Mike Tyson Tattoos

Yes, i agree that it is unpredictable and no one can guarantee as to which one will move faster.
But, it can go either way, may be 2002 EB3 goes current before 2005 Eb2 or vice-versa. Atleast they will have an equal chance and position. However, in the other case, when u allow porting, then A (EB3, PD 2002) will be strictly ahead of B (EB2, PD 2005)


According to you A acquires skills over a period of time and so does a person who went for higher education and is EB2. You also say that if there was no porting, A has a PD of 2002 (in EB3) and B has a PD of 2005 (in EB2), then they are almost in the same position.

At this point both of us agree that A and B are equal, right?

If they both are EQUAL, then can you guarantee that both PDs will move at the same rate?. If A�s PD becomes unavailable and B�s become current. B will get GC faster than A even though both were equal (from your logic). Is this fair, then?

Not to split hairs, but I do not think Lou Dobbs is really "Republican" as far as the core political philosophy of GOP goes, and the same goes for Tancerdo et all. All are extremist nuts and never had any mainstream following. But there is a difference: Forget the fact that he is a pathetic opportunist who switched from financial analysis to immigrant bashing simply because the latter generated more ratings than the former. He positions himself as a anti-globalization nativist, and would find more sympathizers in the loony left rather than the loony right. Tancerdo etc are thinly disguised white-supremacists / nativists and their natural base is the far far right Ku Klux Klan nuts.

In any case, there is nothing special about this election which teaches us to ignore the idiots. Most americans are distinctly uncomfortable with the rants of these guys and therefore Lou dobbs would always remain irrelevant. The world moves not because Lou says it does.. it moves regardless.

Pelosi's first year as House speaker marked by little change on war (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/12/23/MNOUU26C5.DTL&tsp=1) By Zachary Coile | SF Chronicle, Dec 23, 2007

The last day of the House's 2007 session last week summed up the turbulence of Nancy Pelosi's history-making first year as House speaker.

In the morning, she beamed a wide smile as she stood beside President Bush while he signed an energy bill with the first major increase in fuel economy standards in 30 years.

But by Wednesday afternoon, her party was facing two of its biggest defeats. To keep the alternative minimum tax from hitting 20 million Americans next year, Democrats had to abandon their pledge not to pass any legislation that increased the deficit.

Then Pelosi, whose party took control of Congress pledging to change course in Iraq, watched the House approve $70 billion in war funding, part of a budget deal that avoided a government shutdown. Members of her own party denounced it as a capitulation to the White House.

"The war in Iraq is the biggest disappointment for us, the inability to stop the war," Pelosi told reporters in a group interview in her ceremonial office just hours before the war vote. She quickly pegged the blame on congressional Republicans.

The Democrats' failure to shift the war's direction, their No. 1 priority for the year, has eclipsed many of the party's successes on other issues, including raising the minimum wage for the first time in a decade and passing the strongest ethics and lobbying reforms since Watergate.

And Bush, despite his lame-duck status, outflanked Democrats in the end-of-year budget fight - forcing them to accept his number, $555 billion in domestic spending, and funding for Iraq - simply by refusing to yield.

Asked about the setbacks last week, Pelosi, as she has all year, flashed her most optimistic smile and refused to be drawn into the criticism.

"Almost everything we've done has been historic," she said.

But if Pelosi is smiling, so are Republicans. They began the year defeated and demoralized. But they have since shown surprising unity, backing the president on the war and finding new purpose in blocking Democrats' spending initiatives.

"We've stood up to them every step of the way," House Minority Leader John Boehner, R-Ohio, said last week.

The tense mood among Democrats in the session's final weeks was a marked contrast from the festive first weeks of the new Congress, when Pelosi was sworn in as the nation's first female speaker, surrounded by children on the House floor. She promised to lead Congress in a new direction.

Democrats took off on a legislative sprint in which they quickly approved their "Six for '06" agenda including raising the minimum wage, cutting interest rates on student loans, backing federally funded embryonic stem cell research, and revoking tax breaks for oil companies.

