$5 says this is stuck in some bureaucratic sinkhole somewhere. Barring a _good_ reason, I'd much rather have Daniel's brain here in the US than anywhere else.
As someone that's also been stuck in bureaucratic processes before, in all likelihood the application is indeed lost somewhere in the system and won't ever see the light of day without intervention.
I'd fully expect Daniel to have to at minimum file a formal complaint (is there even someone to complain to in this case?) to get any traction.
I had a co-worker whose wife was applying for US citizenship. In the middle of processing her paperwork the immigration department decided they needed to paint the office. The story goes - and I believe her lawyer told her this - the immigrations employees went home one day and the painters came in and covered all of the desks with plastic. They then took the next two years to paint the facility. At the end of two years the tarps came off and the workers returned - with all of their paperwork from two years prior exactly where it had been left.
Sounds crazy but is somehow believable. I had a similar experience last time I was at the New York DMV where I handed an agent my papers, he looked at them for a bit then got up and left without saying a word, he went and had lunch for an hour, then came back as-if nothing had happened. I had twenty plus people standing behind me in the same queue. The other queues around us kept moving, we all stood there for an hour while the guy ate.
It is for non-Express Entry applications. Those of us too old for CRS-score based applications, or who are not looking for jobs evidently get put into a different queue.
The longest queue is still up to 15-19 months long. There may be some expired streams that are taking longer than that, but none of the current immigration streams are supposed to take anywhere near that long.
I can only speak from personal experience. I've been in the process since 2015, and have had confirmation that I can't expect resolution for up to another 30 months.
Maybe you are learning that being actually "nationalistic" (ie maximizing the prosperity of the nation) implies supporting strong high skilled immigration pipelines because of the incredible benefits these immigrants have for the nation and it's native inhabitants. It's a great irony that those who reject taking the best and brightest are the "nationalists" and those who want to take the best and brightest are the "g…
The "globalists" are also in favor of illegal immigration, because it provides them with cheap labor (gardeners, nanny's, construction workers), while never providing any threat to their livelihood - the illegal immigrants are not competing for white-collar and professional jobs. The people whose livelihoods are adversely affected are the poorest people in the US, working unskilled and minimally skilled jobs
More often than not, I've heard so-called "globalists" being in favor of substantially open borders so that the immigration you describe would be legal.
I had a friend who worked in constituent services for a US Senator, and...yeah, if you can get someone's attention in that setting, they can make stuff happen that otherwise would have fallen through the cracks. Been awhile since I heard stories, but one came to mind was someone getting the right visa for his bride in time for the wedding. Another one had to do with getting some kind of medal for a soldier. Not sure…
Oh when it comes to immigration issues for the family of US citizens, yes, calling your Congressman can definitely move things along. But a foreigner whose visa is denied? Not sure why the Congressman would bother unless it somehow impacted the US.
$5 says this is stuck in some bureaucratic sinkhole somewhere. Barring a _good_ reason, I'd much rather have Daniel's brain here in the US than anywhere else.
> I'd much rather have Daniel's brain here in the US than anywhere else. This sentence strikes me as very odd, and I can't quite put my finger on as to why. Like - why? Why does it matter? Is this some sort of competition? Is this like poaching talent into your company? Do you feel pride from sharing a territory with someone important?
I feel this deserves an answer from the guy who made the comment.
First, I'm nationalistic. I want my home to be the best possible place it can be.
There is an undeniable benefit to the economy, culture, general education level, ability to get things done, and overall 'coolness' of a country to have people like Daniel in it. If we're lucky he'd want to immigrate, and he'd get to vote. The US could SORELY use more tech savvy people in the electorate.
Also, make no mistake, it IS a competition. Nations rise and fall on their ability to create, retain, and attract skilled and intelligent citizens.
From an economic perspective, having a specific person in your economy is zero sum; either they’re in your country or they’re not in your country.
This doesn't make sense. Their labor can benefit your economy even if they don't live there, and they can consume your countries goods without living there.
Yes, but the effect is magnified if they're in your country. You would collect local taxes, and the majority of money spent would circulate inside the economy, rather leaving.
Australia pays very well and has pretty reasonable overlap hours with much of Asia if you've got family or friends that you want to catch up with virtually. Probably 90% of my colleagues and customers aren't from Australia (including me!) so it's pretty welcoming in of Australia (there's obviously still issues here, but no worse than you'd experience in other Western countries) Please, we need more talent..
But Australia is not making it easy too. I studied and graduated UQ (but only for a year, so no work for me), and a number of my friends did too and continued to work in Australia. But it's not easy. Most job openings prefer PR/citizens. My friends who got a job can only stay for maximum 2/3 years, with uncertainty related to the point and visa grant system.
If there's a way for me to work in Australia or even get into the work visa stream without spending AUD100k+ on a 2 yr masters + living costs, I'd definitely consider it.
I am a strong supporter of the current administration's restrictions on immigration. The resources in the US are simply too scarce to support unfettered immigration. Moreover, we need less "white immigrants" to come here in order to maintain diversity.
>I am a strong supporter of the current administration's restrictions on immigration. He's visiting a conference not immigrating.
> He's visiting a conference not immigrating.
Crazy thought: perhaps the visa folks are thinking that he already missed the conference and they have stacks of other work to do.