Correctly or not, Americans perceptions of free trade has declined in recent years. Specifically, popular opinion has brought into question the effectiveness of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) as a policy that improves the welfare of Americans, namely through decreased prices and additional choices for consumers. The common arguments against this 1994 deal usually focus on the quantity and quality of domestic jobs. With the lack of tariffs and other trade barriers, NAFTA has allowed some domestic producers to shift production and labor to Mexico, where the factors of production are notably cheaper. Consequently, there are fewer jobs in the United States in overlapping industries, with the enduring jobs offered at lower wages due to Mexican competition. Additionally, safety and environmental concerns are voiced by critics of the agreement, noting Mexico’s more lax laws in these areas. Essentially, the dissenting view holds that assisting developing economies hurts domestic industry and the well-being of the average American.
As it stands, popular opinion has shifted away from supporting trade since the Great Recession. A…show more content… Mexican immigrants make up the largest slice of the pie that the United States accepts, a number that is tied to the consequences NAFTA has had on both the Mexican and American economies (Zong and Batalova 2016). A study conducted by the Center of Economic and Policy Research found that fewer trade barriers have put small farm Mexicans out of work, increasing emigration to the United States (Weisbrot, Lefebvre and Sammut 2014). The extent to which this newfound immigration has impacted the economy is debated, but there is significant evidence that immigration positively contributes to labor, productivity, and consumption (Zong and Batalova 2016, 26). This is especially noteworthy when considering how Mexican immigrants are growing more and more skilled (Zúñiga and Molina