But the bills bogged down in the Senate, where the Democrats' 51-49 majority is so thin it allowed Republicans to determine what would be passed. Democrats have struggled to get the 60 votes needed to overcome filibusters, which are now an almost daily experience in the Senate.

"Pelosi suffered the same ailment that (former Republican House Speaker) Newt Gingrich suffered from when he became speaker: Senate-itis," said Norman Ornstein, a congressional scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. "A lot of what the House accomplished this year either sat in the Senate or got eviscerated by the Senate. What you are left with is not nearly as robust as what you started with."

Even the energy bill, the Democrats' crowning achievement, was stripped of a broad tax package and a renewable electricity standard that would have pushed the nation toward wind and solar power. Still, the fuel economy piece alone is expected to save 2.3 million barrels of oil a day by 2020 - more than the United States currently imports from the Persian Gulf.

Pelosi had to make some painful trade-offs. To get the minimum wage hike signed, Democrats had to attach it to a $120 billion war spending bill.

Other elements of her agenda fell victim to Bush's veto pen. Congress twice passed a bill with bipartisan support to expand the state children's health insurance program to cover 4 million more children. Bush twice vetoed it, forcing Democrats to settle for an 18-month extension of the current program.

Pelosi and her Senate counterpart, Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., held countless votes on war measures setting timetables for the withdrawal of U.S. troops and other restrictions on Bush's policy. But their strategy counted on Republicans switching sides - and very few did.

"I didn't foresee that," Pelosi acknowledged. "We thought they would reflect the wishes and views of their constituents."

Some critics called the assumption naive. Anti-war groups have urged her to use Congress' power of the purse to simply cut off funds for the war, but Pelosi opposes the move, which many Democrats fear would be seen as undermining the troops. Instead the party has pushed for a "responsible redeployment" - meaning funding the war, but with strings attached.

In October, Pelosi's ally and the House's top appropriator, David Obey, D-Wis., said Democrats would draw a line in the sand: They would refuse to pass any more war funding without a timeline for withdrawal. But by last week, with the budget impasse threatening to shut down the government, Democrats dropped the strategy.

Rep. Lynn Woolsey, D-Petaluma, a founding member of the Out of Iraq Caucus, said the Democrats' mistake was not to force the threat to deny funds earlier in the year.

"I wish she could have been bolder," Woolsey said, while acknowledging that Pelosi had to mediate between competing views in the caucus. "If we had started that earlier, we could have built on it until it reached a crescendo, because it's what the American people want."

The Democrats were left in a weak bargaining position at the end of the year. They needed to pass 11 spending bills, but Republicans and Bush demanded the $70 billion for the war in return. The president also held firm on his spending limits. If the impasse led to a government shutdown, Pelosi knew her party would receive much of the blame. So she agreed to the deal, with the concession that Democrats were able to preserve money for their priorities, including home heating aid for the poor and health care for veterans.

"We made it very clear months ago we were not going to shut down the government," said Rep. George Miller, D-Martinez, one of Pelosi's top lieutenants. "Tragically, that put the president in the driver's seat."

Miller said the fight over the war has obscured the progress Democrats made on other fronts, including cutting interest rates on loans for college students and passing a huge increase in veterans' benefits. He said Pelosi worked tirelessly to get the energy bill over the finish line.

"At the beginning of the year, people said we had no chance of getting an energy bill," Miller said. "This was a tour de force for her."

Pelosi also showed she was willing to buck some of her party's most powerful members to get her way. She went head-to-head with Rep. John Dingell, D-Mich., Detroit automakers' top ally, over raising fuel economy standards - and won. She pushed through an ethics reform bill that her friend Rep. John Murtha, D-Pa., called "total crap."

"Some of her colleagues when they took back Congress said, 'That reform message worked to get us elected, but now it's our turn.' " Ornstein said. "That has not been her attitude and her approach, and I give her credit for that."

