John Jacobson

Actually it is quite common for Europeans to assume that non-white means
African-American in America. The fact that Native Americans, and many Hispanics
consider themselves non-white is not that well-known outside the US.

I know when I read your post I assumed that you probably meant you were part
Native-American.

"Kev" <[email protected]>
[usenetquote2]> >> And for the record I cannot be part of the KKK as I am not fully white.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >With the total lack of reasoning and total lack of any logical arguments[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >whatsoever in your postings, it wouldn't surprice me at all if you were the first[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >african-american applying for a KKK membership.[/usenetquote2]

John Jacobson

Wrong. Terje's posts are quite fine and if they reveal any character it is a
character that in all apearances seems to excel beyond your own. He has been rather
patient with you guys, being far more gracious than is warranted. He has sympathy
from a number of us. You don't speak for everybody that reads and/or posts in this
newsgroup.

"Dan" <[email protected]>
[usenetquote2]> >> > Do you have the ability to talk without starting a sentence with an insult? Is[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> > the world so hard from behind your white hood?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> I would like to know Indian's version of the KKK because that's obviously what[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> you belong to.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >Why? Because I reply to someone who calls me a ****face, and worse? Not once have[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >I starded with an insult, I have ONLY replied in the same (in actuality, far[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >nicer) language. I use arguments, and I am ONLY met with insult. How can I assume[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >that such people have more than about 5 braincells?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> > You apparently have no clue whatsoever about H1B. Why would an H1B person not[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> > have the luxury of shopping around? It is trivial to transfer an H1 from one[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> > company to another, today that process is even easier, since you are now[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> > allowed to start working for the second company while the transfer is being[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> > processed.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> That's a lie and you would know that if you knew the first thing about H-1B.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >That is a statement, not backed up by a single argument. It is also completely[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >wrong. If you have an H1B, and you want to work for another company, if that[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >company is willing to sponsor an H1B, and most tech companies are, you can change[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >job easily. It used to take 2-4 weeks in California, now you can change the day[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >they file for an H1 transfer. NO PROBLEM![/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> > My question to you then is, if I am a clueless ****face, and I know A LOT more[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> > about H1s than you do, what does that make you?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> What an ass ****ing low life you are to accuse Kev of being a KKK member.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >ONLY because he calls me a ****face and lots of other stuff in each and every[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >posting. I have ONLY answered back with insult, not once started out with it. Am I[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >not allowed to answer someone that has no arguments whatsoever, but only insult?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> After what you said here, I have to conclude that Kev is a very good judge of[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> character and he figured you out completely.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >How did he figure me out? By calling me a ****face from the first posting he did?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >Hardly.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >--[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >+------------------------+-------------------------------------------+[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >| Terje A. Bergesen | [email protected] | Santa Monica, CA |[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >| http://terje.bivrost.com/ | Living it, loving it | http://ingrid.bivrost.com/ |[/usenetquote2]

John Jacobson

Dan, a tick bloated on a deer's blood is better than you.

    >
    >
    >
    >
    >

    >
[usenetquote2]> >Dan wrote:[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> Hello Asshole Terje ****face,[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> H1s do not have the luxury of shopping around for a better job. Do you know[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >> anything about H1s, you ****ing clueless clown?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >Do you have the ability to talk without starting a sentence with an insult? Is the[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >world so hard from behind your white hood?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >You apparently have no clue whatsoever about H1B. Why would an H1B person not have[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >the luxury of shopping around? It is trivial to transfer an H1 from one company to[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >another, today that process is even easier, since you are now allowed to start[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >working for the second company while the transfer is being processed.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >My question to you then is, if I am a clueless ****face, and I know A LOT more[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >about H1s than you do, what does that make you?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >--[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >+------------------------+-------------------------------------------+[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >| Terje A. Bergesen | [email protected] | Santa Monica, CA |[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >| http://terje.bivrost.com/ | Living it, loving it | http://ingrid.bivrost.com/ |[/usenetquote2]

John Jacobson

Terje, an anencephalous fetus knows more about H-1B than the self-styled luminaries
here in this newsgroup.

    >
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Typical arrogant attitude of guests in this country. They claim they know a lot[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > more than we do, they are better at everything than us and they make more money[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > than us.[/usenetquote2]
    >
    >
    >
    >

John Jacobson

You are unemployed because you don't have any skills except for scripts that any kid
can scribble out in a few minutes.

    >

[usenetquote2]> > Philotsopher wrote:[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > ...[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > Your question is mostly irrelevant because this open border scenario[/usenetquote2]
    >
[usenetquote2]> > > take into consideration exchange rates, work conditions, quality of[/usenetquote2]
life
[usenetquote2]> > > etc. etc. It's very obvious that an Indian would be perfectly willing[/usenetquote2]
to
[usenetquote2]> > > work in the US for a fraction of what a middle class worker expects to make -[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > that is the only thing that is important here.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Why is that perfectly obvious? If he did he would have to be remarkably stupid.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > If, for example, he works in San Jose, and will need to pay for a place to stay,[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > say he gets it cheap at $1700/month. Why would he ba satisfied with say[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > $40.000/year?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
    >
    >
    >
an
    >
    >
double
    >
    >
abolish
    >
life.
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
you
    >
    >
    >
their
    >
    >
[usenetquote2]> > A little shopping around, and he would find that he could double that if he has[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > some experience? Why would he settle for a fraction of what a middle class worker[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > expects to get?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
    >

John Jacobson

    >
problem
    >

They will have no problem ascertaining the low quality of your skills either. Those
are now a matter of record.

