rebeccajo

Forward a PM like that to either a moderator or Captain Ewok so that they may address the situation.

What about a member who PM's others soliciting to process a visa for them?

Expect 50-100% across the board fee increases sometime in 2010 for USCIS. I have it from a very good inside source.

Oh blah blah blah blah.

What a pompous a$$ you are.

Driving American men to marry Ukrainian women? Worked for me. Now all the feminists can drive by my island home on the lakefront, see Alla sunbathing on the private pier and think "that coulda been me...oh well, gotta get to work" Pull up them panyhose, get on your ugly shoes with no heels and get to it!!!!!!!!!! Quit yer bi1ichin' you got what you wanted.

Rush will be back...don't worry. walter williams (the black guy that fills in for him) said so today. He can't be wrong, he's black.

I can guarantee you, Gary, the last thing any self-respecting woman is thinking when she drives past your lakefront house with the private pier is that they would like to be like Alla.

They're more likely driving by waiting for the day the moving van is there while you are at work.

You do realize that as a VWP entrant, it was illegal for you to be working in the US?

Moving to AOS forum.

Moving to consular forums where the issue lies.

I'm just wondering if you have a Hawaiian death certificate, if you're really dead?

so it's not really chicken?

No Amber, it isn't.

I guess since its called "city chicken" the guests should be happy that its not alternating cubes of rat and pigeon...lol...

It's actually a southern thing.

OMG - the part near the end w/the sand dune!! Wow!

Well, that was bad.

But when the other driver was passing Jeremy on the road to La Paz - I couldn't watch.

what is city chicken?

Alternating cubes of veal and pork on little wooden skewers.

Rolled in flour (or bread crumbs) and pan fried. Then baked.

City chicken; cooked cabbage; spuds; carrots.

If you watch for this show through uk-nova or any other venue, you might want to try and catch the recent episode where the boys wander through Bolivia and Chile.

It is undoubtedly the BEST episode I've ever seen (even better than the one where the caravan catches on fire - my fave). There's some stunts and situations I honestly can't believe the BBC let them do.

As far as "proper" bacon goes, isn't it just a different cut than what we Americans are used to having? I think the cut there is a "back'...I am trying to remember on the fly. You might see if there is a meat market around where you can have it cut the way he likes. My biggest problem is going to be finding affordable lamb when I am surrounded by cattle ranching states...

Our local Sam's Club carries lamb most all year round.

WalMart has it from time to time - a tiny little display up high where you'd never find it if you weren't looking.

britishexpress.com

Krikit -

IMO, you'll never have a better cup of tea than one made in a plain old Brown Betty teapot. Not pretty, but - ah - delish!

How is 'original' copy even possible? That appears to be an oxymoron. 'Certified' copy I can understand but an 'original' copy is a merely a copy of an original document.

Sorry for breaking the conversation by not coming back to this sooner.

What I said was "original certified copy" - meaning what I sent to the Service was the exact document the Clerk handed to me - the "original certified copy".

In other words I didn't send to them a photocopy (made by me) of the document I was given by the Clerk. I sent the real deal so the Service could clearly see the Clerk's authentication on the copy.

LOL.....I always think these conversations are a bit confusing. The original of a divorce decree can never be obtained by any of us as the original is on file at the Clerk's office in the county wherein the divorce was granted. So the best any of us can ever get is a copy of the decree. When the Clerk of Courts (Circuit Clerk of whatever they are called in your county) places their mark on the copy, it becomes a certified copy.

Since certification can take any number of forms (a raised seal, a rubber stamp, etc) it can be hard to tell (from a photocopy) if the certification is legitimate. I believe that's the reason these RFE's happen - the adjudicator literally cannot tell if the divorce decree is for real.

So while we are all told it's perfectly OK to send photocopies of documents to the Service, this is one document where that rules seems not to apply.

baron555 -

The Service will issue an Advance Parole document to nearly anyone who pays the fee.

Whether or not that person should actually use the document is an entirely different matter.

Of course, getting admitted to the US or not is a major gamble as it stands.

I'd say not filing taxes is a biggy, so fixing that right away would be smart.

