|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
 Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 3:24 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| SleeplessInHannamdong wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
At Hagwons all E2s must comply. F4s are at the discretion of the employer. |
Right, so this is what I was talking about. Two Canadians with identical backgrounds applying for identical jobs. The sole difference between them is that one has Korean blood. The government demands to know whether the one without Korean blood has AIDS or takes drugs, and forces them to take relevant medical tests to prove it. It does not require those with Korean bloodlines to do the same.
I would be interested to hear the logical justification for this.
| Steelrails wrote: |
| In other fields besides English drug testing and CBCs are at the discretion of the employer. This means that many foreign workers do not get tested for drugs. |
| Steelrails wrote: |
| But the Korea racism crowd seems to think this is about race, but if it were about race how come ALL foreigners are not tested, just teachers? |
I am not concerned with the government discriminating on things like job type, nationality, or income level. There are logical reasons for doing so. I'm concerned with the government discriminating based on race.
There is a difference between a Korean national and an American: they have different nationalities. So policies in Korea that treat Americans and Korean nationals differently are unquestionably justifiable. The problem is when Korean law discriminates between, say, a Korean-American and an African-American. The sole difference is race.
It is, by definition, racial discrimination, for which I struggle to think of any reasonable justification. Whether intentional or merely unfortunate, it is what it is. I find its continued existence rather distasteful, and I hope the discrepancy is eliminated. I could be convinced otherwise, of course, by a sound, logical argument. |
The policy discriminates amongst Korean-Americans as well. Those that do not have registry here or are of 3rd-generation, are, to my understanding, not allowed to attain F4 visas as well. The government does not assume that all F4s will be teachers. If an F4 chooses to become a hagwon teacher then any policy regarding their background checks is up to their employer, not the government. The Korean government does not require Korean-Americans to renounce their F4 visa status and become E2s in order to become a Hagwon teacher. I do not believe that that is unreasonable.
It should be also noted that foreign teachers under different visa status', say those married to Koreans, are also exempt from these tests. Again, its not about race, its about a variety of other factors. I believe short-term C3 visas are exempt from screenings and they be there to do a brief teaching workshop. D2 visas are the student visas, and I may be wrong, but they are allowed to do a minimum of private tutoring and they are not screened.
In fact you could have an Irish-Canadian married to a Korean on an F-visa teaching at a hagwon not having to undergo these tests while a Korean-Canadian on an E-2 would.
Hope that clears things up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
geldedgoat
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 3:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| The policy discriminates amongst Korean-Americans as well. Those that do not have registry here or are of 3rd-generation, are, to my understanding, not allowed to attain F4 visas as well. |
So in addition to discriminating against those with with no Korean ancestry whatsoever, the policy is also discriminating against those whom the government deems to be not Korean enough and/or cannot provide proof to be Korean enough. How does this help your argument?
| Quote: |
| The Korean government does not require Korean-Americans to renounce their F4 visa status and become E2s in order to become a Hagwon teacher. I do not believe that that is unreasonable. |
You don't find it unreasonable that the government requires one foreign national to undergo extensive testing and background checks but not another based on no other reason than a difference in government-approved familial relations?
| Quote: |
| The government does not assume that all F4s will be teachers. If an F4 chooses to become a hagwon teacher then any policy regarding their background checks is up to their employer, not the government. |
You actually have a fair point here, though it doesn't do anything to defend the government's racist policy.
I can accept that it is unreasonable to subject all F4 visa holders to the battery of medical tests and background checks because some may not come here for the purpose of teaching. I can also accept that it is not unreasonable to subject a prospective teacher to those tests. So why not have the tests tied directly to employment rather than visa status? That makes much more sense, and alleviates the problem of racism.
| Quote: |
| Hope that clears things up. |
Hope that clears things up. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 5:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| So in addition to discriminating against those with with no Korean ancestry whatsoever, the policy is also discriminating against those whom the government deems to be not Korean enough and/or cannot provide proof to be Korean enough. How does this help your argument? |
It discriminates based on residency & Citizenship, not on race. The offspring of the few non-Korean Korean citizens out there would be able to get F4s as well if they lived in the U.S.
