 02:07 PM
    So my view is that inflation is a bigger problem that Ben B does not want to tackle in the near future(3-4 months). Well in times of inflation your savings/investment is better in real-estate than anything else. But definitely NOT cash.

    So although we might be near the bottom of real estate market, we can never guesstimate the bottom until it has passed. My advice is, negotiate hard(buyers market) and get into a deal now. As a safety net, you can ask for a long escrow(around 180 days). That way you can backout of the deal if things head south. You've only lost the deposit(subject to arbitration at least in California).

    Someone pointed out that Visa Status is a smaller issue, the big issue is if you can hold onto your investment for atleast 5 years, you are golden.
    5 years is too less (you have to hold it for around 10 yrs minimum). 2 years the prices may/will fall. 2 years it would be steady and maybe start increasing slowly after that. so if you buy a house (depends on area ....but broadly) ..a 100K investment in RE (And if we take the best case scenario) after 5 years would be worth 80, 000. if you take inflation in to account.
    in the end it is supply and demand -- supply is huge. where is the demand going to come from ?? immigration is tight and in the fast moving life -- people have fewer and fewer kids. if u want to be safe - cash is good (atleast principal is safe if you get around 4 percent return) is best to have diversified portfolio. many of my friends have put everything in RE and are worried now


    house Arielle Kebbel Hairstyles hairstyle long in front short in back. Short Hair Cuts long well
  • Short Hair Cuts long well

  • mariner5555
    04-25 02:45 PM
    I also thought that pitching in the home buying by GC folks would make a great argument in front of law makers. But there was a very sensible posting by our spokes person Mark B.

    He said, he would not put home buying by GC folks as a main selling point for our cause. May be he will say this point as a half joke-half serious manner while discussing our core selling point. The core selling point being that the US is losing talent by not giving us GCs in a timely manner.
    let me give my views as to why Mark and others are missing the main point that I am trying to make. agreed using this as the main point may not work ..but this has to be a very important point. at the back of their mind - the policy makers know that some talent will definitely leave but lot will stay back (and they will keep paying USCIS money). even if people go back to India or China ..who will employ them is the same MNC / big US corporations ..
    (so they know some talent will leak away ..but majority will stay back just need to know the quota system / political system in India and china ..and automatically you will know that the talented guys will do everything to prevent their children from going through that ..)
    the second point is for the admin fix (which I guess can be done by president without congress approval) every poll ..the President has a low ranking ..the last thing that he needs is to be blamed for this recession too ..
    so during their meetings if DHS or others were to suggest that more immigrants would buy more stuff here (rather than buying houses in India / china) ..if they were more sure of their status ..the admin fix would have greater chance of success ..

    tattoo short medium layered hairstyle long in front short in back. The ack view, showing the
  • The ack view, showing the

  • gcdreamer05
    03-23 03:36 PM
    People who got GC are not facing any waves. That is why we need to get GC asap. If we struck in the GC process though we have a strong profile (careerwise, w2wise, taxwise, educationwise etc), we need to face waves like recession wave, backlog/perm wave, merging wave, economy wave, I140premium/nopremium wave, bipart wave, 2001 eb3stuck wave, magic visa bulletin wave, technology wave, visa stamping wave, uscis reform wave, dol wave, bulletin wave..

    Agree 200% with you, except that i would replace waves with psunami's - recession psunami, bi part psunami, eb3stuck psunami..........


    pictures Stacked bob hairstyles are hairstyle long in front short in back. Short, Lean Sides
  • Short, Lean Sides

  • unitednations
    08-02 10:51 PM
    ouch. there is always uncertainty, all steps of this gc process :(

    thanks for the note. I only hope they 'go after' people if they suspect fraud or out of status or salary issues etc.

    We are just a widget/number to uscis adjudicator. All of these ability to pay denials were very scarce prior to 2004. However, in 2003 and 2004 a lot of the 245i labors got approved (gas stations, restaurants, etc.). USCIS started to see a lot of bogus companies filing for people. They decided to clarify in a memo how they were going to look at ability to pay. Now; ability to pay was used rarely, in those cases that didn't look genuine (if you go to AAO decisions you would have seen the type of companies that uscis usually went after). However, to combat the 245i labors they started to apply the memo to all companies. Just imagine that a company with $20 million revenue can get ability to pay denials; but a company with $15,000 in revenue can get approval.

    dresses Long in the front and short in hairstyle long in front short in back. Shorter haircut is easy to
  • Shorter haircut is easy to

  • alterego
    09-27 10:39 AM
    I wish Obama wins. His team has more clarity on many issues and he has the zeal like JFK for making things happen. But, a big but - I am very concerned about our Employment Based immigration. If he gets to win (I wish he someone who want to see America regain it's global position not just with might but also being morally right), I am worried if it would be Sen. Durbin who will dictate the immigration policy.

