according research in Washington DC, Mexico increased

according to the center of economic and policy research in Washington DC, the growth of GDP per capita in Mexico from 1994 until 2016 has increased by only 28.7 percent, cumulatively, with annual rate of just 1.2 percent. Therefore, it turned to be less in contrast with other regional countries in Latin America like Panama, Peru, Chile with (4.0 , 3.2, 3.0) percent annual growth respectively, in the same period of time.
              The same study shows that Mexico’s growth ranks 15th of 20 countries in the GDP index. Those numbers are a clear indicator of the poor performance of Mexico since the implementation of NAFTA comparing to countries that are not part of that agreement.
Another important fact we need to mention is Mexico’s growth rate in contrast with the rest of region since NAFTA, comparing to the one before it . According to the center of economic and policy research in Washington DC, Mexico increased twice its income per capita from 1960 to 1980, which was higher than that in it’s Latin American counterparts as a whole. Interestingly, if that growth had continued to increase, Mexico would be a high income nation today. 
             The regional growth of GDP per capita has declined from 87 percent in 1960-1980 to only 9 percent from the period from 1980 to 2000, in other words, 0.9 annually. Mexico’s share in that decline was from 97 percent GDP growth per capita to just 13 percent. In the period from 2000 to 2016,  the regional GDP growth per capita was 1.5 percent annually, with 0.8 percent growth rate for Mexico, according to Feenstra, Inklaar, and Timmer (2015) and IMF (2016). 
            Another study done Laura Carlsen, the director of the Americas program at the center for international policy, Shows the negative impact of NAFTA on Mexico’s economy. According to her, American financial aid or what is called subsidy aiming to supporting US corn and others main produces, has damaged the Mexican farmer market by dumping it with subsidized corp making the pieces to drop and farmer’s livings significantly insufficient . As a result, around million have been forced to leave their farms to survive, and prices has increased making people’s life very difficult. In fact, 20 million Mexicans live in food poverty, and 25 percent of the population can not afford stable food not speaking of the 25 precent of children suffering from malnutrition. Another important  negative outcome of NAFTA is the dramatic increase in the number of  Mexican migrants to the United States, with a rate of half a million annually following NAFTA. According to Laura Carlsen, NAFTA jeopardized farmers when multinational corporations controlled their lands that supported there families for decades. moreover, the significant increase in poverty level created a very fertilized ground to criminals to flourish and threatens the social and economic environment.  
           Another study was done by National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM) affirms that Mexico has not achieved their goals within NAFTA in terms of decreasing the poverty level in the country, with 55.1 percent poverty rate in 2014 and 52.4 percent rate in 1994. It is also useful to compare the performance of Mexico in decreasing the poverty level with the ones in the regional countries. The UN economic Commission on Latin America (ECLAC) assures that the poverty level in Mexico dropped a little from 45.1 percent in 1994 to 41.2 percent in 2014, yet poverty in the region including 19 countries declined significantly from 46 percent to 25 percent at the same period of time.
           Another important outcome of NAFTA is connecting the US economy with Mexico’s economy, making the latter vulnerable to economic fluctuations and crisis.
With more than the two third of Mexico’s exports go to the United states and when the US Federal Reserve’s rose the US monetary policy rate in 1994, the peso crisis occurred  causing a lose in the GDP of Mexico by 9.5 percent.
              Another example of the result of integrating the economy of the US and Mexico is the recession that happened in Mexico following by the one that took place in the US first in 2000 caused by the stock market issues and then in 2006-07 as a consequence of the biggest asset bubble issue in the world history. In that recession, Mexico has suffered more than any country in Latin America due to what expert refer as the negative influences of the US economy on it with a decline in Real GDP of 6.7 percent from 2008 to 2009.
              A Mexican manufacturing employment rate following NAFTA  was expected to rise but in fact it did not reach the hoped level for a couple of reasons. Reasons for that were firstly, producing products assembled from imported parts and components, which led to adding small values and little job creation. The biggest case happens in maquiladora plants which are owned by American or multinational companies, where imports inputs occupy about tree quarters of the value of their export.
           Secondly, Mexico losses the surplus it gains from trading with US to the deficit in goods trade with Asia (about $55 billion with China), and $25 billion deficit with Europe. As a result Mexico did not improve a lot in terms of increasing employment rates from its overall trade.
Lastly, the industrial growth rate was slow and China’s entering to the US market as a tough competitor have impacted the employment growth of the manufacturing sector negatively.     
 Interestingly, Mexico is a better market for the US than China, despite the deficit in trade between Mexico and the US in favor of Mexico, due to the surplus in US import to Mexico comparing with the one to China.
          The forecasts of rising US jobs within NAFTA, as a result of increasing export to Mexico, was overestimated and turned out to be proven wrong.  NAFTA proponents,  claimed that opening Mexico to free trade and unregulated foreign investment would increase job growth and raise incomes needed to create a stay-at-home middle class. There was an effort in the early 1980s by a group of U.S.-educated economists and businesspeople who took over the ruling Partido Revolucionario Institutional (PRI) in order to build a privatized, deregulated and globalized Mexican economy. Among their objectives was tearing up the old corporatist social contract in which the benefits of growth were shared with workers, farmers and small-business people through an elaborate set of institutions connected to the PRI. 
          NAFTA on the other hand provided no social contract. It offered neither aid for Mexico nor labor, health or environmental standards. The agreement only protected corporate investors and everyone else was on his own. NAFTA’s critics knew that it would stimulate more trade; that was, after all, its function. Instead , what happened was that all the benefits that came with new trade went largely to the rich while the middle class and the poor would payed the costs, and the promised growth did not materialize. Although NAFTA is not the cause of all Mexico’s economic troubles, it has clearly made them worse. Since NAFTA’s inception in 1994 the Mexican middle class has shrunk and the number of poor has expanded. Economic growth was below the old corporatist economy’s performance and substantially less than what is needed to generate jobs for Mexico’s growing labor force. 
             The North American Free Trade Agreement was meant to integrate the economies of the United States, Canada and Mexico by breaking down trade barriers among them, creating jobs and closing the wage gap between the U.S. and Mexico. What in fact happened under NAFTA was that heavily subsidized U.S. corn flooded the Mexican market, putting millions of farmers out of work. Multinational corporations opened up factories creating low-wage jobs at the expense of organized labor and the environment. This, in turn, drove waves of migration north.Mexico has benefited less than its neighbors to the north. During NAFTA, Mexico has had the slowest rate of economic growth than with any other previous economic strategy since the 1930s. From 1994 to 2013, Mexico’s gross domestic product per capita has grown at a paltry rate of 0.89 percent per year. Additionally, During NAFTA, Mexico’s economy grew much slower than almost every Latin American country. NAFTA has boosted trade and investment, but has not translated it into meaningful growth that generates jobs. One of the problems it has generated is basically an exporting economy for transnational corporations, and not for the Mexican industry.