The spouse visa discriminates on the basis of marrige. "Hey I'm not married to a Korean but this person who is married to a Korean gets to do this and that..." Come on...
This is approaching the level of whining that things are discriminatory because someone is rich and someone is not. At some point we have to understand that in the real life discrimination is unavoidable and that no two people are going to get an equal shake. I mean what's next complaining that the ugly are discriminated against vs. the beautiful? (Which seems to happen just as much in the ESL field)
| Quote: |
| You don't find it unreasonable that the government requires one foreign national to undergo extensive testing and background checks but not another based on no other reason than a difference in government-approved familial relations? |
There is a big differene- Emplyment and purpose of visa. E2s are here specifically teach. Aside from the Professor visa, is there a visa out there specifically for teaching?
F4 is a general visa.
And no its not unreasonable. Immigrants have to file 50 papers no matter where you go. That's life. If it was unreasonable then you shouldn't have signed the contract.
| Quote: |
| So why not have the tests tied directly to employment rather than visa status? That makes much more sense, and alleviates the problem of racism. |
In the case of public schools it is tied to employment. F4s and E2s go through the same checks.
I am in favor of expanding visa checks to F4s at hagwons (can't trust those Cali Gyopos  ) but just because they aren't currently like that does not mean that the policy is steeped in virulent racism. Maybe its just a simple screen to make sure that the blatantly criminal are kept out. It's not perfect, but what system is? I mean its easy to sit here and talk about how things should be, but when you yourself are held accountable to voters/bosses for the policy decisions you make you get the bureacratic mindset.
I think it balances because many people who are qualified to teach English are denied jobs while many E2s who have a particular appearance are preferred. For the Gyopos they can either whine and complain or market themselves better. For the E2s they can either whine or complain or go do that hours worth of paperwork and the hour trip to the hospital.
I have little sympathy for the gyopos that whine about getting passed over- hey write a better resume or find a different job at a different company. I made my selling point very clear and I was very conscious of some of the superficial perceptions that go on here. But if I didn't want to deal with it I'd stay home and deal with different problems there. Life is the way it is, deal with it, work for change by example, and be patient. It doesn't have to all change in your lifetime, what's important is that things are done in the best way for future generations, not the fastest way for my time.
Again I reiterate my support for the drug test in the sense that if you can't get clean for 30 days, you shouldn't be teaching. It's a great way to weed out the riff raff.
I also think that E2s who work here should be able to work at multiple hagwons/schools and switch schools (and thus have their visa status covered by multiple firms who are aware of each other sponsoring the person via documentation) but only have to take one drug/health test. On the other hand F4s already residing in the country should have to be tested by each employer since those employers would not be aware of the other. This 'discriminates' against F4s, but I consider it reasonable. The E2 tests would be government certified whereas the F4s tests are certified by some private testing company contracted by the hagwon, thus in order to meet their liability standards, each hagwon has to conduct a test of those F4s currently residing.
Now the F4s under my plan could get a government certified test and bypass individual firm tests upon entry. This would discriminate based on residency between F4s. Tough noogies.
Is this method perfect? No. Is there 'discrimination'? Yes. Is it more efficient and more safe-guarding than the current system? Yes, I believe so.
Also to be considered is that if you embarass the company it ends with you. With some of those F4s it may not just end with them. Is that unfair to F4s? Yes. That's life, those are the choices you make. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeonmunka
Joined: 05 Oct 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 6:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
I like to think that soju and dope is all pretty much bad for you (soju for its bad affect, pot for it's smoke inhilation) so deny all. Whether or not soju is legal is not the point nor the issue - you've got to do what's right for you.
However, if pot came legally, like soju, and in little capsules that needn't be carcinogenic I would like that.
| Quote: |
| I made my selling point very clear and I was very conscious of some of the superficial perceptions that go on here. |
Mo matter where you are or who you are life throws curve balls and difficulties for us all. Even the rich can have very terrible times. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 4:31 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| geldedgoat wrote: |
[q
YouSo why not have the tests tied directly to employment rather than visa status? That makes much more sense, and alleviates the problem of racism.