    I wish we get some clarity in this aspect. In the economic downturn, I wish to work more than I ever did and see that US comes out of recession fast. But for that I have to be inside the country first. I have to be given a fair chance to contribute to this economy first and I need to be treated with respect and honor.

    Sen. Durbin's position on this issue and his closeness to Sen. Obama is certainly a cause for concern, however, one thing I have noticed over and over with Sen. Obama is that he is a cerebral pragmatist with a fairly decent judgement. He is not a locked in ideologue, when a rational argument is put to him he tends not to be dogmatic like the current president and instead will try to cut a deal.
    To get the support of republican moderates in any CIR legislation pro business immigration policies will need to be included in an Obama administration. No doubt the legislation will include some H1b restrictions, but they may be more open to EB visa recapture etc. That will atleast get those in the 485 queue some relief. Noone can reason with the Sen. Sessions and Rep. Kings of the congress. The same group that is so ultra conservative that they basically openly revolted with their president on numerous issues including the current economic rescue package.
    My fear with a Sen. McCain administration is that on the immigration issue, whatever his personal views, we will see another 4 yrs similar to the last 4 on immigration! He will get nowhere moving his party either. Pres. Bush is about as pro CIR as they come, he tried and tried very hard, but to no avail with the Congress. Even before the election, you can see the disagreements between McCain and the extreme right wing conservatives. Atleast with Obama, the scene will be shaken up, noone knows where it ends up, but atleast there is a chance the gridlock will be broken.


    makeup Shorter Emo hair styles hairstyle long in front short in back. Arielle Kebbel Hairstyles
  • Arielle Kebbel Hairstyles

  • validIV
    06-26 02:47 PM
    I don't know what else to tell you except what I've already stated. Frankly I am surprised that this debate has gone beyond 1 page. I am tired of beating a dead horse.

    If you are renting for 1500/month thats 18,000 a year, or 540,000 in 30 years that you lose with no chance of claiming as a deduction or ever using for anything. Rather than losing that money, why not use it to own the property you are living in?

    As a homeowner, you can use that 540,000 to own the home. The interest and property taxes you pay are tax deductible, and the principal means that at the end of the 30 years, the home is yours (20 if your loan is 20 years). Even when you are paying the mortgage, you are saving. You are getting bigger tax returns and you are owning the home that you live in. No amount of rent will guarantee either.

    Through a combination of tax deductions, home equity, and property value, I am willing to bet you that I can save the same amount you do by renting, but still be ahead by owning the property I live in in 30 years. Just take a look at any home owner's history and tell me someone who hasn't doubled the value of their home (home only, not including their savings) in the past 30 years or more.

    Everyone here that is dead-set on renting, by all means continue to throw your money away. And it REALLY is throwing your money away. How you wish to justify doing so is fine by me as long as you can sleep at night and explain to your family, friends and kids why you chose to rent for 30 or so years.

    If you buy - and take a mortgate - you end up losing (the same way you "lose" your rent)
    1. Interest you pay
    2. Property taxes you will pay forever.
    3. Maintenance you will pay forever.

    On the other hand - if you rent and,
    A. IF you pay less in rent than #1 + #2 + #3,
    B. IF you invest the remainder plus your mortgage principal amount in some other investment vehicle with superior investment returns than real estate.
    .... Then you will come out ahead renting.

    The tipping point is whether your rent equals interest + property taxes + maintenance. Based on which side is higher - either renting or buying could be good for you. I don't think there is a clear cut answer. This does not take into account the flexibility associated with renting - which is important for non-GC holders. If you assign a non-zero dollar value of $X with that flexibility, then your rent needs to be interest + tax + maintanance + $X to get to the tipping point. On the other hand, if you are not forced to save (in the form of mortgage principal payment every month) - you may just spend that money instead of investing that. If you assign a dollar value of $Y with that (probability multiplied by actual dollar value) - then the tipping point is at
    $rent = $interest + $tax + $maintenance + $X(dollar value for flexibility) - $Y(dollar value for probability of spending money instead of saving).

    Now as soon as you plug in the numbers in this equation - it will give you your tipping point and will tell you whether it is right for you to rent or to buy.

    Think about it. It is not as clear cut as you think it is. :-) Based on your earlier posts - you got an absolutely faboulous deal on your house (maybe because of your timing) and the tipping point equation would probably highly favor buying in your case. For many other (specially for those without a GC) - it may not be so clear cut.

    girlfriend The ack view, showing the hairstyle long in front short in back. They can be long or short.
  • They can be long or short.

  • ScratchingHead
    10-01 01:28 PM
    For the record the raising of the FDIC limit was proposed by John Blunt and not Obama. One article spinned it to show that Obama proposed it and then that news got the most clicks and now everyone says that he proposed the limit.

