Join Us at the 2023 World Economic Conference in Orlando, Florida!

? Dates: November 17, 18, and 19 ? Location: Orlando, Florida, USA (or tune in from home with our virtual ticket options)

Are you ready to unlock the future of economics and finance? Prepare for an unforgettable World Economic Conference experience in sunny Orlando, Florida! This premier event is your gateway to insights, networking, and valuable resources that will supercharge your understanding of the global economy.

?️ What’s Included for In-Person Attendees:

1. Event Admission: Enjoy reserved seating assigned based on the order of ticket sales, ensuring you have a prime view of every presentation.
2. Presentation Slides: Gain access to the presentation slides from all speakers, allowing you to delve deeper into the topics discussed.
3. Video Recording: Can’t make it to a session? No worries! You’ll receive access to video recordings of all conference presentations, so you can catch up at your convenience.
4. WEC Event App: Connect with the conference on a whole new level. Access presentation slides, bonus reports, recordings, and more via the official WEC Event App.
5. Bonus Conference Materials: Get a package of bonus conference-related materials, including exclusive bonus reports and videos (as provided by Martin Armstrong).
6. Morning Information Sessions: Don’t miss out on important morning information sessions, screened on-site in the meeting room on Saturday and Sunday.
7. Networking Opportunities: Exclusive access to the Event App Networking Feature allows you to connect with fellow attendees, both in-person and virtual, fostering valuable professional relationships.
8. Culinary Delights: Savor delicious breakfast and lunch on Saturday and Sunday, prepared to keep you energized throughout the day.
9. Cocktail Reception: Kick off the conference in style at our Friday evening cocktail reception. Meet and mingle with fellow attendees while enjoying refreshing drinks.
10. Swag Bag: As a token of our appreciation, each in-person attendee will receive a swag bag filled with goodies, including an Armstrong Economics notebook, pen, and an event collector’s mug!

Unable to travel? We also have two different ticket options for those wishing to attend virtually! 

Don’t miss this opportunity to be part of a global gathering of economic and financial minds. Secure your spot at the World Economic Conference in Orlando, Florida, and gain the knowledge, connections, and resources you need to thrive in the world of finance and economics.

Space is limited, so act now and reserve your seat! Visit our Events page to register and join us in sunny Orlando this November.

Now available at all major retailers!

The eBook will be available shortly.

The second edition of “The Plot to Seize Russia – The Untold History” is now available for purchase in paperback and hardcover on Amazon and Barnes and Noble. The ebook will be available shortly.

Book description:

“Take care of Russia,” Boris Yeltsin said as he departed his presidency in August 1999. These words were directed at current Russian president, Vladimir Putin. Yeltsin specifically picked Putin as his predecessor to prevent the takeover of Russia.

So, who was Yeltsin warning against? Newly declassified documents from the Clinton Administration prove that there was a plot to rig the Russian election of 2000. These never-before-seen documents confirm numerous attempts to implement pro-Western policies using the Russian oligarchy headed by Boris Berezovsky.

On the other side were the communists who desired a return to the glory days of the Soviet Union. As one of the largest international hedge fund managers, author Martin Armstrong found himself in the middle of perhaps the greatest espionage, or attempt at a regime change for Russia, in modern history.

The Plot to Seize Russia pulls back the curtain to expose the most extraordinary attempt to seize power in modern history, but with the pen rather than armies. These declassified documents reveal a plot that has altered our thinking about the relations between the United States and Russia. The thirst for power comes seething through every line of these papers that alter our perception of reality, change the course of history, and now threaten us with World War III.

For years, I have warned that technology would become the government’s greatest surveillance tool. Politicians always promise new powers will only be used against criminals. Then those same powers gradually expand until everyone becomes a potential suspect. History never changes because governments never voluntarily surrender authority once they obtain it.

The U.S. Supreme Court has now delivered one of the most important privacy decisions in years. In a 6-3 ruling, the Court held that law enforcement’s use of geofence warrants constitutes a search under the Fourth Amendment.

Justice Elena Kagan wrote that people do not surrender their constitutional right to privacy simply because they carry smartphones or enable location services. As she explained, “A cellphone user is not to be viewed as sharing private information with third parties… just by doing the ordinary things cellphone users do.” The Court sent the case back to determine whether the warrant itself satisfied the constitutional requirement of probable cause, but the broader principle is now clear, digital location data deserves constitutional protection.

