"Our numbers are always very accurate, so I was surprised at the discrepancy with the government's numbers," says Mayur, whose firm owns the TIPP polling unit, a polling partner for Investors' Business Daily and Christian Science Monitor. After all, the headline number shows the U.S. unemployment rate today is 9.5%, with a total of 14.6 million jobless people.

However, Mayur's polls continued to find much worse figures. The June poll turned up 27.8% of households with at least one member who's unemployed and looking for a job, while the latest poll conducted in the second week of July showed 28.6% in that situation. That translates to an unemployment rate of over 22%, says Mayur, who has started questioning the accuracy of the Labor Department's jobless numbers.

Even Austan Goolsbee Has Been Skeptical

Mayur isn't alone in harboring such doubts, nor is he the first to wonder about inaccuracies. For years, many economists have pointed to evidence that the government data undercounts the unemployed. Economist Helen Ginsburg, co-founder of advocacy group National Jobs For All Coalition, and John Williams of the newsletter Shadow Government Statistics have been questioning these numbers for years. - Daily Finance

It appears to me the US government is covering up the real unempolyment numbers in order to keep quiet the disasterous results of their policies of opening our borders to limitless immigrants and goods. We have lost good paying industrial jobs by the millions, our industrial base is being decimated, and our government is lying about the results.

A Democratic Congress and White House, fully conscious of America’s economic woes, continue to maintain a stranglehold on U.S. trade expansion by their failures to ratify three trade agreements negotiated by the George W. Bush Administration. In the case of the U.S.-Colombia trade agreement, Democrats—bowing to U.S. labor and human rights groups, who seem to ignore progress in Colombia—have held that stranglehold for more than three-and-a-half years.

The amount of trade at stake for the United States in the first full year of the three agreements’ implementation is $2.91 billion, according to the American Farm Bureau Federation—that’s $815 million in exports to Colombia, $195 million to Panama and $1.8 billion to South Korea. The meat and poultry export share of that would $2.3 billion, according to the American Meat Institute (AMI).

Ratification and full implementation of the FTAs would result in the creation of 29,524 new meat and poultry jobs, according to AMI, with the creation of 10,293 jobs for the pork industry, alone, the National Pork Producers Council says.

Failure to ratify the U.S.-Colombia FTA “could cut current U.S. wheat sales to Colombia by more than half because Canada is close to ratifying its own FTA with Colombia,” U.S. Wheat Associates President Alan T. Tracy warned in The Washington Times last year. Tracy served in the Reagan White House as special assistant to the President for agricultural trade and food assistance. - David Alan Coia Human Events

Our industrial strength has been decimated. We a losing highly skilled, high paying jobs so the big agricultural conglomerates can make money hand over fist. Our government is very likely doctoring the statistics to make it look like the economic picture is rosier than it is. So what is this bozo's answer? Let's sign a whole bunch more "free trade agreements". Yet another pundit, a Republican pundit obviously, who is bought and paid for by foreign interests to sell out his country.

Primary elections are on us now. Soon it will be time to vote for federal representatives and senators who will determine our trade policies for the next 2 to 6 years. If you are punching a straight ticket for either party or are ignoring the potential of third party candidates because you don't want to "throw your vote away" (as the Republicrats always like to refer to this) then it's time to rethink what throwing your vote away really is.

Some of the responses I'm hearing on TV about what people should be doing in response to lack of jobs is really alarming to me.

What I'm hearing is how we need to be creative and start new Small Companies or we need to go work for small companies. In my experience, the benefits working at a small company really doesn't compare to working for large companies as far as training opportunities, benefits, retirement, stability etc... And isn't this what we are told we need to do is plan for our retirement? The off-shoring and Visa workers seem to be happening mainly at the Fortune 500 Corporation level. So does this mean the future does not look bright for It jobs at large Corporations in this Country and saving for retirement could be a real challenge?

With everything that is said on TV/Newspapers about the increasing numbers of Illegal Immigrants/Visa Workers/Outsourcing, it seems our Immigration Policies might be very 'relaxed' and there gets to be a point where there just are no more jobs to go around and Americans are left standing with no jobs (unemployment rate). It's hard to compete with Visa workers from other countries who probably get paid on their currency.

From what I've heard, most all other countries are very strict when it comes to allowing in workers from abroad and are very protective of their workers. Does it mean this country doesn't care about their workers anymore, and only care about growing their corporate profits for the very few wealthiest Americans?

Questions to ask, what is the unemployment rate? Where are people's salaries at? I would think Corporations would want to pay decent salaries so people can actually buy their products.

