Debate Digest: Teacher-student friendships on Facebook, Law school, Balanced budget amendment, US debt ceiling deal.

From Debatepedia

Parent debate(s)

• Debate:NAFTA, pro.
• Debate:Free trade, pro.

Argument summary

While free trade can cause lay offs, its general effect on middle-income workers is to increase their purchasing power, enabling them to live better lives. Almost all economic models demonstrate that free trade causes a general reduction in the price of goods available to all participating countries and citizens. This means that a middle income worker in the United States can pay less for the goods that he or she purchase from, for example, Wal-Mart. This allows that middle-income worker to spend less on daily goods, save money, and improve their standard of living.

Supporting evidence

• "Wal-Mart and Woods’s Law". Christopher Westley, LewRockwell.com. August 28, 2006 - This article argues that Wal-Mart, a company that exploits free trade and NAFTA more than almost any other company, is bringing the benefits of such free trade agreements to poor and middle income workers through lower prices.