Geofence warrants represent one of the most sweeping investigative tools ever created. Instead of identifying a suspect first, police define a geographic area and time period, then compel companies such as Google to identify every device that was present. In the Virginia robbery case before the Court, Google initially identified 19 devices located within approximately 150 meters of the crime scene before investigators narrowed the list. These warrants invert the Constitution by allowing police to search thousands of innocent people first and decide who becomes a suspect afterward.

The significance extends far beyond one robbery case. Smartphones constantly generate location histories, travel patterns, religious attendance, medical visits, political gatherings, and personal relationships. The government no longer needs someone to follow you down the street. Your phone already performs that task every minute of every day. Technology companies possess an extraordinary amount of information, and governments around the world increasingly view those databases as investigative gold mines.

This ruling does not end digital surveillance. It simply reminds governments that constitutional limits still exist. Many technology companies have already begun changing how they store location data. Google, for example, has shifted much of its location history storage onto users’ own devices rather than centralized servers, making broad geofence requests more difficult. Law enforcement will undoubtedly seek new methods as technology evolves, because governments never stop seeking additional powers.

The larger trend remains exactly what our computer has warned. Governments burdened by rising debt, political instability, and civil unrest always seek greater control over information. Surveillance expands during every crisis because politicians claim extraordinary circumstances require extraordinary powers. Today it is geofence warrants. Tomorrow it will be artificial intelligence analyzing billions of data points in real time. The battle between personal liberty and government surveillance is only beginning, and this decision represents one of the few occasions where the courts have reminded Washington that the Constitution still matters in the digital age.

People wonder why I devoted an entire Agricultural Report to food security. It was never simply about crops. Agriculture has become another battlefield where governments, multinational corporations, and unelected organizations all believe they have the right to dictate what people eat, what farmers grow, and ultimately who controls the food supply. History has always shown that whoever controls food controls society. That lesson has never changed.

Now researchers have found another reason for concern. A new study published in the Journal of Antimicrobial Chemotherapy found that exposure to glyphosate, the world’s most widely used herbicide, may increase antibiotic resistance in bacteria. Scientists reported that even concentrations below legal application levels triggered biological changes that made bacteria less susceptible to commonly used antibiotics. As the researchers noted, this “highlights the potential impact of glyphosate on antibiotic resistance.” This comes as antimicrobial resistance is already estimated to contribute to more than one million deaths globally each year, making it one of the fastest-growing public health concerns.

Glyphosate has already been surrounded by controversy for years. Thousands of lawsuits have alleged that Roundup exposure caused cancer, resulting in billions of dollars in settlements and verdicts against Bayer after it acquired Monsanto. More recently, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that many state-law failure-to-warn claims are preempted by federal pesticide law, significantly limiting future litigation against the manufacturer. Whether one agrees with those legal rulings or not, they demonstrate how difficult it has become to hold large corporations accountable once regulatory agencies approve a product. The courts decide legal liability. Science continues to evolve independently.

My concern has never been limited to one herbicide. The broader issue is the increasing concentration of agriculture into fewer and fewer hands. Farmers across Europe are already facing nitrogen restrictions, fertilizer regulations, water limitations, and climate mandates that make it increasingly difficult for family farms to survive. The World Economic Forum has openly promoted changing global diets to reduce meat consumption, while numerous governments have discussed reducing livestock production in the name of climate policy. Meanwhile, restrictions on backyard livestock, zoning rules affecting home food production, and tighter regulations on seeds and fertilizers have fueled concerns among many people that food independence is gradually becoming more difficult.

Suggesting that the food supply is poisonous is seen as conspiracy rhetoric, but modern agricultural methods are silently poisoning the population. That is an uncomfortable truth that has been proven time and time again.

Throughout history, governments facing sovereign debt crises have always sought greater control over strategic industries. Food, energy, transportation, and finance inevitably become political tools because they are essential to daily life. You do not need a grand conspiracy to see that governments consistently expand their influence during periods of economic stress.

