SN ignored the benefit of NAFTA to Mexico’s workers

Dear Editor,
I do not write to defend the American Tea Party, but I was surprised that in your editorial about them, you attacked neo-liberalism and free trade.

NAFTA, in particular, seems like a strange target.  First, I’m surprised because you totally ignore the benefit of NAFTA to Mexico’s workers, as Mexico’s export sector blossomed after NAFTA and provided jobs that paid more than anything in Mexico previously.  Second, I’m surprised that you say NAFTA was disastrous for American workers.  Unemployment in America went from, 6% before NAFTA to 5% in the years after, a slight improvement, if anything.

Maybe you meant that NAFTA was horrible for the manufacturing sector?  But just as a developing economy moves away from agriculture to manufacturing, America took the next step and moved from manufacturing to economic services and Information Technology.  Manufacturing jobs in the US started to decline in 1979, which can hardly be blamed on NAFTA.

Naturally, I do not oppose criticisms of NAFTA or free trade in general, but next time, I’d prefer that you state what the specific ‘horrible’ effects you object to actually are and cite some supporting facts.

Moving on from your editorial, I wish to address free trade in general. I cannot see how anyone can oppose it, since it is simply a question of individual rights.  If a person in Bangalore wants to offer his services to a company in London, they have the right to do so without being told that ‘foreign’ workers can’t do the job.  If a farmer in Guyana wants to sell their produce in Jamaica, they should not face barriers such as quotas, subsidies or tariffs.  The human right to trade with anyone extends beyond borders and it should be enshrined along with all other human rights such as the right to a fair trial or free speech.
Yours faithfully,
Imam Baksh