I dont know how that article can be used to justify the lofty claims of NAFTA, it sounds more like a snivelling apology after all the lofty claims.
The article only allows a modest net plus for the economy occured not counting the 4 million jobs lost (due to China not NAFTA so they claim). 'After 15yrs illegal immigration skyrocketed' which basically tells the story regarding Mexico who had theoretically the most to gain from NAFTA. Imagine having one of the richest countries in the world next door but not being able to make a living despite free-trade.
What does the article say about winners? Agricultural export from US tripled which is not surprising since NAFTA ended the livelihood of 1 million corn farmers in Mexico. Walmart expanded in Mexico and exports in electronics, industrial machinery, chemicals and instruments south climbed but export of lumber/furniture dropped no doubt due to the diminishing Mexican middle class.
Free trade does not benefit poor countries at the expense of the rich countries, what happens is that the elites from both rich and poor countries rip off the poor. See my previous post above.