Pelosi had clumsy moments, too. She pushed hard for a resolution denouncing Turkey's mass killings of Armenians during World War I as genocide, only to reverse course when it sparked a diplomatic fight, with Turkey threatening to reduce logistical support to U.S. troops in Iraq.

Republicans say she has reneged on a promise to run a more open House. Following a pattern set by the GOP when it ran the House for 12 years, Democrats have often rammed bills through, giving Republicans few opportunities to amend them.

"It's hard to work together when you're not even invited into the room," said Rep. Kay Granger, R-Texas.

But Pelosi's supporters say Republicans haven't been willing to compromise and have mostly tried to block Democrats from racking up accomplishments.

"The Republicans have frustrated us because they want to run a negative campaign saying the Democrats didn't accomplish anything," said Rep. Henry Waxman, D-Los Angeles.

The bickering in Congress, over the war and other issues, has taken a toll. When Democrats took power, Congress had an approval rating of 35 percent, but it's since dipped into the low 20s, according to the Gallup poll.

Pelosi is already crafting a strategy for next year, when the presidential race is likely to take some of the spotlight off Congress. With the war debate at an impasse, she's planning to push a series of measures on health care, the economy, the mortgage crisis and global warming.

If Democrats can't win on these issues, at the very least they can draw sharp distinctions with Republicans leading up to the fall elections, she said.

"One of the reasons we were able to be successful with the energy bill is that this is something we took to the American people," she said. "That is what we have to do next. We have to go public with many of these issues."

I was recently riding with a friend of mine.
We were coming to a red light, and he shoots right through it. I ask him, "Why'd you do that?" He tells me this is how his brother drives.

We come to another red light, and again, he shoots right through it. I ask him, "Why'd you do that?" Again, he tells me this is how his brother drives.

We come to a green light, and he SLAMS on the brakes. My heart nearly goes into my throat. I shouted at him, "Why'd You Do That?!"

He replied, "You never know, my brother could be coming the other way."

That is my point, being an employee you are not fully working for your company growth. Then don't talk about a consultant is illegal when he don't get paid.

If it is really illegal why are they renew H1 when they can know that somebody is not paid for couple of months. All they want is money, you keep paying, you are safe and legal here.

Your point being? If you think what I am saying is wrong, argue your case please... Case and point: The abusers prevent some honest people from getting a chance. We should all be infuriated by that.

That's exactly what I was wondering about! Did anybody get a rejection letter from *DOL* advising them to apply in EB3 instead? It's hard for me to believe DOL was ever that helpful!

And if they did not hear it from DOL and did this on their attorney's/employer's advise sending out this letter may spell trouble for the sender. You are basically sending out a signed letter stating that you tried to get labor approved for one category, failed and then applied in a lower category for exactly same job to work your way around the rejection. I'm not sure on how solid legal ground we will be if this be the case. Job requirements are supposed to be what they are and not what is "approvable". Remember recent Fragomen audit?

Now before labeling this as yet another FUD from EB2 please understand that I'm not saying that you should or shouldn't send out the letter. Just that we should consult someone qualified in immigration law to make sure we are not inviting more troubles than what we are already in.

pani,

This is what you have in the draft letter.

"Let me take you back to the situation in 2001-2003 when a lot of current (EB3) applicants were qualified under EB2 and RIR category(many of whom had masters degrees from Top US universities) our green card labors applications were sent back from DOL saying that the economy was slow and hence cant apply in EB-2. So we were forced to apply in EB3 NON- RIR categories, but when the economy improved in 04-05 you introduced the PERM system and most people applied in EB2 and got their Labors cleared in few months time while the folks who applied in 2001-2004 were stuck at the backlog centers for 3 plus years."

Do you have any evidence/reference to back this up?