The computer has warned repeatedly that agriculture will become one of the defining strategic sectors into the next decade. As geopolitical tensions rise, fertilizer supplies remain vulnerable, energy costs fluctuate, and governments intervene more aggressively in farming, food security becomes a national security issue. My Agricultural Report explained that nations able to produce their own food will hold a tremendous advantage during the sovereign debt crisis. Those that become dependent on imports or centralized supply chains will discover that food can become just as powerful a weapon as sanctions or military force.

The debate over glyphosate is therefore much larger than one chemical. It raises fundamental questions about how food is produced, who regulates it, who profits from it, and whether governments are becoming too dependent on large corporations to manage an increasingly fragile agricultural system. Once confidence in institutions begins to break down, people naturally question everything, from the safety of their food to the integrity of the agencies responsible for protecting public health. That erosion of confidence is precisely what the computer has been warning would emerge as we move deeper into the current crisis cycle.

Europe’s united front behind Zelensky is beginning to crack, and this time it is not because of money or weapons. It is because of history. The Czech opposition party SPD has demanded that President Petr Pavel revoke the Order of the White Lion, the country’s highest state honor, that was awarded to Volodymyr Zelensky. The demand came after Zelensky approved naming Ukraine’s 225th Separate Assault Regiment after the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN), a movement whose factions collaborated with Nazi Germany during the Second World War and whose legacy remains deeply divisive throughout Central Europe.

SPD chairman Jindřich Rajchl declared that the Czech Republic “cannot remain silent when the highest state decoration is worn by a man who names military units after Nazi monsters.” That statement followed an even stronger reaction from Poland. Polish President Karol Nawrocki announced that he is moving to revoke the Order of the White Eagle that had been awarded to Zelensky after Ukraine honored figures connected to the Ukrainian nationalist movement. For Poland, this is far more than a political disagreement. The OUN and its military wing, the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA), are associated with the Volhynia massacres of 1943-44, during which tens of thousands of Polish civilians were brutally murdered. Those events remain one of the darkest chapters in Polish history.

This is an extraordinary political blunder. Poland stood beside Ukraine from the very beginning. It accepted millions of refugees, became one of Kyiv’s largest military supporters, and repeatedly urged Europe to increase aid. The Czech Republic likewise committed substantial military, financial, and humanitarian assistance. Instead of recognizing the enormous sacrifices these countries have made, Zelensky chose to celebrate a movement that many of his closest allies remember not as freedom fighters but as perpetrators of wartime atrocities. He cannot expect governments to erase generations of historical memory simply because it is politically convenient today.

The bureaucrats in Brussels have spent years insisting that everyone accept a single approved version of history, but history cannot be rewritten by decree. Whether one views the OUN as anti-Soviet nationalists or collaborators who committed horrific crimes, the reality is that Poland has never forgotten the slaughter of its people. By elevating these symbols, Zelensky has managed to alienate one of Ukraine’s most loyal allies at the very moment his government depends on continued European support. Now the backlash is spreading beyond Poland into the Czech Republic, and others may follow.

This is how alliances begin to unravel. Governments believed they could paper over centuries of ethnic and historical conflict with endless funding and political slogans. They were wrong. Economic pressure is rising, public support for the war is fading, and old grievances are resurfacing across Europe. Our computer has warned for years that Europe would enter a period of fragmentation as confidence in governments declined. The dispute between Ukraine, Poland, and now the Czech Republic is another indication that the façade of European unity is beginning to crack. Once history becomes a political weapon again, repairing those relationships becomes far more difficult than issuing another package of financial aid.

History shows that war rarely breaks out in times of widespread prosperity (fat & happy). When economic conditions deteriorate, civil unrest, revolution, and international conflict tend to follow. This isn’t a matter of opinion, it’s a pattern observable across centuries of global history. As economies contract, public frustration mounts, and long-simmering grievances resurface with explosive force. We are now entering a period of major global realignment, with 2032 marking a critical turning point. By 2028, the rising tide of conflicts will become unmistakable.

The historical precedent of the post-9/11 security expansion, is on the minds of some unelected bureaucrats. An attack inside the USA by Hezbollah of some sleep-cell if they were to explode a serious bomb in the USA would change everything for the Midterms. Homeland Security and ICE did not exist prior ot the World Trade Center attack 911.

