5. In an analysis of globalization, two sociologists write: Not surprisingly, business people and their political allies respond to attempts to raise the floor under the lowest-paid workers with claims that increasing the minimum wage will inevitably augment inflationary pres- sures and job losses can cause grave damage to global competitiveness. To combat these arguments, proponents of a "living wage" make the simple point that anyone working full time should earn enough to support a family at least at the poverty line. (Hytrek and Zentgraf 2008, 153-54)

Does the argument in the second paragraph,"combat" the argu-ment in the first paragraph? Can a scholar ever ignore the argu-ments made by the opposing side in a debate?