From the post, I read that his CR1 was issued prior to 2nd anniversary and US entry happened after 2nd anniversary. If so, should have been given 10 year card. If so, assuming successful entry to the US, a correction could be all that is needed instead of filing I751.

Ah. I had missed that one.

Wonder how hard it would be to get them to change it all these years later........

Obviously! I have snared an unwitting Canadian in my USC/sandy-####### trap.

If certain men who go overseas to marry are treating THEIR wimmins better than me...I need to know! Especially because these women are apparently more exotic, beautiful, and submissive than myself. So I should get something in return, right?

YOU have not been paying attention!

As you are not exotic enough, beautiful enough or submissive enough, you shouldn't be expecting ANYTHING in return!!

This thread has real potential.

In my world, if you want something, you actually have to pay for it. That is, if you want goods or services, you have to spend money.

It seems in your world, simply having enough money to pay for it is enough. You don't actually have to pay for it and spend the money.

Otherwise, how can your standard of living increase (which is the amount of goods and services you have) without spending more money?

I guess because in my world standard of living and quality of life are very similar.

Now - that's not to say it's my opinion that more goodies you have, the happier you will be. Quite the contrary. It's my opinion that if you DON'T have the money to pay for basic necessities, then quality of life can very much be effected. Part of the problem of poverty is the worry associated with it. That's one reason you see people who lose their jobs end up on the therapists couch. You can have a pretty good 'standard of living' (as you seem to define it) and have that definition change overnight if your income stream is reduced by a personal financial disaster. You get to the point where if you are able to keep your house, the light and heat on, and food on the table - you are pretty satisfied.

I really don't think the more you spend, the higher your standard of living will necessarily be. A rich man can spend all his dough on whiskey and pot. He spends the money but his standard of living doesn't go up.

That's a ridiculous straw-man argument taken to the extreme. I didn't say that money doesn't effect quality of life, only that it doesn't determine it. Some poor people enjoy a high quality of life and some rich people a low quality of life.

In any case, you have radically changed the subject. We were really talking about standard of living and how you have to spend money to increase your standard of living. Do you accept that, or do you still think that simply having the money is enough?

I think having the money is enough. I think having the power to choose to spend the money is enough.

Quality of life is. Standard of Living really isn't. You are the one who brought up quality of life and I was simply stating that I didn't think money determines quality of life.

Then try living without any. See if your opinion changes.

Standard of living and quality of life are two different things. Standard of living is about the level of goods and services available to a person. If you want to have more goods and services, you typically have to pay for them. Thus, to increase your standard of living, you have to spend more money.

Quality of life is a much broader term that refers to general well-being. It is affected by things like your culture, your personal satisfaction, family life, health, art, beauty of your surroundings, etc. in addition to the things covered by standard of living. My point about quality of life is that some people haven't got much but they are happy with their life. They could have a high quality of life, although their standard of living is relatively low.

Isn't that a philisophical perspective? (Again I quote you).

Imagine two people. One of them makes 50k/year and the other one makes $1 million/year. They both spend $50k/year to live. The millionaire puts the rest of his money in the bank. Since they are both living on the same income, they have comparable residences, food, cars, clothing, etc. Their standard of living is identical because they are spending the same amount of money. That's what I'm trying to say. Your standard of living is determined not by how much money you have, but by how much money you spend. If you want a higher standard of living, you have to spend more money. (This is ignoring the fact that some people can get more for the same money by finding deals, etc. and that living is more expensive in some places. This complicates the situation, but it's a completely different subject).

Whether or not having enough money that you don't have to worry about it leads to a higher quality of life is really a philosophical question that has nothing to do with taxes, in my opinion. Maybe the millionaire is happier because he doesn't have to worry about making the next mortgage payment. But you can't quantify that and you can't, or at least shouldn't, tax it.

Consumer spending does drive the economy. It always has and it always will. If nobody buys things, the economy collapses. That really isn't up for debate. The only thing that can be debated is whether or not consumer spending should fund the government. I say it should.

Your reference to keeping up with the Joneses is out of place. You don't have to spend more money to have a better quality of life. Some people have great lives with very little money. All I'm saying is that, unless he spends his money, a rich person doesn't have anything that a poor person doesn't. Money is just numbers in a computer.

Take a look at what you wrote (I've bolded it for you).