The Paradigm Shift: From Reactive to Preemptive

Prior to September 11th, 2001, which took place precisely on our model to the very day, the concept of a domestic intelligence agency focused on counterterrorism, such as the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), did not exist in its current form. The attack acted as a catalyst, enabling the rapid consolidation of 22 federal agencies into a single department and expanding surveillance powers (e.g., the Patriot Act) that had previously been politically untenable.

A serious bomb detonation attributed to Hezbollah or some Iranian sleeper-cell would likely have a similar effect, but with a different focus. Unlike the aviation-centric attacks of 9/11, a radiological attack implies a failure to interdict materials and domestic cells rather than just hijackers. We already have some in government insisting that terrorist entered the USA under Biden’s Open Border’s Policy. Such ab incident would likely be framed as a failure of the current “defensive” posture, shifting policy towards a “preemptive” posture. It would be used to track everyone and that could result in biometrics.

Drawing from historical patterns, the bureaucratic and political response would likely pivot from failure to “necessary” expansion. The opportunity set would likely bring to the surface DHS currently operates fusion centers. Post-event, we would likely see a significant increase in funding to expand these centers to include real-time environmental monitoring data, linking health reports, weather patterns, and travel data to detect anomalies.

The “Traveler” vs. “Citizen” Distinction:

The Patriot Act lowered the barriers for surveillance of foreign nationals. A Hezbollah serious bomb or biological event could likely be used to justify expanded surveillance of U.S. citizens. The FBI and DHS would likely need to expand their Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTFs) significantly.

The Economic and Systemic Impact

From a modeling perspective, any sort of domestic attack by some sleeper-cell would at first create a brief correct in the market as everything readjusts and regroups.

NATO DIVISION:

Meanwhile, the Turkish Foreign Minister, Hakan Fidan, gave an interview on the CNN Türk broadcaster, in which he said Israel’s politics and mindset had “become a burden that humanity can no longer bear.” 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu rejected Vice President JD Vance who warned him to avoid angering the United States, saying any wrenches thrown into a peace deal between the US and Iran by Israel risked losing the support of the “only powerful ally that [they] have anywhere left in the entire world.”

When the War Cycle turned on May 8th, 2025, Amnesty International urgently called on the Israeli government to abandon plans for expanded military operations that included annexing territory and forcibly displacing Palestinians in Gaza. The organization stated these actions would “gravely violate international law“.

Furthermore, tensions with the Trump Administration surfaced. According to Israeli media citing sources close to U.S. President Donald Trump, there was growing frustration with Prime Minister Netanyahu. The sources indicated that Trump felt “disappointment” with Netanyahu and had decided to proceed with steps in the Middle East, potentially related to normalization with Saudi Arabia, without waiting for Israel’s cooperation.

That May 8th, 2025 turn in the war cycle was critical. Netanyahu’s appearance in the White House Situation Room to sell this war with Iran was in February 2025. The United States bombed Iranian nuclear facilities with bunker buster bombs on June 22nd, 2025. This operation, which involved the use of GBU-57 “bunker buster” bombs, was codenamed “Operation Midnight Hammer.”

Israel and Iran have a long history of operating in the “grey zone” – involving targeted killings of nuclear scientists and military commanders, as well as cyberattacks. These operations often occur alongside or in the periods surrounding overt military actions.

Iran’s top officials and brothers of the new supreme leader did emerge into public view Sunday to attend funeral prayers for Ayatollah Ali Khamenei. Their appearance signaled confidence in their safety. I believe that Trump warned Netanyahu he better not attack the funeral and to stand-down.

With the ECM Turning Point taking effect on July 1st, we can anticipate increased political instability. Ukrainian President Zelensky appears to be acting recklessly, seemingly attempting to provoke a direct Russian-NATO confrontation. Meanwhile, the Kremlin has officially reclassified its stance: what was once described as a “special operation” to protect the Donbas has now escalated, with Russia declaring itself to be in a state of war with Ukraine.

Obviously, there are more complicated nuances, but even a child can understand that our system is completely flawed.

What if the economy wasn’t chaotic at all-but followed a hidden code?

The Armstrong Economic Code reveals the powerful cyclical patterns discovered by legendary forecaster Martin A. Armstrong, whose Economic Confidence Model (ECM) has predicted every major boom, bust, and geopolitical shift for more than four decades.