    Thats because the rich folks all of sudden who have more then 100k in their accounts felt unsecured and obviously the US government for the rich is helping the rich.

    hairstyles Hairstyle amp; Haircut Collection hairstyle long in front short in back. the front a bit shorter,
  • the front a bit shorter,

  • alterego
    07-13 06:13 PM
    Needless to say that the distincation between EB2 and EB3 has become so meaniningless now. How many positions really satisfy the EB2 requirements? From what I heard that most people just try to get around the system to get an EB2. One of the persons who filed EB2 told me that a high school graduate would probably be able to work in that position too.

    Just my observation.[/QUOTE]

    If you believe this to be the case. ie that a high school graduate should be able to do that job. Then that person should not get a green card for that job.

    People, please think before you post and write letters. It is important to be rational and not put your foot in your mouth.

    This is EB immigration and it is hierarchial. That is quite simply a fact not an opinion. The sooner people understand that, the better, and then everyone can channel their frustrations into broader fixes. Unless that can be done we will see these less than well planned, less than well coordinated, fitful efforts, and an internecine warfare that will make us a laughing stock and undermine the heroic efforts of IV core.

    06-12 12:11 AM
    This is for sharing and suggesting your views, ( :)who are not opposing for buying a home now or in the near future and those who are staying at Bay Area, CA or similar places in US) where the medium home price is still looks like quite unaffordable :

    for example, in Bay Area, CA - places which has good school districts and neighbourhoods like Cupertino, Fremont, Redwood shores etc., (please add other good places also...) - the medium home price of a new independant home (anywhere from 1500 to 3000 sq.feet) will be atleast in the price range of $700000 - 2+ Millions.

    Other options are :
    1) Moving to the outskirts, around 40 or 50+ miles - places like San Ramon, Gilroy etc. (remember commute will be too hectic...). In these places also, the above mentioned homes will cost $450000 and up.

    2) Go with an old condo/town home (in Bay Area, usually an old house is 25+ years YOUNG!!!) and after 5+ years look for an old independant home and after another 5+ years, move to your dream home. (I don't know whether we, most of us who are in the GC mess might be in 35 and above age group, have any juice left to do so rather than try to settle down within a couple of years. And one more thing, are these places really worth for spending this much for houses? (I know its a personal choice and lot of factors come in to play...)

    3) Move to a more affordable place so that even if there are some hick ups in career or other ups and downs in life, it won't affect the mortage payment (considering ones personal interests and other factors like employment opportunities, climate, diversed community etc etc.) - places like Dallas, Austin, Phoenix, Atlanta etc. (feel free to add other cities also).

    Please comment/share your thoughts (I am agreeing there may be slight variation in above price ranges) and really sorry if we discussed this in any other threads....


    I am in SF Bay area.
    I would say WAIT and prices will become affordable here as well.

    People who bought these 700K+ houses were not necessarily richer than you and me.
    ARMs with low or zero down payments did the trick.

    Save for the down payment and wait. You will get a good house at affordable price in 1-2 years.

    12-28 01:56 AM
    I am begining to beleive that WAR is not the answer, even though for the past 20 odd years, they have bled Kashmir, driven certain relegion members out, making them penniless, killing some of them and their family members mercilessly, doing the same in punjab (thanks to KPS Gill that was eradicated from the core), and using India's peace meaures in the last 7 odd years to infilitrate members who have created havoc in India.
    What India needs to do is strengthen internal security ('our sardar.....the chief...respectfully meant as i am a admirer of him, has done the right think by bringing in his most trusted man, PC to run home ministry....that man has been an asset in which ever position he has of v.v. high integrity and honesty like our chief)
    Secondly as i said before,...... the super powers also are pretty much behind India and will not make the same mistake as they have done in the past as they know that this is universal/global problem...and the doublespeak will not work...the worry is....who to talk to there...(neighbouring country)....there are so many power centres....its total i agree we should not go for war as that could be disastrous and open a exit strategy for all the dangerous elements and give them a longer/extended life to survive..........and continue with their nonsense......globally....WHY because once the war breaks out these dangerous elements will use their deadly toys that they have been provided with thanks to some of the regional powers....who....will then step in and insist on a dialogure....peace...etc etc..
    I am also surprised how sri lanka has agreed to go ahead with their cricket tour...i mean come on such a huge India....clear evidence...and to think and we sacrified a leader(possible PM) for them....STRANGE Behaviour....

    Without doubt, the internal security needs to be strenghtened. That is absolutely necessary. But is that sufficient?

    Why spend $26 billion yearly on defence budgets, if we are not to fire a single missile, worrying about the repercussions and what the dangerous elements will do?
    Is this only to be used in another Kargil-like war? WIf the answer is yes, that at least we should reduce our defence spending and divert it to make our nation secure. There is no possibility of that happening either.

    What is the probablity of another Kargil when a single terrorist attack is sufficient to throw the country into chaos?
    The whole idea is to destroy these terrorist outfits. Pakistan is not doing it. Should we not do it using our own arms?

    No comments:

    Post a Comment

    Total Pageviews