Shipping illegal immigrants to "Sanctury cities" and other left wing elitest havens? Yes or no?

Wrong. Evidently you have done "NO RESEARCH" on the subject.

AMERICA’S TOP 10 RICHEST FAMILIES

1. 1. Walton– Republican — The family owns the Walmart corporation. The Walton family fortune is estimated to be about $130 billion.
   2. Koch– Republican — Businessmen, owners of Koch Industries, a manufacturing company. Koch brothers have a net worth of about $41 billion each ($82 billion together).
   3. Mars– Republican — Own the Mars candy company. The three children of founder Forrest Mars are worth about $78 billion together.
   4. Cargill-MacMillan– Republican — The Cargill-MacMillan family owns 90 percent of the largest privately-owned corporation in the U.S. The family, as a whole, is worth about $49 billion.
   5. Cox– Democrat — The Cox family owns a number of auto consumer sites and services (Kelley Blue Book, AutoTrader.com, etc.). They have an estimated net worth of $41 billion.
   6. Johnson (S.C. Johnson)– Republican — The Johnson family is known for their cleaning products and hygiene products. They are valued at $30 billion.
   7. Pritzker– Both — Founders of Hyatt. The family has a combined value of $29 billion in 2017.
   8. Johnson (Fidelity)– Republican — Overseers at Fidelity, ensuring the cash of millions of Americans. The family has a combined net worth of $28.5 billion.
   9. Hearst– Republican — The Hearst family owns one of America’s largest media companies. The family is valued at $28 billion.
   10. Duncan– Republican — The Duncan family works mostly with oil and pipelines. The family is valued at about $21.5 billion.

Income. Democrats versus Republicans

Financially, Republicans fare better than either Democrats or Independents, and tend to identify themselves as such. Republican candidates gain a significantly higher percentage of votes from individuals with incomes over $50,000 per year, and the advantage increases along with the income level, to a height of 63 percent of individuals earning $200,000 or more a year supporting Republicans. This level is the direct inverse of individuals earning less than $15,000 a year, who support Democrats at 63 percent and Republicans at only 36 percent.

Republicans also express a much higher level of satisfaction with their personal financial situation than either Democrats or Independents. Before the U.S. economy’s downturn, an all-time high of 81 percent of Republicans expressed satisfaction with their personal financial situation

 

I said the ones I know. I don't know any of these people, I was directly commenting on the liberals in MV, unlike liberals I am not the least bit envious of income, except the immigrants who come and collect and wave the flags of shithole countries they left.

 

I am siding with common sense, while you seem to side with the populist republican party by using silly lines like "so much pain just for these poor people". What is that supposed to mean? What pain are they experiencing by being in Cape Cod as opposed to MV? Your post is a classic appeal to emotion, but it comes across fake, and done purely for partisan reasons.

Can you at least try to explain why you think they would have been better off on the island of MV as opposed to 10 miles away in Cape Cod?

You talk about "uniting" and yet you insist that every issue must have a "left" and "right" side, where every disagreement with the republican party must be labeled "left". People who do not have such partisan mindset see this whole MV stunt as a childish play by DeSantis, but its telling that you bend over backwards to justify it out of party loyalty.

IMO, their applications should be reviewed and rejected so they can be sent back, but these kinds of stunts are beyond idiotic.

As for open immigration, - its more of a libertarian POV than 'left'. Libertarians would literally open the border.

 

Ultra rich typically vote Republican because they know they have more to gain from Republicans than Dems. Likewise, poor people vote Dems for the same reason. Some things are just common sense.

 

LP clearly is pro freedom of movement which I agree on but for non criminals, as far as welfare
from their platform
Retirement planning is the responsibility of the individual, not the government. Libertarians would phase out the current government-sponsored Social Security system and transition to a private voluntary system. The proper and most effective source of help for the poor is the voluntary efforts of private groups and individuals. We believe members of society will become even more charitable and civil society will be strengthened as government reduces its activity in this realm.