Compiled and expanded by Kerry Lutz, host of the Financial Survival Network and longtime student of Armstrong’s work, this definitive edition connects the dots between history, markets, and the rhythm of human behavior. From the rise and fall of empires to the digital age of algorithmic finance, the Code shows how every crisis-and every recovery-follows a pattern few understand but everyone feels.

Whether you’re an investor, policymaker, or simply trying to navigate a world of chaos, The Armstrong Economic Code gives you the tools to see what’s coming next-and why the future was already written in the past.

Inside you’ll discover:

• The 8.6-year Economic Confidence Model and how it pinpoints global turning points

• How capital flows reveal the next great migration of wealth and power

• Why governments always collapse in predictable cycles of confidence and corruption

• Exclusive post-2020 commentary and charts expanding on The World According to Martin Armstrong

• How to interpret Armstrong’s forecasts to protect and grow your wealth

COMMENT:

I felt compelled to reach out. I attended your 2021 conference, and I remember clearly that you spoke about the United States heading toward political fragmentation—and that the real risk of a complete split would emerge after 2028. Over the years, I’ve come to deeply respect how far in advance your forecasts prove accurate. What sets you apart is that it’s never partisan opinion—it’s simply the data speaking. I can now fully understand why some people resent you, and why others try to silence you. You speak a truth that comes straight from your models, and that’s not just rare—it’s revolutionary. I see what you’re really doing: laying the groundwork for what comes after 2032.

Watching this all unfold on the 250th anniversary of our nation is nothing short of astonishing. The number of Democratic states refusing to participate in national celebration in Washington, DC is a direct reflection of what you projected. Mayor Zohran Mamdani’s speech torn down the United Sates and had nothing good to say about anything. And at your 2024 conference, you also said the Democratic Party itself would fracture—and now that prediction is staring us in the face, with James Carville himself just acknowledging the rift openly. James Carville just said:

Lady, I ain’t in the same party as you. I’m sorry. I’m just not. And I actually do think it’s time for Democrats to talk ‘the S-word.’ ‘Schism.’ I really do… Let’s negotiate terms of a schism here. Maybe we can part under some kind of advantageous terms for both of us, but I’m done. And I’m not in that F*ing political party.*”

Jude

See you on the 25th

REPLY: The LEFT is typically the most violent insofar as they inevitably seek to impose their views and theories by raw force. The fact that this position of the LEFT has been prohibited by the very foundation of civilization is proven that this has been acknowledge in the Ten Commandments prohibition. This is all rooted in material jealousy for the LEFT always presents that they are oppressed because other have more than they do. This cornerstone of the LEFT has been prohibited and is mentioned twice in Scriptures. The first time in Exodus 20:17 when Moses ascended Mount Sinai to meet with God: “You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male or female servant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.”

The second mention of the 10th Commandment is in Deuteronomy 5 when Moses reminds the Israelites of the laws as they prepare to enter the Promised Land. Deuteronomy 5:21 – “You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife. You shall not set your desire on your neighbor’s house or land, his male or female servant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.”

Those who preach this doctrine cannot belief in God or the equality of the rule of law. The tendency to use coercion to enforce a vision is a feature of many revolutions, regardless of their position on the political spectrum. Revolutionary ideology often uses a Manichean worldview, framing the struggle as a zero-sum battle between good and evilm, which can justify the use of force to solve participation and coordination problems. The LEFT is rising for they are intent upon suppress everyone else to be extorted all because of the material jealousy.

This ideological framework always leads to authoritarian outcomes, as the newly empowered leadership inevitable resort to coercion and oppression to consolidate power and enforce its theories . This dynamic is not unique. It is the halmark of all revolutions.

Reflections on the history of the Latin American LEFT further shows the internal debate on this very point. In the 20th century, the LEFT grappled with a dichotomy between reform and revolution. Some argued that a focus on reform without challenging the dominant system was insufficient, while others believed that an exclusive focus on armed struggle led to isolation and defeat . This internal debate underscores that the left is not a monolithic force, and its relationship with revolutionary theory is complex and contested.

President Trump at Mt Rushmore said that America is under threat of rising Communism. My computer has been forecasting this for the last ten years. Revolutions and civil wars are inevitable. Between 2026 and 2028, the economy will take its nose-dive and this will turn the heat up on civil unrest and discontent. I am still very concerned that the 2028 election will be a disaster assuming it even takes place. Elections are questionable anymore is they are free. We will see with the Midterms just how corrupt this has become. You have LEFT leaning judges even striking down basic fundamentals that someone must be a citizen to vote. I lived in London and Tokyo as well as Hong Kong, Sydney, Thailand, and Switzerland. Never was I allowed to vote in their elections just because I lived there for a while.