    >
    >

No, you were not.

John Jacobson

Well said. Actually these corporate "greedsters" are doing far far more for the
welfare and good of humanity than all the anti-H-1Bers and other anti-corporate types
combined. Next time you have to get a medical treatment that saves your life, or an
MRI finds a cancer before it has spread, or any of a great number of other things
that save or prolong a life, look and see what human endeavor has made the
instruments of your salvation. It is not the name of Greenpeace or Shame-H-1B or Norm
Matloff whose name is on the side of the MRI, or medicine, or other stuff, it is
corporate "greedsters" like GE, Baxter Healthcare, Abbott Labs, etc. And it wasn't
charity or altruism that led them to supply that life-saving technology or drug
either. It was good old greed.

    >
    >
    >
[usenetquote2]> > http://www.globalexchange.org/ftaa/statement040201.html[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > This is a complete capitulation to corporate greedsters.[/usenetquote2]
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >

Kev

Are you going to sit there and say you honestly believe those number? The US has just
had one of the biggest layoffs in history and you think that the 4.4 number are
actually true! The gov is lying and everyone knows it. Please JJ don't embarrass
yourself like this.

On Sat, 2 Jun 2001 13:04:16 -0500, "John Jacobson" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >
    >
    >
    >
[usenetquote2]>> >> >> Your question is mostly irrelevant because this open border scenario[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> >won't[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> >> >> take into consideration exchange rates, work conditions, quality of[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> >life[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> >> >> etc. etc. It's very obvious that an Indian would be perfectly[/usenetquote2]
    >
[usenetquote2]>> >to[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> >> >> work in the US for a fraction of what a middle class worker expects[/usenetquote2]
    >
[usenetquote2]>> >> >> make - that is the only thing that is important here.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> >> >Why is that perfectly obvious? If he did he would have to be remarkably[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> >> >stupid. If, for example, he works in San Jose, and will need to pay for a[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> >> >place to stay, say he gets it cheap at $1700/month. Why would he ba satisfied[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> >> >with say $40.000/year?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> >> >A little shopping around, and he would find that he could double that if he[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> >> >has some experience? Why would he settle for a fraction of what a middle class[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> >> >worker expects to get?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> >> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> >> >--[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> >> >+------------------------+-------------------------------------------+[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> >> >| Terje A. Bergesen | [email protected] | Santa Monica, CA |[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> >> >| http://terje.bivrost.com/ | Living it, loving it |[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> >> >| http://ingrid.bivrost.com/ |[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> >>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> >>[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]>> >[/usenetquote2]
    >

John Jacobson

    >

LOL. Actually the numbers were just released and the unemployment rate FELL this
past month to only 4.4%, remaining at historically low levels. Your arrogance is
exceeded only by your ignorance.

    >
    >
[usenetquote2]> > that we can now buy "stuff" for a fraction of what it cost in our parents time.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
    >
    >

What a stupid statement. A life-saving MRI or medicine or a new treatment that
prolongs and improves the quality of life for a human being is not "cheap
trinket". A computer that allows you to communicate almost for free with relatives
around the world in real time is not a cheap trinket. And so...ad infinitum.

    >
[usenetquote2]> > How is the world doing under this tyranny? Well, this corporate globalism has had[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > its strongest growth since the early '80, and onwards. In 1980 40.000 people died[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > of starvation every day. In those days there was somewhere around 4B people in[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > the world. In 1999 20.000 people died every day of starvation, a SUBSTANTIAL[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > reduction.[/usenetquote2]
    >
    >

It is just like you to cavalierly dismiss a reduction in world starvation. You are
such a self-centered ignoramus.

    >
    >
[usenetquote2]> > trade, hardly any from aid programs, and some, but extremely little, from[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > population movement. You need to solve the problems where they are.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
    >
    >

Well, they are obviously doing more for humanity than you.

    >
[usenetquote2]> > What wrong did these corporate greedsters do so that the number of people[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > starving to death has been halved while the worlds population has increased by[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > almost 50%? Where is their crime?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
    >
    >
to
    >

You wouldn't be able to convert him because you have no argument in the
first place.

Tom Lehman

Jacobson--Yeah. Paid for by the public through the National Institute of Health, the
military, or other government/public funded research and development. Then
capitalized on by the corporations and sold back to the public who paid for it in the
first place.