I 100% agree with the welfare part

I think citizenship is precious but when I see people disrespecting those who have helped them it does piss me off

https://www.libertarianism.org/columns/libertarian-perspective-modern-american-welfare-state

 

401K is a private voluntary system, but the problem is that it was designed to be goldmine for the financial institutions (which it is), and while it works for many retirement saves, it is not working for most since median 401K balance at 60 is $82,297, which is nowhere close to being enough. So libertarians say its their problem if people run out of money, but it really becomes everyone's problem when people retire living and dying on the sidewalks. Its an example why pure libertarianism will never work. Some countries have a systems where a part of people paycheck it deducted (like SS), and it placed on a private account, which can be used when retirement age it reached, and that system provides retirees with about 70% of their salary assuming they worked full career. That sounds like a good compromise.

 

Some people will never learn, I do not want nor think we can save all. SS is a waste

 

I resent the governor using Florida funds to help Texas ship refugees away from their own yard. Texas should pay for this.

 

Its a waste which I have been funding all my career, and its a part of my retirement plan. Its not "government money", its my money. IMO, the system I described earlier is better, while you seem to think we should not be in business of saving citizens, meaning its acceptable to have people die on sidewalks.

 

I read DeSantis spent $615 000 of taxpayer money for this.

 

$12,000/person. I could have flown them there for about $500/person and pocketed the rest…. Oh, wait….

 

Since, for reasons that I have NEVER understood, we are forbidden keep them from getting in here in the first place, and, we are required to provide them with various kinds of "services" and other welfare handouts (probably forever), then, YEAH, we ought to round every damned one of them up, put them on special trains, and send every fugging one of them to the hyperliberal, 'woke' "sanctuary cities" located throughout the United States!

 

They might have to look into this, because it reeks of embezzlement. How can it cost $615K to fly 50 folks to NE?

Florida pays $615K to aviation company as part of migrant relocation program
About 50 Venezuelan migrants that landed in Martha's Vineyard were told they were going to Boston and they would have a job and housing, the AP reported.
https://www.wtsp.com/article/news/r...mpany/67-1d00e6d7-27e7-4fd5-b415-465fd70a1cf8
ST. PETERSBURG, Fla. — Records show the state of Florida recently paid $615,000 to an Oregon-based aviation company as part of what the DeSantis administration calls a state "relocation program to transport illegal immigrants to sanctuary destinations."

The payment to Vertol Systems Company Inc. was completed on Thursday, Sept. 8, according to the government site — just six days before two planes carrying migrants arrived at Martha's Vineyard at Gov. Ron DeSantis' direction

 

You don't understand it because you have believed a lie. If you had thought about it critically for even few minutes you would have spotted the obvious issue with the claim.

 

And now Razorfist... https://www.bitchute.com/video/dgQbp5Isyjc/

 

What? You mean the lib-fiction about how ALL these claims for 'asylum' are somehow both legitimate AND legally applied-for? What NONSENSE!

And weren't you the one who rejected the reports of thousands of illegals poised to barge into the U. S. this year? I can go back to last spring and retrieve your posts if you have trouble remembering them.

Right now we're clocking them in here at the rate of ~5,000 per day on our southern border! Is THAT convincing enough? And they just keep swarming in like a plague of rodents!

 

And now on Steve Turley
https://www.bitchute.com/video/tsVIBJr7E28/

 

And now on Vee https://www.bitchute.com/video/ZHUVbFDdkOc/

I wonder how much Mass Gov. spent to have the military take the 50 nation rapists out of M.V.?

 

Don't change the subject. You said we are forbidden from keeping them from getting here, which is total nonsense, and you bought it.

Yes, why don't you do that. You celebrated a "caravan" of magnitude never seen before in South Mexico, and then to your great disappointment it disappeared like a fart in Sahara.

Ah, so you have the apprehension numbers. See, if you had spend few minutes in critical thinking, you would have seen the contradiction between the claim of being forbidden to apprehend them, and the fact that we are apprehending them in numbers greater than ever before.

 

Well the federal government needs to do their job. If they refuse because it isn't their problem it needs to be made into their problem.

You can think it's childish but it's what must be done in order to make the government be the government.

 

right they are elitists and deserve to be free from such human scum right that's for you to deal with because you aren't as good as they are.

They want these people in you neighborhood because you don't matter.

It's not our problem we can't solve it we are shipping a problem they caused to them. And watching their hypocrisy is hilarious.

So giving Trump credit? I'm cool with that I hope it spreads to more states and Martha's vineyard is permanently destroyed.