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.

The politicians always promise everything to everyone because that is how they get elected. They hand out benefits, expand programs, borrow endlessly, and then leave the bill for the next generation. What has made this crisis even worse across Europe is that governments have become addicted to debt while pretending there are no consequences. Now Slovakia’s Constitutional Court has stepped into the middle of that problem and delivered a message that politicians everywhere should be paying attention to.

The court ruled that when government debt breaches constitutional limits, the government cannot simply continue business as usual. It must immediately seek a vote of confidence in parliament. In other words, if politicians drive the country into dangerous debt territory, they must answer for it politically rather than hiding behind accounting tricks and bureaucratic delays. This decision strikes directly at the heart of the modern political model where governments spend first and worry about the consequences later. The ruling reinforces the principle that excessive debt is not merely an accounting issue. It is a constitutional and democratic issue because taxpayers ultimately become responsible for the promises politicians make.

What makes this so important is that virtually every Western government is facing the same disease. The United States has surpassed $37 trillion in federal debt. France, Italy, Britain, and numerous EU member states continue running deficits despite years of promises about fiscal discipline. Politicians talk endlessly about sustainability while debt levels continue climbing. They always assume growth will save them tomorrow. Then when growth slows, they simply borrow even more. We are watching governments consume future generations in real time. The debt crisis is no longer coming. It is already here.

The European Union has spent years criticizing member states over budget deficits while simultaneously encouraging massive spending programs, energy transitions, military expenditures, and endless bureaucracy. The contradiction has become impossible to ignore. Slovakia’s court has essentially acknowledged what politicians refuse to admit: debt accumulation eventually becomes a constitutional issue because it threatens the stability of the state itself. Once governments become dependent upon borrowing simply to maintain operations, democracy begins to erode because every political decision becomes subordinate to debt servicing and creditor confidence.

This is why I have repeatedly stated that the sovereign debt crisis remains the biggest threat facing the developed world. Governments cannot borrow forever. History has never produced a single example where endless debt expansion continued indefinitely. Every empire eventually reaches the point where the cost of maintaining the system exceeds the productive capacity of the economy. The ECM continues to warn that we are moving into the most dangerous period for sovereign debt since World War II. The panic cycle of 2026 is exposing the cracks. By 2028 the economic pressures intensify, and by 2032 we are looking at the potential climax of the sovereign debt crisis that has been building for decades. Slovakia’s Constitutional Court may have issued a ruling aimed at one government, but the warning applies to every government drowning in debt around the world.

Tens of thousands of ultra-Orthodox Jews have taken to the streets, blocking highways, shutting down rail lines, and clashing with police over mandatory military conscription. Some demonstrations have brought major cities to a standstill. This is no fringe protest. It is a direct challenge to the authority of the state itself and highlights a deep fracture that has been growing within Israeli society for decades.

What the outside world often fails to understand is that the issue goes back to the founding of Israel in 1948. Ultra-Orthodox Jews, known as Haredim, were granted exemptions from military service if they devoted themselves to full-time religious study. At the time, the numbers were relatively small. Today, however, the ultra-Orthodox population represents roughly 13% of Israel’s population and is one of the fastest-growing demographic groups in the country. After years of legal battles, Israel’s courts ruled that the blanket exemptions could no longer continue indefinitely. The military has now issued tens of thousands of draft notices, yet only a fraction have responded.

Israel is simultaneously fighting multiple conflicts while suffering manpower shortages. Reservists have been called up repeatedly, many serving hundreds of days away from their families and businesses. As casualties mount and military commitments expand, resentment has grown among secular and traditional Israelis who see themselves carrying the burden while a large segment of society remains exempt. The result has been a political explosion that has destabilized Netanyahu’s government and contributed to the collapse of his coalition.

Manpower shortages are happening throughout the world as nations see that their troops are disposable until there is no one left to replace the last men. Israel was entirely dependent on support from the US, which is why Trump’s recent pivot is peculiar in timing, as it corresponds with our War Cycle that indicated heated tensions over the summer. Come August, the cycle is turning up; peace, unfortunately, is not going to happen.

Polls show 61% of Israelis do not want Netanyahu to seek reelection. Now, 13% of the population is at odds with Bibi and his unholy wars. This is why there is extreme danger ahead: Netanyahu needs a military victory to secure power.

Ukraine’s government is celebrating a new feature inside the Army+ app that allows soldiers who went AWOL to return to military service and even select a new unit. Defense Minister Mykhailo Fedorov announced that nearly 200 requests had already been submitted through the system, with dozens approved in just a matter of days. The government presents this as a technological success story. I see something very different. When a nation at war needs a smartphone application to bring soldiers back after they have abandoned their units, that is a sign that the manpower crisis has become impossible to hide.

Earlier this year Fedorov acknowledged that roughly 200,000 Ukrainian soldiers were listed as AWOL while another 2 million Ukrainians were being sought for draft evasion. Those are not normal wartime statistics. Even Reuters previously reported that Ukraine was offering second chances to thousands of soldiers who had abandoned their positions because the military desperately needed personnel back on the front lines.

Videos have circulated showing military recruitment officers hunting down men in broad daylight and throwing them into windowless vans. Ukrainians do not want to continue fighting a war that has already consumed hundreds of thousands of lives. Regardless of where one stands politically, a government does not need aggressive mobilization campaigns when volunteers are lining up to serve. The world is applauding Zelensky and the neocons while those forced to battle are pleading for peace, not another multi-billion-euro package to prolong the war.

What makes the Army+ program so revealing is that it effectively acknowledges the problem. Soldiers can now submit applications, select preferred units, and return through a simplified digital process. The government is trying to make military service more attractive because it knows morale and retention have become major issues. The Ministry of Defense itself has promoted these reforms as a way to quickly reintegrate personnel who left without authorization.