"Free trade is not complicated, yet NAFTA and CAFTA are comprised of thousands of pages of complicated legal jargon. All free trade really needs is two words: Low tariffs. Free trade does not require coordination with another government to benefit citizens here. Just like domestic businesses don't pay taxes, foreign businesses do not pay tariffs, consumers do, in the form of higher prices. If foreign governments want to hurt their own citizens with protectionist tariffs, let them. But let us set a good example here, and show the world an honest example of true free trade. - Ron Paul

Both the Paul’s, along with the rest of the Libertarian traitors hate America. They don't like NAFTA, CAFTA, the rest of the "free trade" treaties, and the WTO, not because they open our markets to foreign government without adequate assurances of reciprocity, but because they do not UNILATERALLY REMOVE ALL TARIFF PROTECTIONS FROM OUR MARKET!

Here's some more Libertarian double-speak from the Communist Chinese loving CATO Institute:

"America's merchandise trade deficit could hit $250 billion in 1998, propelled to a record high by financial turmoil and plunging growth rates in the Far East.

If the past is any guide, the widening trade gap will be reported almost universally as grim news. Critics of free trade will wave the deficit numbers as a rallying call to get tough with "unfair" trading partners.

But are trade deficits necessarily bad for the U.S. economy? The answer is no. Trade deficits are not a sign of unfair trade practices, or a lack of American "competitiveness." Trade deficits are caused by factors in the macroeconomy that are not directly related to trade. - Daniel Griswold

No, the trade deficit with China is a sign of America's strength. Just ask the Communist Chinese.

Neither the Libertarians nor Ron Paul have never supported a tariff! Both were very firmly against Obama's pitiful little tariff on those cheap crappy tires China was dumping on our market to run our few remaining tire manufacturers out of business. Need some help researching where Ron Paul stands on "free trade"? Take a look here

The agenda of the Libertarians seems to be to take us back to slavery. They are constantly preaching that states should secede, vilifying Lincoln, and glorifying the Confederacy. The South didn't like tariffs because they had slaves. Slavery gave them the low labor costs they needed to undercut farmers in every other civilized nation. The North wanted tariffs to protect domestic industries and our ability to protect ourselves. Ron Paul would have us take tariffs off strategically important resources such as steel so that we can't make guns or other weapons unless someone ships us some raw materials to make them from. The lack of industrial might is exactly why the South lost the Civil War.

Ron Paul argued for Most Favored Nation trade status for Communist Red China. Their economy has grown in double digits ever since. We have been losing our industrial capacity and jobs ever since. Clearly protectionist trade policies have not hurt China, but we are supposed to believe those same policies applied to our nation would be the end of us all. It is a ludicrous argument for ludicrous times when our political parties would have you believe your only enemies are your fellow countrymen.

Many have been stampeded to the Libertarians as the only viable 3rd party option. The fact of the matter is, they are far worse than the big 2. In the last presidential election I wrote in Chuck Baldwin of the Constitutional Party for my vote. That was before he started echoing Ron Paul's objections to tariffs on Chinese tire dumping and now I wonder if Chuck has any real idea what he's for or against. The Green Party favors tariffs. I don't care for Ralph Nader's positions on tort law, but without some protections we soon won't have any domestic industries left to sue. The main thing you need to do is vote for your own interests. The only vote thrown away is a vote you feel you have to cast instead of one you want to cast.

We don't need government agreements to have free trade. We merely need to lower or eliminate taxes on the American people, without regard to what other nations do. Remember, tariffs are simply taxes on [foreign made goods bought by American] consumers. Americans have always bought goods from abroad; the only question is how much our government taxes [those of] us [buying that crap] for doing so. As economist Henry Hazlitt explained, tariffs simply protect politically-favored special interests [otherwise known as American industrial producers] at the expense of consumers [formerly known as the employees of American industries], while lowering wages across the economy as a whole. [Hazlitt had a hard time with the notion of supply and demand which explains many of his crackpot economic theories]. Hazlitt, Ludwig von Mises, Friedrich Hayek, Murray Rothbard, and countless other [crackpot] economists have demolished every fallacy concerning tariffs, proving conclusively that unilateral elimination of tariffs benefits the American [surely he meant, Chinese] people. We don't need CAFTA or any other international agreement to reap the economic benefits promised by CAFTA supporters, we only need to change our own harmful economic and tax policies. Let the rest of the world hurt their citizens with tariffs [and those nasty jobs they can't outsource because of tariffs]; if we simply reduce tariffs and taxes at home, we will attract capital and see our economy flourish [just like protectionist Communist China's economy has flourished, with double digit growth for 30 years. Oops, ignore that one, and Japan, ignore them, and Korea and Vietnam, pretty much all those Asian countries, just ignore them]. -- Ron Paul Texas Straight Talk.

