Homeless people, mostly. Some will indeed be addicts, though I've been told many of them prefer Oregon. Many will have mental illnesses. Basically, if you can't manage to keep a roof over your head, a place like California is where you want to be.
2016 US Presidential Elections | Trump Wins
- Thread starter Raoul
- Start date
- Status
Homeless people, mostly. Some will indeed be addicts, though I've been told many of them prefer Oregon. Many will have mental illnesses. Basically, if you can't manage to keep a roof over your head, a place like California is where you want to be.
Nevada has been putting their mentally ill homeless people on buses and sending them to CA. State-sanctioned and very wrong.
From Twitter:
2016: "No way will they vote for Donald Trump"
2017: "No way will President Trump fire the nuclear bombs"
2018: "No way am I doing what that ape tells me"
2016: "No way will they vote for Donald Trump"
2017: "No way will President Trump fire the nuclear bombs"
2018: "No way am I doing what that ape tells me"
Hey, the desert gets cold at night and the casino bosses are tired of them loitering.
'Give me your poor, your huddled masses, yearning to breathe.....'
What are the Californians beefing about? It's one border-less country after all. California liberals oppose the exclusion of illegal Mexican immigrants, but object to American citizens legally entering their own State? When that shoe begins to pinch your own foot, it's a son of a bitch, isn't it?
Yeah, right, it´s a borderless country. Ever tried to cross the border? I didn´t think so.
Sanders is beginning to sound like Glastonspur. "When we started no one gave us a chance, we were a fringe campaign but we've proved everyone wrong by coming second" is like Glaston saying We targeted the Top 4 and we very nearly won the league by coming second.
First they had problems with super delegates and by saying how they can't decide the race, now they want the super delegates the decide the race for them. Initially, it was all unconstitutional and against the will of the people, but now Sanders wants super delegates to ignore the popular vote (more than 3 fecking million) and vote for him as he's the stronger candidate. Well, you can't have the cake and eat it too.
I think Sanders is a good guy, ran a great platform and will leave a very distinct mark in the reformation of the Dem Party, but he's starting to sound like a sore loser (and has been for some time)
First they had problems with super delegates and by saying how they can't decide the race, now they want the super delegates the decide the race for them. Initially, it was all unconstitutional and against the will of the people, but now Sanders wants super delegates to ignore the popular vote (more than 3 fecking million) and vote for him as he's the stronger candidate. Well, you can't have the cake and eat it too.
I think Sanders is a good guy, ran a great platform and will leave a very distinct mark in the reformation of the Dem Party, but he's starting to sound like a sore loser (and has been for some time)
I meant that America has no internal borders. I wouldn't claim to be an expert on liberalism, but, regardless of whether their movement is facilitated by another State or not, objecting to a fellow American entering your State on the grounds that he's poor, doesn't sound very liberal to me.
I meant that America has no internal borders. I wouldn't claim to be an expert on liberalism, but, regardless of whether their movement is facilitated by another State or not, objecting to a fellow American entering your State on the grounds that he's poor, doesn't sound very liberal to me.
The objection is putting mentally ill folks on a bus t ship them out somewhere else.
I meant that America has no internal borders. I wouldn't claim to be an expert on liberalism, but, regardless of whether their movement is facilitated by another State or not, objecting to a fellow American entering your State on the grounds that he's poor, doesn't sound very liberal to me.
United States insists on giving a lot of power to the states instead of a federal government, so of course there are borders. I paid 2.49 dollars per gallon this morning while the guy in NJ about 20 miles away from me paid 1.56 USD.
I reckon California's objection is to Nevada sending people who will likely need the state to care for them their way. Would be the same if they were homeless, penniless, mentally ill, or all three. Basically, any people that might prove to be a drain on the state budget.
I meant that America has no internal borders. I wouldn't claim to be an expert on liberalism, but, regardless of whether their movement is facilitated by another State or not, objecting to a fellow American entering your State on the grounds that he's poor, doesn't sound very liberal to me.
They don't, but a lot of power is devolved to the states themselves. As such, any residents who can't contribute to society aren't exactly welcomed in any state but every state would be happy to send these people somewhere else.
America is one country, divided into States. Any American citizen has the right of unrestricted movement within the boundaries of the US.
If one state is dumping their mentally ill to another, it's not unrestricted movement, it's forced evacuation.