If you don't got the greencard, good luck for that. Please don't discuss any religious things here. It make others furious. Concentrate on your carrer and family. Belief in God is enough. Organised Religion will give misery only. Man made the religion. God didn't created it.


you have serious language comprehension issues.. I used bastards on palestinians not jews in a post where i was defending palestinians, so i was being sarcastic
and in the other post you refer to, i was criticizing jews, cristians and muslims for taking the end of time scenarios too seriously and applying it now.. no ones knows we are the the end of times anyway.. and even if that in some way offends you, that doesn't make name-calling all egyptians any less racist

genuine firms like microsoft are unable to hire h1b people because ..guess what? all the h1 quota is over..here in new jersey, I was approached multiple times by people who said if I get anyone to file an h1 in their company, and if the h1 came through..I would get 1000 U.S.D. I asked them..what should be their qualification, they said..dont worry about qualification, they'd give a free course for QC tester and place them. So I wont be surprised if big fortune 500 companies are also behind this bill.

Israel is fully justified in responding to the rocket attacks from Gaza. How long can they show restraint by not responding to the unprovoked attacks. Do you think US will remain silent, if Canada were to lob rockets into US. Asbolutely not. Every country has the right to protect itself.
Hamas is such a coward orgn that they hide behind school, mosque, hospitals to shoot their rockets, so they really are luring israel to bomb those areas. Unfortunately innocents die...the blame should be on hamas. In fact, before bombing Israel even goes to the extent of calling and texting people in the target area to warn them before bombing. which country at war you know does that. Inspite of all these the biased media portrays Israel as the evil one. time to think. if only india shows some courage like that.

Oh really? Thats how they bombed the school and killed more than 40 kids?

When terrorists attacked Mumbai, Indian commandos took 3 days to rescue hostages and kill terrorits.
When terrorists entered school in Baslan, Russia, Russian commandos took their time to respond in order to minimize the casualty and rescued most of the children and killed all those terrorist.

Do you think same thing happend in Palestinian school? There are certain rules that has to be followed during war. Rules of engagement. Not to kill innocent civilian, not to kill kids, not to bomb place of worship, hospitals etc. Do you think these are followed anywhere in anywhere while killing muslims?

If Israel want to kill terrorist, they have every right to kill those terrorist who kill Isrealis. Instead they are bombing kids. Which is not acceptable by any people or any nation.

May I ask, why you agree with PD porting and not labor substitution... Was it because you were affected in later case?
Let us face it , we all are selfish. And if our self interest match then we are an organization.
here is another point:
i think its a childish and selfish idea...i agree labor substitution was absolute nonsense...but not PD porting!

its ok, you misunderstood my point. I dont want to divert OP of this thread.

Anyways the fact of the matter is that we are in a limbo, all indications point to Obama becoming the next president of US. if CIR 2008 was any indication , we as EB applicants are royally screwed if Sen Durbin dictates his immigration policy. What is the use of talking about wars and innocent people when chances are that the advocate of his immigration policy is opposed to my main issue of EB reform. high low Taxes, 401k's, houses, Medicare etc will matter if you get to stay here in the first place. A average 6-9 years of paying taxes, supporting medicare and Social Security and we now need to think about moving to different countries where skilled immigrants are welcome....think about it. Just look at the CIR 2008 discussion to understand what i am talking about. Read the senators transcripts.



Ramayan was an epic written long time ago. It is a story(like stories in bibble). Creationism evolved just to oppose evolution theory and cause confusion to the evolution theory. They say it is based on science, when it is not. BTW evolution is also a fact, it is not just theory.

Spending on needless wars are not helping economy. With this economy there is little chance for GC. If everybody wants tax cut, who will pay the debt. Keep borrowing? Some one has to pay the interest at the least..
Clinton balanced the budget, while taxing the rich. McCain is for the 'trickle down economy' which we now see what it really is(DOW down 800 points). Obama is for tax cut for the average guys and not for the 'trickle down economy' scam.

Another muslim hater who justify organized crime and killing and support the killing of innocent school kids and civilians.

Hiding behind civilians and schools and mosques???? 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?
Refugee Now,

I believe the thinking needs to be done by the moderate muslims like yourself all over the world. Do you agree that Hamas is a terrorist outfit? Do you agree that no good can come with them as the decision makers in Palestine? Do you agree that by NOT re electing Mahmoud Abbas and the Fatah party, the people gave mandate to a outfit (Hamas) that was seeking the end of the ceasefire with Israel?