. |
Except there is no problem of racism in this regard. There are teachers of Korean ancestry here teaching on an E-2 visa (because they couldn't get the F-4 for some reason or another). They had to go through the same checks as the rest of the E-2's
There are also Western teachers married to Koreans and who are here on a F-2 or F-5. They don't have go through the checks.
It's a visa thing and nothing to do with racism. Get an F-2 and it won't matter what your skin color is or who your ancestors were with regards to the extra checks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
geldedgoat
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 6:58 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| It discriminates based on residency & Citizenship, not on race. |
No, it most definitely discriminates based on race. John Smith, a native-born Canadian citizen residing in Canada, is forced to apply for an E-2 visa and undergo extensive testing in the process. John Park, also a native-born Canadian citizen residing in Canada, can apply for an F-series visa and avoid extensive testing. What is the difference? Not their residency. Not their citizenship. The only difference is their race.
| Quote: |
| The offspring of the few non-Korean Korean citizens out there would be able to get F4s as well if they lived in the U.S. |
These people, along with those non-Koreans married to Koreans, are the exception, not the rule. For them, the best you can say is that the discrimination they benefit from is cultural. Even then, though, the government attitude towards them suggests that they are 'Korean enough' and thus not a risk to the society. So I will grant that not all of the discrimination is race-based; a very, very small percentage of it is merely cultural.
| Quote: |
| The spouse visa discriminates on the basis of marrige. |
Wrong, as explained above.
| Quote: |
| At some point we have to understand that in the real life discrimination is unavoidable and that no two people are going to get an equal shake. |
Of course it's unavoidable, and I accept that. When I go back home to the southern US, I, more often than not, find myself on the favorable side of race-based discrimination. However, you should accept that just because it's unavoidable, does not mean it should be beyond criticism.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| So why not have the tests tied directly to employment rather than visa status? That makes much more sense, and alleviates the problem of racism. |
| Quote: |
| In the case of public schools it is tied to employment. F4s and E2s go through the same checks. |
|
Will you please stop using public schools to defend hagwons? Yes, I know, public schools have their own set of restrictions beyond those imposed by immigration that requires everyone, Korean, gyopo, and foreigner alike, to submit to similar tests. However, at hagwons (maybe universities too?) it is a much different situation, so it's very disingenuous of you to cherry-pick the laws governing public schools and apply them to all E-2 and F-series visa holders.
| Quote: |
| I am in favor of expanding visa checks to F4s at hagwons (can't trust those Cali Gyopos ) but just because they aren't currently like that does not mean that the policy is steeped in virulent racism. |
That alone, perhaps not. Maybe it's just unintentional racism. However, when combined with intentionally misrepresented statistics as a basis for increased restrictions on only one group of applicants, it's very clear that the policy actually is 'virulently racist.'
| Quote: |
| Maybe its just a simple screen to make sure that the blatantly criminal are kept out. It's not perfect, but what system is? I mean its easy to sit here and talk about how things should be, but when you yourself are held accountable to voters/bosses for the policy decisions you make you get the bureacratic mindset. |
So because the law-makers must, in order to maintain their political positions, fabricate a scapegoat in response to sudden national interest in a situation, we must ignore their inane, racist comments and policy suggestions? Really?
| Quote: |
| Again I reiterate my support for the drug test in the sense that if you can't get clean for 30 days, you shouldn't be teaching. |
Great. That's not the issue, though.
| Quote: |
| Also to be considered is that if you embarass the company it ends with you. With some of those F4s it may not just end with them. Is that unfair to F4s? Yes. That's life, those are the choices you make. |
Is it government-mandated embarrassment? No? Then it's entirely tangential. The different societal hardships foreigners and gyopos face would make an interesting discussion. However, it has nothing at all to do with the issue of government-mandated racism.
