On May 22, 6:15 pm, Arthur Figgis wrote:
wrote:
If poor airports are capable of wrecking an economy then the US is
screwed. In my experience any foreigner is made to feel entirely
unwelcome and treated with intense suspicion as you enter the country,
thanks to those nice chaps at the Department of Homeland Security. I
don't think it's dawned on the US government how much that's going to
put people off studying or working in the states, which over the
medium term is going to do some pretty nasty things to its economy

Chap I know is off to Boston or somewhere on business next week, and
reckons he was entirely unwelcome and treated with intense suspicion
just getting to the stage of the visa interview, never mind actually
going...

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

Funnily enough, a chap I know went to Boston a couple of months ago,
for a six-month fellowship at Harvard. Couldn't get a visa appointment
in London within any reasonable time-scale so had to fly to Belfast
and stay overnight. The interview took about two minutes. So a total
waste of time, money and carbon emissions (this is a guy who cycles/
trains everywhere and doesn't have a car, so was annoyed by this) -
but at the end of the day, once he got through all the bureaucratic
obstructionism, he was welcomed with open arms. So, a bit of both.
They risk affecting their universities as well as the economy.
Tim

On 23 May, 10:10, TimB wrote:
On May 22, 6:15 pm, Arthur Figgis wrote:





wrote:
If poor airports are capable of wrecking an economy then the US is
screwed. In my experience any foreigner is made to feel entirely
unwelcome and treated with intense suspicion as you enter the country,
thanks to those nice chaps at the Department of Homeland Security. *I
don't think it's dawned on the US government how much that's going to
put people off studying or working in the states, which over the
medium term is going to do some pretty nasty things to its economy

Chap I know is off to Boston or somewhere on business next week, and
reckons he was entirely unwelcome and treated with intense suspicion
just getting to the stage of the visa interview, never mind actually
going...

--
Arthur Figgis * * * * * * * Surrey, UK

Funnily enough, a chap I know went to Boston a couple of months ago,
for a six-month fellowship at Harvard. Couldn't get a visa appointment
in London within any reasonable time-scale so had to fly to Belfast
and stay overnight. The interview took about two minutes. So a total
waste of time, money and carbon emissions (this is a guy who cycles/
trains everywhere and doesn't have a car, so was annoyed by this) -
but at the end of the day, once he got through all the bureaucratic
obstructionism, he was welcomed with open arms. So, a bit of both.
*They risk affecting their universities as well as the economy.


Over the long term, the universities are the economy - one of the
reasons the US has done so well over the last century is the amount
poured into practical academic research. The fact that Harvard and
Stanford attract bright people from all over the world has done
wonders for the US economy. The fact that most European universities
don't is one of the reasons Europe's a mess.

Whoever said that the US authorities don't care about any of this is
right. But give it twenty years and they'll wish they had.

Jonn

wrote:

The fact that Harvard and Stanford attract bright people from all over
the world has done wonders for the US economy. The fact that most
European universities don't is one of the reasons Europe's a mess.

That's a fair assessment, except for two things - first Europe's
universities contain many bright people, and second, Europe isn't a
mess.

In matters that are on topic for this group, it's the US that is in a
mess.

--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9683725.html
(55012 (Class 122) at Stratford-upon-Avon, 6 Aug 1982)

wrote:
On 23 May, 10:10, TimB wrote:
On May 22, 6:15 pm, Arthur Figgis wrote:





wrote:
If poor airports are capable of wrecking an economy then the US is
screwed. In my experience any foreigner is made to feel entirely
unwelcome and treated with intense suspicion as you enter the country,
thanks to those nice chaps at the Department of Homeland Security. I
don't think it's dawned on the US government how much that's going to
put people off studying or working in the states, which over the
medium term is going to do some pretty nasty things to its economy
Chap I know is off to Boston or somewhere on business next week, and
reckons he was entirely unwelcome and treated with intense suspicion
just getting to the stage of the visa interview, never mind actually
going...
--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK
Funnily enough, a chap I know went to Boston a couple of months ago,
for a six-month fellowship at Harvard. Couldn't get a visa appointment
in London within any reasonable time-scale so had to fly to Belfast
and stay overnight. The interview took about two minutes. So a total
waste of time, money and carbon emissions (this is a guy who cycles/
trains everywhere and doesn't have a car, so was annoyed by this) -
but at the end of the day, once he got through all the bureaucratic
obstructionism, he was welcomed with open arms. So, a bit of both.
They risk affecting their universities as well as the economy.


Over the long term, the universities are the economy - one of the
reasons the US has done so well over the last century is the amount
poured into practical academic research. The fact that Harvard and
Stanford attract bright people from all over the world has done
wonders for the US economy. The fact that most European universities
don't is one of the reasons Europe's a mess.

Sitting here at my desk in a UK university, looking at the graduate
students, I'd say that we have about 10% UK nationals, about 50% other
EU nationals, about 15% Commonwealth and most of the remainder are far
eastern (Korea and China seem to dominate), though a few interesting
others. I'd say we're doing a pretty good job of attracting people from
around the globe.

Robin

On 23 May, 11:29, "R.C. Payne" wrote:
Over the long term, the universities are the economy - one of the
reasons the US has done so well over the last century is the amount
poured into practical academic research. The fact that Harvard and
Stanford attract bright people from all over the world has done
wonders for the US economy. The fact that most European universities
don't is one of the reasons Europe's a mess.

Sitting here at my desk in a UK university, looking at the graduate
students, I'd say that we have about 10% UK nationals, about 50% other
EU nationals, about 15% Commonwealth and most of the remainder are far
eastern (Korea and China seem to dominate), though a few interesting
others. I'd say we're doing a pretty good job of attracting people from
around the globe.