The Supreme Court is to blame. You cannot discriminate based on race or creed. But you can freely discriminate based on class and material wealth. That has left the door open where the LEFT is seeking to kick-in the door and transform the United States is the old Soviet Union. Friends who moved here from Eastern Europe comment that the very ideas that they fled from are being pushed here by the Democrats. There will be no equal protection of the law thanks to the Supreme Court.

The mere fact that several Blue States have REFUSED to participate in the official 250th celebration, namely  the “Great American State Fair,” which was organized by the Trump administration’s Freedom 250 group on the National Mall in Washington, D.C. Just because Trump set this up, they REFUSE to participate demonstrating that the United States is no longer one nation under God.

The states reported to have declined participation in this particular event are:

Connecticut, Hawaii, Illinois, Massachusetts, North Carolina, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, and Washington

The LEFT seeks only to enslave everyone. I was in Vancouver and a LEFTIST politicians actually said, everything a person earns belongs to the state, nd the state decides what we are allowed to keep. Over 200 million dies the last time the LEFT sought to seek power and force their will upon everyone. They never learn from history because the do not have the courage to break into your home and rob you at gun point, so the tell everyone they are a victim and vote for them and they will rob the rich using the police to enforce what they would do personally out of material jealousy.

Finland has become another example of what happens when ideology overtakes economic reality. According to a recent report, Finland’s construction sector is suffering severe unemployment, with the Construction Trade Union estimating that 17.5% of construction workers are now unemployed. Many have already exhausted the maximum 400 days of earnings-related unemployment benefits and have dropped onto lower levels of support. Yet almost simultaneously, there are renewed discussions about bringing in workers from outside the European Union to fill jobs in the construction industry.

The desperation in Finland’s labor market is becoming almost unbelievable. One comparison circulating widely captures just how severe conditions have become. Reports indicate that Finnish discount retailer Puuilo received roughly 21,000 applications for just 400 summer jobs, an acceptance rate of less than 2%. By comparison, admission rates to Finland’s medical schools reportedly range from roughly 2.8% at the most competitive universities to nearly 4% at the least competitive.

It has become statistically more difficult to land a seasonal retail job than to gain admission to medical school. Whether viewed as a symbol or a statistic, it reflects the same reality: the labor market has become so weak that even entry-level positions attract overwhelming demand. When thousands of qualified people are competing for temporary retail work while experienced construction workers remain unemployed, it becomes increasingly difficult to argue that the problem is a shortage of labor. The problem is a shortage of opportunity, brought about by years of economic mismanagement, high financing costs, and policies that have steadily undermined productive private-sector growth.

Nearly one out of every five Finnish construction workers cannot find employment. The construction sector has been battered by bankruptcies, collapsing housing demand, and rising interest rates. Employment in Finnish construction has fallen to roughly 176,800 workers, down sharply from the peak reached only a few years ago. Yet instead of asking why so many skilled Finnish workers remain unemployed, policymakers continue discussing labor imports.

At the same time, bankruptcies across Finland have climbed to their highest level since 1996, with the construction sector among the hardest hit as high interest rates, weak housing demand, and rising financing costs continue to cripple new development. Yet despite what many workers describe as the worst construction labor market in a generation, policymakers continue discussing the recruitment of labor from outside rather than first putting their own skilled workforce back to work. That disconnect is precisely why confidence in government continues to deteriorate.

This has become the standard political response across Europe. Governments insist there are labor shortages while their own citizens struggle to find work. The problem is often not an absolute shortage of workers but a mismatch created by economic policy. High interest rates have devastated residential construction across much of Europe. Finland’s own central bank acknowledges that housing construction remains in severe difficulty and that the labor market will stay weak well into 2027 despite hopes for a gradual recovery.

What governments refuse to acknowledge is that this is the direct consequence of years of policy failures. Europe embraced negative interest rates, encouraged debt-fueled property booms, and expanded government spending while simultaneously imposing environmental regulations, soaring energy costs, and endless bureaucracy. When inflation finally arrived, interest rates had to rise, and the very sectors that had been inflated by cheap money collapsed first. Construction always becomes one of the earliest casualties because it is extraordinarily sensitive to financing costs.