Last edited by geldedgoat on Wed Jul 14, 2010 7:50 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
geldedgoat
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 7:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| Except there is no problem of racism in this regard. There are teachers of Korean ancestry here teaching on an E-2 visa (because they couldn't get the F-4 for some reason or another). They had to go through the same checks as the rest of the E-2's |
As I already said, these are simply individuals who were unable, for one reason or another, to prove they are 'Korean enough.'
| Quote: |
| Get an F-2 and it won't matter what your skin color is or who your ancestors were with regards to the extra checks. |
No, it will just matter who the ancestors of your spouse were. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 8:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| These people, along with those non-Koreans married to Koreans, are the exception, not the rule. For them, the best you can say is that the discrimination they benefit from is cultural. Even then, though, the government attitude towards them suggests that they are 'Korean enough' and thus not a risk to the society. So I will grant that not all of the discrimination is race-based; a very, very small percentage of it is merely cultural. |
They are the exception because of numbers.
No, its residential and citizenship based.
All nations discriminate based on residency and citizenship. I'm not allowed to vote in Korea, nor should I be allowed to be. That doesn't mean its a racist policy.
| Quote: |
| No, it most definitely discriminates based on race. John Smith, a native-born Canadian citizen residing in Canada, is forced to apply for an E-2 visa and undergo extensive testing in the process. John Park, also a native-born Canadian citizen residing in Canada, can apply for an F-series visa and avoid extensive testing. What is the difference? Not their residency. Not their citizenship. The only difference is their race. |
John Park Jr. native-born Canadian citizen is forced to apply for an E-2 visa and undergo 'extensive' testing in the process.
John Smith Jr. in Canada, son of John Smith immigrant citizen of Korea, can apply for an F4 series visa and avoid extensive testing. What's the difference? The citizenship and residency of their parent.
| Quote: |
| However, at hagwons it is a much different situation, so it's beyond ridiculous for you to continue to compare the two as if they're synonymous. |
The 'racism' there is up to the Hagwon, not the government. Take it up with individual Hagwon owners who choose not to have the same requirements.
Woe is me. I had to go to the hospital here for an hour and the police station back home for 5 minutes.
That is not extensive testing. If you think that is extensive, you have no idea what extensive is. It's called bureaucracy, get used to it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 8:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
[q
All nations discriminate based on residency and citizenship. I'm not allowed to vote in Korea, nor should I be allowed to be. That doesn't mean its a racist policy.
John Park Jr. native-born Canadian citizen is forced to apply for an E-2 visa and undergo 'extensive' testing in the process.
John Smith Jr. in Canada, son of John Smith immigrant citizen of Korea, can apply for an F4 series visa and avoid extensive testing. What's the difference? The citizenship and residency of their parent.
. |
This^
Citizenship is different from a work visa
A RESIDENCE visa is different from a work visa.
The tests are linked to the visa, not the skin color. If it were the other way around it would be racism. What we have here is discrimination (at best) against those on a E-2 visa. But it's not racism as if it were, ALL foreigners (not just teachers) would have to get the checks as well.
It is COMPLETELY due to what visa you are on. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
geldedgoat
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 10:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| They are the exception because of numbers. |
I'm hanging on to this for this next part...
| Quote: |
| John Smith Jr. in Canada, son of John Smith immigrant citizen of Korea, can apply for an F4 series visa and avoid extensive testing. What's the difference? The citizenship and residency of their parent. |
Yes, his visa status is dependent upon his parents. Not John's citizeship. Not John's residence. His ancestry is what's important. And where do you think race is derived from? Now, yes, AGAIN, someone with no 'Korean blood' may end up with one of these visas. However, they are an immense exception. This special visa status was not made for the naturalized son of a Canadian emmigrated from Korea whose father was a naturalized Canadian-Korean. It was made for children of Korean-Koreans.