Generally UK universities are considered separately from mainland
European universities in this context (because ours are unequivocally
the best outside the US, largely because we have a national merit-
based admissions system rather than a "anyone who passes their A-
levels can go to their local Comprehensive University" system.

--
John Band
john at johnband dot org
www.johnband.org

John B wrote:
On 23 May, 11:29, "R.C. Payne" wrote:
Over the long term, the universities are the economy - one of the
reasons the US has done so well over the last century is the amount
poured into practical academic research. The fact that Harvard and
Stanford attract bright people from all over the world has done
wonders for the US economy. The fact that most European universities
don't is one of the reasons Europe's a mess.
Sitting here at my desk in a UK university, looking at the graduate
students, I'd say that we have about 10% UK nationals, about 50% other
EU nationals, about 15% Commonwealth and most of the remainder are far
eastern (Korea and China seem to dominate), though a few interesting
others. I'd say we're doing a pretty good job of attracting people from
around the globe.

Generally UK universities are considered separately from mainland
European universities in this context (because ours are unequivocally
the best outside the US, largely because we have a national merit-
based admissions system rather than a "anyone who passes their A-
levels can go to their local Comprehensive University" system.

While I can see that applying at undergraduate level (where UK students
definitely dominate), I'm not sure that's as relevent at a graduate
level. Most of the graduate students here did their undergrad in their
home country and have only come here for the next bit.

Robin

PS perhaps I was a little pessimistic on my previous numbers, perhaps
it's more like 20% UK / 40% EU

TimB wrote:
On May 22, 6:15 pm, Arthur Figgis wrote:
wrote:
If poor airports are capable of wrecking an economy then the US is
screwed. In my experience any foreigner is made to feel entirely
unwelcome and treated with intense suspicion as you enter the country,
thanks to those nice chaps at the Department of Homeland Security. I
don't think it's dawned on the US government how much that's going to
put people off studying or working in the states, which over the
medium term is going to do some pretty nasty things to its economy
Chap I know is off to Boston or somewhere on business next week, and
reckons he was entirely unwelcome and treated with intense suspicion
just getting to the stage of the visa interview, never mind actually
going...

--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK

Funnily enough, a chap I know went to Boston a couple of months ago,
for a six-month fellowship at Harvard. Couldn't get a visa appointment
in London within any reasonable time-scale so had to fly to Belfast
and stay overnight. The interview took about two minutes. So a total
waste of time, money and carbon emissions (this is a guy who cycles/
trains everywhere and doesn't have a car, so was annoyed by this) -
but at the end of the day, once he got through all the bureaucratic
obstructionism, he was welcomed with open arms. So, a bit of both.
They risk affecting their universities as well as the economy.
Tim

The last time I went to the States, only about a year and a half ago,
you didn't need a visa. Has this changed?

--
Corporate society looks after everything. All it asks of anyone, all it
has ever asked of anyone, is that they do not interfere with management
decisions. -From “Rollerball”

In message , at 07:35:52 on Sat, 24
May 2008, Martin Edwards remarked:
Funnily enough, a chap I know went to Boston a couple of months ago,
for a six-month fellowship at Harvard. Couldn't get a visa appointment
in London within any reasonable time-scale so had to fly to Belfast
and stay overnight.

The last time I went to the States, only about a year and a half ago,
you didn't need a visa. Has this changed?

Were you going as a tourist or to a business meeting, and for no more
than three months?

Those are the usual qualifications for not needing a Visa.
--
Roland Perry

In message , Roland Perry
writes
In message , at 07:35:52 on Sat, 24
May 2008, Martin Edwards remarked:
Funnily enough, a chap I know went to Boston a couple of months ago,
for a six-month fellowship at Harvard. Couldn't get a visa appointment
in London within any reasonable time-scale so had to fly to Belfast
and stay overnight.

The last time I went to the States, only about a year and a half ago,
you didn't need a visa. Has this changed?

Were you going as a tourist or to a business meeting, and for no more
than three months?

Those are the usual qualifications for not needing a Visa.

AND being a citizen of one of

Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium Brunei, Denmark, Finland, France,
Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg,
Monaco, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, San Marino,
Singapore, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the United Kingdom

BUT not

holding a passport indicating that the bearer is a British Subject,
British Dependent Territories Citizen, British Overseas Citizen, British
National (Overseas) Citizen, or British Protected Person

AND

travelling on a valid, machine readable or e-passport with an electronic
chip

PLUS

if entering the United States by air or sea, holding a return or onward
ticket and entering the United States aboard an air or sea carrier that
has agreed to participate in the visa waiver program

OR

if entering the United States by land from Canada or Mexico, in
possession of a completed form I-94W, issued by the immigration
authorities at the port of entry, and a $6.00 fee, payable only in U.S.
dollars

AND NOT

being a person who has been arrested, even if the arrest did not result
in a criminal conviction, with criminal records, (the Rehabilitation of
Offenders Act does not apply to U.S. visa law), has certain serious
communicable illnesses, who has been refused admission into, or has been
deported from the United States, or has previously overstayed on the
visa waiver programme

So there are many reasons why someone might need a visa.
--
Goalie of the Century

In message , at 09:26:06 on Sat, 24 May
2008, Goalie of the Century remarked:

Funnily enough, a chap I know went to Boston a couple of months ago,
for a six-month fellowship at Harvard. Couldn't get a visa appointment
in London within any reasonable time-scale so had to fly to Belfast
and stay overnight.

The last time I went to the States, only about a year and a half ago,
you didn't need a visa. Has this changed?

Were you going as a tourist or to a business meeting, and for no more
than three months?

Those are the usual qualifications for not needing a Visa.

AND

[snip lots of unusual things for someone living in UK]

So there are many reasons why someone might need a visa.

The most usual being that they want to study, to work, or to live there.
--
Roland Perry