[Toddsterpatriot]

In the rural regions, the wage is lower. So what do you think about paying workers $2 an hour with no benefits in bad working conditions?

If the prevailing wage is $1 an hour, I think most people would take a job for $2 an hour. If the prevailing wage was $3 an hour, most people would not.

Do you consider that humane?

More humane than starvation. Do you agree?

So assuming those who agree with you stay in charge, Mexico will certainly go the route of the rest of central America.

Who is in charge that agrees with me?

You are reluctant to answer the question. But that is an answer as well.

If we send the illegals back and seal the border with there be a revolution in Mexico? Maybe. Would it be worse than it is now? Maybe. It might also get better.

Should we allow millions of illegals in to prevent a revolution, or at least a major change in their system? I don't think so.

[mysterio]

If the prevailing wage is $1 an hour, I think most people would take a job for $2 an hour. If the prevailing wage was $3 an hour, most people would not.

They don't have a choice. It's either accept the slave wage, starve, or sneak into America to work illegally. They WILL eventually choose revolt, however, and it will be left wing.

More humane than starvation. Do you agree?

No. There is no excuse for using slave labor.

Who is in charge that agrees with me?

Bush, and Clinton before him.

If we send the illegals back and seal the border with there be a revolution in Mexico? Maybe. Would it be worse than it is now? Maybe. It might also get better.

Is Cuba "better?" Is Venezuela "better?"

Should we allow millions of illegals in to prevent a revolution, or at least a major change in their system? I don't think so.

No. We should pay a humane wage at our factories in Mexico like you, Bill Clinton, and the rest of the NAFTA proponents predicted would happen.