If these people are actually mentally ill, and herded onto buses without their consent, that is certainly objectionable (and, presumably, illegal). But if, in fact, most of them are merely poor and homeless, and a State official approaches them and says: 'Hey folks, there's transport available on the corner of ****, ready to take you free of charge to sunny California, where you won't freeze your asses off sleeping rough at night' that's a different matter. It hinges on the issue of choice.
See my above post.
Third, did you miss the hilarity when they somehow managed to finish behind Arsenal?
Shit is going to hit the fan in the coming days. I hope.
I'd have to check the latest estimates on the number of homeless in California, but my best guess is that we have about 125,000 to 150,000 homeless persons in California. If I'm right about that then that's about 0.03% of the total state's population of 39,000,000.
150,000 is still a large number but in relative terms it's a fairly small number.
But if your point is simply that if you're homeless you want to go to California, I couldn't agree with you more. Life on the beach in Venice or Redondo is awesome. Even hanging out in Golden Gate Park is sweet. Even Skid Row or the Tenderloin isn't all that bad. That is, considering the alternative of living in Oklahoma, Kentucky or Minnesota.
Ah ok, so that's it. I just thought it was a funny thing to hear. We stayed in, listened to baseball on the radio and drank beer
When it's 105F it's best to stay indoors.
That is one way to look at it. Another way would be to say that California's 130k homeless account for almost 21% of the homeless population across the country. Compare that to the next most populous state (Texas) that has 19k homeless - and the numbers are a bit more worrisome.
All that said - I would still choose Venice Beach if I was homeless.
So you support dumping mentally handicapped citizens like refuse? Why am I not surprised.
Here's the scoop just so you know what we're talking about.
http://www.sfexaminer.com/sf-reaches-400k-settlement-proposal-in-nevada-patient-dumping-case/
Funny thing is the most visible GOP leaders have slammed him on his recent words and still support him.
And still had the gall to say they should vote Trump to keep Hillary out. These political parties have no boundaries.
No, I don't. As you'd know if you read the thread.
There's a difference between a single hospital dumping its mentally ill patients across the border, as per your quoted story, and the state of Nevada shipping homeless people to California, as stated in your original post. California has a long history of obstructing the entry of poor people from other states, see The Grapes of Wrath.
Funny thing is the most visible GOP leaders have slammed him on his recent words and still support him.
They are shit scared of him, and more of what would happen to the party if they pulled their support. They are clinging on the hope of winning this election due to the importance of the upcoming term with regards to Supreme Court positions etc.
Oh, I know, believe me. It shows the greed of power, white privilege, status quo, capitalism, wealthy elite, etc. that has infected the GOP (DNC has it's share of the infectious).
Yeah, I agree. Personally, I think, in the long term at least, it would be a lot better if they came out against him now, and all pulled their support and cited all the racist, misogynistic and offensive shit he has said, and all the moronic policies he has come up with. Just being honest about how he is a laughing stock around the world and an embarrassment, and how he has upset many world leaders etc. I think it would show some honesty amongst them and it would at least show that they are not as stupid as he is making them look at the moment.
Sam Bee looking back at the primaries
''Because black people are allowed to vote''
Funny thing is the most visible GOP leaders have slammed him on his recent words and still support him.
Funny thing it is. Just when you think that his latest eruption must surely finally bring him down, Republicans rally around him in even bigger numbers. Slam McCain for being such a massive fool as to get captured by the Viet Cong, Trump's numbers go up. Slam a judge for being a "Mexican", Trump's numbers go up. Reports of rape and torture some, no doubt his numbers go up. Tax evasion, not a problem. Trump U scam, he's a marketing genius!
Well, Trump's numbers have gone up with Republicans. We shall see whether his numbers go up with other Americans.
The homeless have no good reason to go to Texas. It's hot and miserable there for about 8 months a year and there's hardly anywhere great to hang out. Maybe in Austin or some of the beach areas, but their beaches are hell compared to our beaches. There's no denying that CA is something of a homeless magnet, but it's also the entertainment, tech and agricultural capitals of the world.
I just voted Bernie.
Are you lot watching CNN? I may be mistaken, but one guy is arguing that Donald Trump's statement against the judge is not racist, but it underlines the problem of race/racism when a judge who strongly identifies himself as Latino is going after Trump on a problem that doesn't concern him and that white men are subjected to racism now.
Jeffrey Lord is the guy who apparently called out Paul Ryan that he's a racist.
That was surreal. Axelrod, Smerconish and even the Republican lady just couldn't believe what he was saying.
- Status