I know what you're going to say: "You're just making baseless assumptions! You can't be certain of the Korean government's ulterior, racist motives!" Ordinarily, that would be right. However, as has been said so many my brain is in danger of hemorrhaging, the reasons given us for the government picking on E-2 visa holders reveal a significant amount about their intentions, a salient point that you have avoided like the plague (not to mention the stupid **** they've said and done in the past).
| Quote: |
| The 'racism' there is up to the Hagwon, not the government. Take it up with individual Hagwon owners who choose not to have the same requirements. |
The hagwons do not demand anyone undergo testing. The hagwons cannot choose not to force an E-2 visa holder to undergo testing. It's entirely up to the government. The government has established the selective regulations, so the government is to blame.
| Quote: |
| Woe is me. I had to go to the hospital here for an hour and the police station back home for 5 minutes. |
Am I complaining about giving multiple vials of blood, carrying several uncovered, paper cups filled with my own urine, and spending upwards of $100, two months of my time, and hours in the car to receive a certified, notarized, and apostilled copy of my criminal background check every time I change schools? I could, but I have yet to do so in this thread. The word 'extensive' here simply means that the tests consist of many different steps and checks, which they most certainly do.
Oh yeah, and there's the poor souls who don't have the luxury of a visa history that extends beyond the inception of 2007's (I can't remember if this is the correct year) increased visa requirements and have to interview for their E-2.
| Quote: |
| That is not extensive testing. |
We either live in very different worlds or use very different dictionaries. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 11:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| geldedgoat wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
| They are the exception because of numbers. |
I'm hanging on to this for this next part...
| Quote: |
| John Smith Jr. in Canada, son of John Smith immigrant citizen of Korea, can apply for an F4 series visa and avoid extensive testing. What's the difference? The citizenship and residency of their parent. |
Yes, his visa status is dependent upon his parents. Not John's citizeship. Not John's residence. His ancestry is what's important. And where do you think race is derived from? Now, yes, AGAIN, someone with no 'Korean blood' may end up with one of these visas. However, they are an immense exception. . |
Since there are lots of foreign wives here (not to mention foreign husbands) the exception isn't that immense.
And let us not forget all the other visas Korea issues.
E-2 visas are only a TINY amount of the overall number of visas issued by Korea. Yet they are the only ones to undergo these checks (with the possible exception of "entertainment workers"). All the other foreigners get a pass (tourists, DDD workers, foreign wives, professors....) So once again how is taking a TINY percentage of the foreigners who come here and making them undergo checks racist?
Simply not seeing it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
geldedgoat
Joined: 05 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 14, 2010 11:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TheUrbanMyth wrote: |
| And let us not forget all the other visas Korea issues. |
Why should we consider the visas Korea issues that have nothing at all to do with teaching? The new regulations apply only to teachers, they were proposed as a response to a situation involving a teacher, and their falsely supported intention is to protect Korean children from... teachers. So what relevance do the factory workers, musicians, tourists, etc have to this issue?
| Quote: |
| Since there are lots of foreign wives here (not to mention foreign husbands) the exception isn't that immense. |
You are talking about a completely different visa, operating under its own exceptions (which I mentioned already in a different post). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2010 12:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Yes, his visa status is dependent upon his parents. Not John's citizeship. Not John's residence. His ancestry is what's important. And where do you think race is derived from? Now, yes, AGAIN, someone with no 'Korean blood' may end up with one of these visas. However, they are an immense exception. |
It's not an exception based on rules, its an exception due to numbers.
Korea has not had a high population of immigrants. Therefore the number of F4 visas of non-ethnic Koreans will be low. That is true.
But if you're a Korean citizen and you move overseas and have kids there, no matter what your race, they can get an F4.
Yes they are a very small fraction.
You say the F4 visa is issued based on race. That is false. It is issued based on citizenship.
If there is one black person working at a company and the other 99 employees are white, does that make the company racist? Not if that one black person was the only black person who applied.
You're confusing results with processes.
| Quote: |
| the reasons given us for the government picking on E-2 visa holders reveal a significant amount about their intentions, a salient point that you have avoided like the plague |
Did it ever occur to you that the test is to make you look good, not bad? As in being certified and bonded.