How comel you stand quite when the terrorists all over the world most of them who cite Islam or the defense of Islam as a reason to cause havoc and terror? It is clear you can have a strong voice when protesting the tragedies like in Gaza, how come the same voice is missing when the perpetrators are Islamic like in the case of Mumbai?

I whole heartedly join you in bemoaning the human loss in this conflict and pray for peace.

Some paras from Slowing Down The Revolving Door (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/03/04/AR2007030401201.html)

A House committee has approved legislation that would lengthen employment restrictions for federal procurement officials who take certain jobs when they leave government, from one year to two years. It also would prohibit newly hired procurement officials from awarding contracts to their former employers for two years.

Tightening employment restrictions will bring more accountability to government, contends Rep. Henry A. Waxman (D-Calif.), chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee. Recent lobbying and procurement scandals are proof that something needs to be done, he points out.

Congress has been trying to regulate the revolving door -- the rotation of federal officials and business executives into and out of government -- since at least 1872, according to the Congressional Research Service.

Over the decades, Congress has sought to protect the government from former employees who took sensitive information with them and used it to promote the interests of a private party. Congress also has devised rules to discourage federal employees from cashing in on their inside knowledge or becoming snarled in conflicts of interest with companies doing business with the government.

Guys,

Looks like we may see some action from India within hours now. The war clouds have been gathering ever since the Mumbai attacks. But now the signs of an imminent war are unmistakable.

Apparently India had given pak a deadline of one month to hand over the perpetrators of this attack. The deadline expires on December 26th.

Both India and pak have canceled the leaves of their military personnel.

People in border villages of Rajasthan are evacuating.

CNN has been reporting that paki troops are on the move.

If my hunch in right, something big will happen in next 24 hours.

You there, Beemar? ;)

India is not going to attack in your and my life. India has never invaded any country in it's history, (i don't know if it's peace loving or lack of balls), but several invaded, defeated, ruled and looted India. Just being big (1 billion) does not mean anything, you need the guts to avenge/attack, look at Israel, Vietnam if you need examples. Why can few tigers attack the hurd of dozens of dears/buffalos/cows and make them run ?

India could not even fix LTTE, forget Pak.

Hello,

Though housing market may still have room to fall and not rise again for next decade or so, there are some factors to consider in 2009 that could tilt the decision in favor of buying a house:

1. Location - If you are not in bad markets like CA, NY, FL but in more stable ones like TX, you should evaluate
2. Taxes - If you've AGI above 300k, buying house is one of the few options left to reduce your tax bill
3. Affordability - If your monthly mortgage, interest and maintenance payments are comparable to current rent amount (as taxes are adjusted during tax filing) and affordable even when you move out of US, buying house should be an option
4. Price - If you are looking at localities where prices are close to 1995-2000 levels and the particular property has held the value steady, then buying the house could be an option

Just my 2 cents... :)

A guy in a bar was talking about how he always watched his wedding video backwards.

When asked why, he replied:

"Coz I love the end bit where she takes the ring off her finger, goes back down the aisle, and jumps in the car and disappears..."

Too Good.......I could not control

Is IV core planning to get in touch with Compete america to find what they
think about this bill and what is their plan of action?

>> First off, a house is really both an investment and a home.

If you look at the historical rate of appreciation vs. the risks involved - I think you will come to the same conclusion as I did - that it is a lousy investment in mature markets like US.


Correct.
Infact experts call an invest a good investment if
#1 Returns are good
#2 Expenses are low

Investment in house does not meet any of these.. Returns historically are only slightly better than rate of inflation (forget the bubble years) and expenses which include property taxes and maintenance costs are too much to call it a good investment. And then you pay interest on the borrowed money.

Hi Macaca,

Thanks for all info about lobbying. The concept is good for changing laws based on public opinions but i think it's misused to pass the laws from businesses who have money. Like these big oil and automobile companies.. huh..