The numbers are becoming increasingly alarming. Finland’s unemployment rate has climbed into double digits, making it one of the highest in the European Union. Recent data showed around 290,000 unemployed people nationwide, while economists continue warning that job creation remains weak despite isolated signs of economic growth. Even the Finnish government expects unemployment to remain elevated throughout 2026 before any meaningful improvement begins.

Our models have long warned that Europe would face a prolonged period of economic stagnation accompanied by growing political unrest. Finland is now experiencing exactly that combination. Workers who spent decades paying taxes are watching opportunities disappear while policymakers debate importing additional labour. That is the type of policy disconnect that destroys confidence in government. History demonstrates that when citizens conclude their own governments place ideology ahead of the interests of their own workforce, political backlash inevitably follows. Europe is learning that lesson the hard way.

France is enduring one of its most intense heat waves in decades, with temperatures exceeding 40°C (104°F), schools forced to close, and public officials urging people to stay indoors. Yet what caught my attention was not the weather itself, but the response from the French government. Instead of asking why millions of French citizens remain without air conditioning, politicians are effectively telling people they should simply learn to live with the heat.

After years of climate policies discouraging air conditioning, France now finds itself with only about 27% of homes and roughly 13% of apartments equipped with cooling systems, compared to well over 90% of homes in the United States. The public has had enough, with polls showing nearly 80% of French citizens now support expanding air conditioning in homes, schools, hospitals, and public transportation.

France’s Minister for Ecological Transition, Monique Barbut, said she was “horrified” by calls to install more air conditioning, insisting it should be reserved only for emergencies. Bureaucrats are more concerned with preserving ideology than allowing people to protect themselves. People should not be overheating to death in a developed nation.

Then came perhaps the most absurd comment of all. Paris Deputy Mayor Audrey Pulvar attempted to blame the United States for Europe’s heat wave, arguing that Americans bear “significant responsibility” because of their carbon emissions and widespread use of air conditioning. According to her logic, Americans cooling their homes are somehow responsible for French families suffering through extreme temperatures. Rather than asking why France spent years discouraging investment in reliable energy and practical infrastructure, politicians once again looked across the Atlantic for someone else to blame. That has become the standard playbook whenever government policy fails.

Marine Le Pen and the National Rally have called for a nationwide plan to equip schools, hospitals, nursing homes, and other public buildings with air conditioning, arguing that protecting people from extreme heat should take precedence over ideological objections. Meanwhile, much of France’s political left continues to portray widespread air conditioning as environmentally irresponsible, even as record temperatures expose the country’s lack of preparation. One side recognizes that governments have a responsibility to adapt to reality and protect their citizens. The other remains committed to climate doctrine, even when that doctrine leaves the elderly, children, and the most vulnerable suffering through dangerous heat because admitting they were wrong would undermine the entire climate agenda that has been pushed by the globalists for years.

I have said for years that climate change has become the perfect political tool because it allows governments to justify virtually any expansion of power. They tell farmers what they may grow, regulate fertilizer, attack livestock, close nuclear plants, restrict affordable energy, discourage air conditioning, and then claim these sacrifices are necessary to save the planet. Every crisis becomes another excuse for more regulation, more taxation, and more control over everyday life.

The Great Reset was never simply about reducing emissions. It is about changing the way people live. They want to dictate what you drive, what you eat, how you heat or cool your home, how much energy you consume, and ultimately how much of your standard of living you are willing to surrender in the name of climate. The people promoting these policies rarely live under the same restrictions. They fly private jets to climate conferences while telling everyone else that air conditioning has become a luxury.

France has spent years regulating and discouraging the installation of air conditioning in the name of climate policy. Strict building regulations have favored passive cooling measures over mechanical air conditioning, while environmental policies and energy-efficiency rules have made installation more costly and, in many older buildings, considerably more difficult. Now, as record heat places millions at risk, those same policies have left much of the population without one of the most effective tools for protecting themselves. This is what happens when ideology replaces common sense. Government believed it could regulate the climate by regulating how people cool their homes, and ordinary citizens are paying the price.