Its sort of like someone with a Medical Degree from Guatemala U. getting a U.S. certification to practice medicine. Is it racist that people from Wahooistan U. have to get certified to practice medicine in the States? Notice that black and brown countries tend not to be on the lists.
Now Dr. Whoever could whine and carry on about being demonized as incompetent or he could look at it as part of a screening process and one that ensures his status as 'professional.'
Do you really think we're demonized and public enemy number 1?
Who do you coteachers, students, and parents worry about more- You/Random Foreigner or the burberry man standing outside the playground?
IF you're so under suspicion how come you're not under surveillance and constantly being told to stay focused and busy? Why do you have free time to come on Dave's or visit Facebook?
If we're such demons why do silly parents send their kids off to be under our supervision and care?
Maybe their view is that yes, there are some bad apples out there trying to get in, but thanks to the tests (not saying this mindset makes sense) whoever is in here is 'safe'. Maybe the tests are there so they don't view you, Mr. Geldedgoat in Korea as a pedophile.
You know what hasn't happened to me or any other NET I know? An offer to sell us drugs or to ask us where to find drugs or selling us kiddie porn or asking us if we want to meet some child.
If we really were seen as these demons that some out there believe we are portrayed as, don't you think those things might happen?
Instead the solicitations we tend to get either involve loot or speaking English or datability.
We get tons of his and kids running up to us. Not kids screaming "Byuntae" and hightailing it and hiding from us.
But go ahead, believe the "they all think we're" scum propaganda. That stuff is the same kind of misinformation that the Korea Times and the AES puts out.
As for the AES' death grip I've written about it on other threads to death. Search under my name for the old topics for my opinions on the subject. I'm not going to rewrite it here.
Suffice to say I think the AES influenced regulations, and I seriously question the influence of the AES on this were actual the conversion of a variety of interests from immigration officials, drug-testing firms, to companies, to hagwons, to teachers unions, to politicians to satisfy a panicked public yet really do nothing.
Anyone who believes government regulations like this are based on morals/racism has no clue as to what drives government/the real world. It's about who gets paid and who gets to look like they're taking action and who gets to keep the money flowing.
I mean there's a thought, maybe we have drug testing because there's some big Korean drug/medical company out there that wants to sell test kits. They want to get all teachers (Korean and otherwise) and all foreigners (including Samsung employees) to do it, but guess what they all have powerful backers and unions and so it gets 'tested out' on NETs and probably 3D workers. If all goes well some case will break 4 years from now where some Korean teacher gets busted for giving dope to a girl to get her in bed and then the K teachers will all have more tests. I'm some newspaper/ TV station with ties to the drug-testing company will whip the story up.
Korea's a country of white envelopes and corporations and investment. They don't have time to deal with a 'moral' (racists have morals, bad ones, but they are morally driven) issue like racism.
EDIT- well they do, but not enough to get in the way of $$$ flowing.
Last edited by Steelrails on Thu Jul 15, 2010 7:19 am; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NYC_Gal
Joined: 08 Dec 2009
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2010 1:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jeonmunka wrote: |
I like to think that soju and dope is all pretty much bad for you (soju for its bad affect, pot for it's smoke inhilation) so deny all. Whether or not soju is legal is not the point nor the issue - you've got to do what's right for you.
However, if pot came legally, like soju, and in little capsules that needn't be carcinogenic I would like that.
| Quote: |
| I made my selling point very clear and I was very conscious of some of the superficial perceptions that go on here. |
Mo matter where you are or who you are life throws curve balls and difficulties for us all. Even the rich can have very terrible times. |
You can use a vaporizer or bake with it. Smoking isn't the only option. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
PatrickGHBusan
Joined: 24 Jun 2008
Location: Busan (1997-2008) Canada 2008 -
|
| Posted: Thu Jul 15, 2010 4:20 am Post subject: |
|
|
The point is that E2 visa holders are foreign teachers who will in large part teach kids.
As the point was made many times...
E2 = foreign worker visa, short term (1 year)
F-visa = RESIDENCY visa not tied to a job.
That is a huge difference. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