John Jacobson wrote:

    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >

[usenetquote2]> > Margaret Bartley wrote:[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > ...[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > http://www.globalexchange.org/ftaa/statement040201.html[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > > This is a complete capitulation to corporate greedsters.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Who are these corporate greedsters? What do they do? How is the world fairing[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > under their tyranny?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > They are us, you and I. We have our 401K money placed squarely in their corner.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > Our jobs depend on them being as greedy as they can possibly be.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > They create jobs, some in the US, who has the lowest unemployment in a very long[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > time. They create products, ever cheaper such, so that we can now buy "stuff" for[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > a fraction of what it cost in our parents time.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > How is the world doing under this tyranny? Well, this corporate globalism has had[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > its strongest growth since the early '80, and onwards. In 1980 40.000 people died[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > of starvation every day. In those days there was somewhere around 4B people in[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > the world. In 1999 20.000 people died every day of starvation, a SUBSTANTIAL[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > reduction. Most of this reduction comes from increased global trade, hardly any[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > from aid programs, and some, but extremely little, from population movement. You[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > need to solve the problems where they are.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > What wrong did these corporate greedsters do so that the number of people[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > starving to death has been halved while the worlds population has increased by[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > almost 50%? Where is their crime?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > In the same time, the difference between rich and poor in the US has increased.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > This is a problem, and it is a problem that should be solved. Domestic poverty is[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > something the US should not have to deal with. There will always be transition[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > periods, but the current situation is too bad. It can be solved by finding ways[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > to create jobs in areas where jobs are dissapearing, but one must also realize[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > that some movement of people will be needed, all areas are not meant to be[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > livable.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > --[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > +------------------------+-------------------------------------------+[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > | Terje A. Bergesen | [email protected] | Santa Monica, CA |[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> > | http://terje.bivrost.com/ | Living it, loving it | http://ingrid.bivrost.com/ |[/usenetquote2]

John Jacobson

Actually you are really missing the boat here. Mass layoffs are actually very low
relative to unemployment in general and this has always been the case. Most
unemployment doesn't occur because of mass layoffs, but because of a lot of little
layoffs and firings across the economy. In addition, if people who are laid off are
finding jobs, they never add to the unemployment rate. So you could easily have a
record number of mass payoffs and still have falling unemployment.

"Dan" <[email protected]>
[usenetquote2]> >> I will move to Ethiopia, where paradise awaits.[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >Says who?[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >--[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >+------------------------+-------------------------------------------+[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >| Terje A. Bergesen | [email protected] | Santa Monica, CA |[/usenetquote2]
[usenetquote2]> >| http://terje.bivrost.com/ | Living it, loving it | http://ingrid.bivrost.com/ |[/usenetquote2]

Terje A. Bergesen

Dan wrote:
    >
    >
    >

Well, I never said unemployment is going down, even though there was a drop to 4.4%
in May, which is down from 4.5% the previous month. That is immaterial, and not what
I was talking about, I was saying that the unemployment rate is lower today, at 4.4%
than it has been in a long time, the last 2 rather bizarre years excepted. A rate at
4.4% is very low, since not the entire part of that is REALLY out looking for a job,
and a large number is shortly unemployed between two jobs.

When there is such low unemployment, finding qualified workers is very hard, and
prices start to increase. That is called inflation, and something we rather would not
have too much of, since that, in the longer run, will create far more problems than
the current dip in the economy.

--
+------------------------+-------------------------------------------+
    >
[usenetquote2]| | Living it, loving it | http://ingrid.bivrost.com/ |[/usenetquote2]

Terje A. Bergesen

Dan wrote:
    >
    >
    >

Dan, Kev just asked if I wanted to discuss as an adult, why is it that you do not
have such capabilities? Are you not able to say a single word to someone who
disagrees with you without calling them names?

--
+------------------------+-------------------------------------------+
    >
[usenetquote2]| | Living it, loving it | http://ingrid.bivrost.com/ |[/usenetquote2]

Terje A. Bergesen

Kev wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >

Kev, please don't tell me you are one of those? Why would the government lie about
this? They have ABSOLUTELY nothing to gain from it. Such a low unemployment number
serves ONLY to hurt the interests of the US. If they were to lie, theyd say that
the rate was at 10%, that would have been great for them, AND for most parts of
the economy.

--
+------------------------+-------------------------------------------+
    >
[usenetquote2]| | Living it, loving it | http://ingrid.bivrost.com/ |[/usenetquote2]

Terje A. Bergesen

John Jacobson wrote:

...
    >
    >
    >
    >

John, just for the record, you were able to shop around for a job before October as
well. Several friends of mine working on H1Bs changed jobs about 18 months ago, when
they felt that the current management of their company wasn't really doing what they
should. The trouble at the time was that it took a few weeks to get things in order,
and in between you couldn't work. A few weeks of waiting is nothing more than a litte
bump in the road though. In October it became possible to start working for your new
employer once the papers were filed.

--
+------------------------+-------------------------------------------+
    >
[usenetquote2]| | Living it, loving it | http://ingrid.bivrost.com/ |[/usenetquote2]