Thanks,
Kris

Does anyone know that the closing has to be before November 30th in order to get this 8K tax benefit?

My advice don't buy just for the 8k tax benefit. The reatlors main weapon is this 8k tax credit now. In NJ/NY it is less than the property tax u r paying for one year. In other places with less house prices it may be good.

�Can�t Be Done�

Gibbons, 70, says he learned that lesson when he tried to raise 4 million pounds ($6.2 million) from two wealthy London- based nonresident Indian investors in November 2006.

Talks failed because of differences over expectations for returns on equity and other contract terms, he says.

�That�s what made me think this just can�t be done,� he says.

Indian microlenders differ from Yunus�s Grameen Bank in key ways. To protect depositors� money after bankruptcies among nonbanking financial companies in the early 1990s, India�s Reserve Bank in 1997 made it more difficult for them to meet the requirements needed to take deposits from the public. Only 36 microlenders are registered as nonbank financial companies, according to information supplied by the Reserve Bank.

�I Feel So Sad�

Indian microlenders themselves borrow from banks at 13 percent or more on average and extend credit to the poor. They charge interest rates that can rise to 36 percent, says Alok Prasad, chief executive officer of the Microfinance Institutions Network, which represents 44 microlenders. He says all 44 firms are registered with the Reserve Bank.

SKS Microfinance gets funds at about 12 percent interest and lends at 24.52 percent in Andhra Pradesh, spokesman Atul Takle says.

In Bangladesh, Grameen Bank got a banking license in 1983, which allowed it to take deposits. It charges 5 percent for education loans and 8 percent for housing loans. Beggars can borrow for free, and interest on major loans is capped at 20 percent, Yunus says.

�Microfinance has been abused and distorted,� he says. �I feel so sad because that�s not the microcredit I have created.�

Indian microfinance has roots in decades-old informal community financing.

Nongovernmental organizations pioneered cooperative lending, known today as self-help groups, with seed money from the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development. Encouraged by these projects, the state-backed bank worked to tie borrowing groups to local bank branches in 1992.

For-Profit Companies

Nonprofit organizations subsequently got involved as middlemen between the banks and the borrowers. By 2005, nonprofits such as SKS and Share Microfin had turned themselves into profit-making enterprises.

Akula�s SKS attracted investors such as Khosla Ventures, Sun Microsystems Inc. co-founder Vinod Khosla�s venture capital firm.

Capital flowed into the new industry from commercial banks, venture firms and private equity.

Sequoia Capital, in Menlo Park, California, and Bangalore- based Infosys Technologies Ltd. Chairman N.R. Narayana Murthy were among the backers. George Soros�s Quantum Fund has a 0.37 percent stake in SKS.

Private-equity investors alone have put $515 million into Indian microfinance companies since 2006, research service Venture Intelligence says.

�Explosive Growth�

More than half of the 66 Indian microlenders tracked by Micro-Credit Ratings are for-profit firms. Some 260 microlenders had 26.7 million borrowers and 183.44 billion rupees of loans outstanding as of March, according to the Microfinance India State of the Sector Report 2010.

�Over the last two years, we�ve been seeing explosive growth,� says N. Srinivasan, who wrote the report. �Microfinance institutions found that it�s easy to make money. Not that making money is bad, but when you go overboard and say you require money for growth, you get into problems.�

Polelpaka Pula, a mother of two, says she saw microlenders rushing into her village of Pegadapalli to compete for business -- with tragic results.

Her husband, Prakash, a painter who made 250 rupees on a good day, first borrowed from a group of villagers to build a house. Each participant of the so-called chit fund contributed 1,000 rupees a month and took a turn collecting the entire sum.

Microfinance officers from L&T Finance Ltd., Spandana Sphoorty Financial Ltd., Share Microfin and SKS began offering loans in the village starting in 2004, she says.

The couple, already contributing to their village fund, took five more loans totaling 64,000 rupees. That saddled them with payments of 7,300 rupees a month, more than Prakash�s 5,000 rupee maximum monthly income.