It seems I cast aspersions on all Libertarians when only some are to blame. Here is an excerpt from an article on the Lew Rockwell site, Rockwell being perhaps one of the most widely know Libertarians. This does not represent his opinions on "free trade" which are much more like those of Ron Paul:

It seems the American middle class was sold a false bill of goods. They bought the Big Lie that globalization would benefit them. They bought into the delusion that even though their high paying manufacturing jobs sailed away to China and India, they could maintain their lifestyle through brain work, easy credit, cheap goods made in China by the people who took their jobs, and the ever increasing value of their homes. Noam Chomsky notes the fallacy of this delusion:

"The dominant propaganda systems have appropriated the term "globalization" to refer to the specific version of international economic integration that they favor, which privileges the rights of investors and lenders, those of people being incidental."

Again, one must seek out who benefits from the delusion of globalization. The crony capitalists, Wall Street oligarchs, and corporate fascists who control the puppet strings in this country have benefited greatly from the Big Lie. Over 5 million manufacturing jobs have been off-shored since 2000. These good paying jobs are never coming back. Millions of service sector jobs continue to be shipped overseas. The global conglomerates like GE, HP, Oracle, IBM, and Boeing continue to rake in billions of profits, distributing millions to its high paid executives, while gutting middle class America. The ruling oligarchs convinced Americans to take advantage of cheap goods and easy credit, to buy electronics, cars, appliances, new kitchens, and take the vacations of their dreams. This Big Lie has left the American consumer with $2.5 trillion of non-mortgage debt and the lowest level of home equity in history. Retailers like Wal-Mart, Target, Home Depot, and Best Buy reaped billions in profits as Americans whipped out one of their 10 credit cards to buy HDTV';s, economy bags of tube socks, iPads, iPods, stainless steel refrigerators, and Dell computers. Small town America’s mom and pop economy was gutted by Big Box retailers selling the globalization delusion. The biggest beneficiaries of the globalization delusion were the Wall Street banks. They control 80% of credit card market and have reaped billions in interest at rates exceeding 20%, while sucking $20 billion per year in late fees from the clueless public. Wall Street bankers have rewarded themselves for their brilliance in destroying the middle class by reaping multi-million dollar bonus packages. -- Jim Quinn on Lew Rockwell.com

Perhaps if even Libertarians are seeing the light with regard to "free trade", there's some hope yet? It's a longshot, I know. Honestly, I believe the only way we are going to be able to turn around federal government on this issue of tariffs is to call a constitutional convention. We need to repeal the 16th amendment. Notice I did not say we need to replace the federal income tax, I said we need to repeal the 16th amendment. There is no way the middle class in this nation can compete with the lobbying power of a foreign government, not even a domestically hated foreign government like Saudi Arabia or China, obviously. So let's stop competing.

You may have noticed that Ron Paul has taken all of his past speeches off his websites. If you click on any of my links above, almost none of them work. He is clearly hiding from his record for his own sake and the sake of his son's senate campaign in Kentucky. Here is the sum total Rand Paul has to say on "free trade" on his own website:

Rand Paul proposes that America can engage the world in free trade, develop lucrative commercial relationships with other nations, and defend its national interests without funding or joining international organizations. The US Government must answer only to the Constitution and the citizens protected by it. -- Rand Paul 2010

The Paul's like to couch tariffs as an issue of "sovereignty" to misdirect the public. What they are really after is total economic disarmament. It is absolute economic suicide. Ron Paul's call for the "unilateral elimination of tariffs" can still be found at Lew Rockwell.com. It is tempting for all of us to want to "vote the bums out", especially when our economy is going into the toilet like it is today, but if you don't think before you vote, you could easily end up out of the frying pan into the fire. As a friend of mine is fond of saying, no matter how bad things are now, they can always get infinitely worse. As gloomy as that is, it is also true. So the lesson is, don't turn off your brain just because things are bad. That's exactly the opposite of what you should be doing, because things can get worse, much worse.

Increasingly my opinion is that we will never get tariffs reinstated via elected federal government representatives. The one chance we may have is leveraging growing discontent over tax rates by mounting a campaign to repeal the 16th amendment, which states:

16th Amendment - The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration.

Perhaps better than repealing this amendment directly would be adopting an amendment that specifically forbade the federal government from directly taxing individual citizens.

The problem is, as long as we give the federal government the option of taxing citizen, the citizens always lose when it comes to a lobbying battle with foreign interests. The foreign interests, whether countries or multi-national corporations beat our efforts to influence the federal government hands down. If we returned to a federal government that was funded by tariffs alone, we could finally go back to a level playing field because our interests would coincide with those of our federal representatives.