Loan Shark

When Prakash ran out of microlenders to borrow from, he went to a village loan shark, who charged 100 percent interest.

With no way out and debt from multiple lenders ballooning, Prakash hanged himself in November 2009, his wife says.

The small house he�d dreamed of was never completed. Only the foundation stands next to the home of his parents, a tiny structure with a roof of palm leaves.

Spandana says that neither of the couple�s names is in its database. The company says the media wrongly attribute harassment cases to microfinance, especially when Spandana is mentioned.

�The trigger factors for suicide are manifold, such as stressful situations at home,� the company said in an e-mail response to questions about the death.

Subprime Parallel

SKS spokesman Takle says its staff has practiced responsible lending for the past 12 years. Its employees are not paid based on the loan size or repayment percentage.

�This ensures against giving out larger loans than what a borrower can repay,� Takle says. A spokesman for L&T Finance declined to comment.

Overlending in Andhra Pradesh calls to mind the U.S. subprime crisis, says Lakshmi Shyam-Sunder, director of corporate risk at International Finance Corp. in Washington, which invests in microlenders.

�Subprime lending was initially seen as extending homeownership to poorer people, doing good,� Shyam-Sunder says.

As the industry expanded, making a profit became more important to some lenders, she says. �Tension arises when you work on activities with both social goals as well as commercial interests,� she says, adding that it�s important to strike the right balance.

Companies chasing profits amid poor corporate governance are undermining the intent of microfinance, Cashpor�s Gibbons says.

�Lending Gone Wild�

During the past five years, the number of microloans in India has soared an average of 88 percent a year and borrower accounts have climbed 62 percent annually, giving India the world�s largest microfinance industry, Micro-Credit Ratings says.

�This is unrestrained consumer lending gone wild,� Gibbons says. �It�s not about poverty reduction anymore.�

Sumir Chadha, managing director at Sequoia Capital India Advisors Pvt., says that without a profit motive it�s hard to find anyone who will lend to the poor.

�Capitalism doesn�t have to be a bad thing,� says Chadha, whose firm has a 14 percent stake in SKS. �If you can�t profit off the poor, it means that no companies will service the poor -- and then they will be worse off than earlier.�

Chand Bee�s Tale

For Chand Bee, a 50-year-old who led three borrowing groups in Andhra Pradesh, too many loans almost became her undoing.

She says she ran away from home after collectors began harassing her. She took out multiple loans beginning in 2005, and she names Spandana as one of the lenders.

Some of the money paid for the funeral of her eldest son. When she fell behind on payments, she says loan officers threatened to humiliate her in front of neighbors and pressed her to sell her small grandchildren into prostitution.

She left her slum in Warangal, where she lived with her deaf husband, some of her eight grown children and more than a dozen grandchildren.

After living as a beggar for a year, Chand Bee returned home in early November when family members told her that the state ordinance that went into effect on Oct. 15 had suspended some collections. A Spandana spokeswoman says none of the company�s four customers in the district with the name Chand Bee has had trouble repaying.

Almost every household in the slum of 250 people -- where barefoot children play in lanes between rows of dilapidated shacks -- has taken several loans. So many microlenders ply their trade that residents refer to them by the days they collect: Monday company, Tuesday company and so on.

Debt Free

Rabbani, a widow with four children, is one of the few women who are debt-free. She started a spice shop with two loans, which she repaid with her small profit. After seeing her neighbors� pains, she vowed never to seek another microloan.

SKS says 17 of its clients have committed suicide, none because of loans being in arrears or harassment.

�Suicide is a complex issue,� Akula says.

Sitting in the second-floor conference room of SKS�s seven- story headquarters in Hyderabad, where posters of smiling women running handicraft and tailor shops decorate the doors of elevators, Akula says there�s nothing wrong with seeking profits.

�What does it matter to a poor woman how much an investor makes?� says Akula, dressed in his trademark knee-length kurta shirt from Fabindia, a seller of ethnic clothes made by rural craftsmen. �What matters to her is that she gets a loan on time at a reasonable rate that allows her to earn higher income.