The existence of an app designed to bring back soldiers who abandoned their units may be presented as innovation. In reality, it may be one of the clearest signs yet that Ukraine’s manpower crisis is coming to a head. This is precisely why Europe should be on edge. They will come for your sons next.

After spending years defending him, campaigning for him, endorsing him, and standing beside him while anyone who questioned his fitness was attacked as a conspiracy theorist, Hillary Clinton now says Biden made a “terrible mistake” by running again. That is convenient, but the problem is that Biden did not act alone. The entire Democratic establishment knew exactly what was happening and saw his cognitive decline. They heard the incoherent speeches, watched the debates. Yet they all marched in lockstep behind a man they insisted was perfectly capable of serving another four years.

Clinton is really attempting to do is rewrite history. Biden did not force the Democratic Party to rally behind him. The party leadership, the donors, the consultants, the media allies, and every major power center in Washington actively protected him from criticism. Anyone who raised concerns about his age or cognitive condition was dismissed. They shut down a meaningful primary process and effectively told Democratic voters that there would be no debate, no competition, and no alternative. Then, after the disastrous debate exposed what millions of Americans had already seen with their own eyes, panic set in. The same people who spent years telling the public everything was fine suddenly discovered there was a problem.

Then came the greatest political bait-and-switch in modern American history. Biden withdrew only months before the election. Dems immediately installed Kamala Harris, leaving voters with a candidate they never selected. No one voted for Kamala during her first bid as presidential candidate but Democratic voters were told to accept the decision and remain silent. Clinton now argues that another Democrat could have beaten Trump.

“We would have had a real contest,” Clinton said about what would’ve happened if Biden didn’t run. “And very sadly I believe whoever emerged from that contest, whether it was the vice president or a governor or a senator or anybody else, would have beaten Donald Trump.”

Precisely why the Democrats lost: the party is completely out of touch with the wishes of the people. They abandoned working-class voters and became the party of divisive politics. They ignored growing concerns over inflation, immigration, crime, foreign policy, and economic insecurity. Biden spent his presidency pushing forth the globalist Build Back Better agenda, abandoning domestic interests. Democrats spent years lecturing the public instead of listening to them and then seemed shocked when voters revolted.

Clinton will think of losing to Trump on her deathbed; she simply cannot let it go. After 2016 there was a seemingly endless list of culprits. Now, after 2024, the blame falls squarely on Biden. Yet Clinton herself endorsed Biden’s campaign, defended him publicly, and later endorsed Kamala Harris when he withdrew. She did it for her career and not the people. The same political class that created the disaster is now trying to convince everyone they were warning about it all along. Americans are not that foolish. The public watched the cover-up in real-time. They watched party leaders insist Biden was fine. They watched them pivot overnight to Harris. They watched them demand loyalty at every stage. Now they want to pretend they were innocent bystanders. That may be the biggest insult of all.

Everyone expected Kevin Warsh to come into his first Federal Reserve meeting and immediately begin cutting rates because Trump put him in the chair. That was never going to happen. Markets have once again demonstrated they do not understand how interest rates actually function. The Federal Reserve left rates unchanged at 3.50% to 3.75%, but what mattered was not the decision itself. What mattered was the complete shift in tone.

The Fed removed language suggesting future easing and, for the first time this year, officials openly moved toward discussing potential rate hikes rather than cuts. Inflation is moving higher again, energy prices have surged amid Middle East tensions, and the bond market immediately understood what many economists still refuse to accept.

What I found far more interesting was Warsh’s attack on the institution itself. He announced five separate task forces to review how the Federal Reserve operates, how it communicates, how it measures inflation, how it uses economic data, how it manages its balance sheet, and how productivity and employment are evolving in a rapidly changing economy.

Warsh is openly signaling that he believes the Fed has become bloated, overly academic, and detached from reality. For years I have argued that governments and central banks are operating on outdated models that no longer reflect the world economy. Warsh appears to recognize the same problem.

The irony is that Warsh was selected largely because many believed he would be more dovish than Powell. Instead, his first meeting produced one of the most hawkish shifts we have seen this year. Officials now see inflation remaining elevated and several policymakers are looking toward possible rate increases before year-end. Bond yields jumped, the dollar strengthened, and equities sold off because traders suddenly realized the era of guaranteed rate cuts may be over.

Only 29% of Democrats say they are extremely or very proud to be American, compared with 90% of Republicans, based on a recent NBC poll. Among Americans aged 18-34, just 36% express strong pride in their country, compared with 75% among those over 65. Those numbers should concern anyone who understands history because they point to a crisis of confidence in the nation itself.

Most people blame Trump for dividing America, but the fracture began long before Trump entered politics. The split emerged during the Obama years as the Democratic Party gradually abandoned its traditional working-class foundation and embraced identity politics, globalism, and the expanding administrative state. The 2007.15 Economic Confidence Model turning point marked the beginning of a broader collapse in confidence across Western governments. The Great Recession weakened confidence and caused upheaval. The cohesion from the 9/11 Bush years had come to an end as war in the Middle East dragged on. By 2013 and 2014 the divisions were becoming increasingly visible. Trump’s election in 2016 did not create the divide. It exposed it.

What shocked the Democratic establishment was discovering that millions of Americans no longer shared the worldview being promoted by the media, academia, and Washington. Since then the separation has only accelerated. The old Democratic Party of labor unions, manufacturing workers, and middle-class families has increasingly been replaced by a coalition whose priorities are divisive identity politics.

People lost faith in Washington, but they still believed in America. The anger was directed toward politicians, bankers, and government institutions. Republicans blamed Democrats. Democrats blamed Republicans. The country was divided, but there was still a common identity underneath it all.

Then Trump arrived and the divide exploded. Politics stopped being about policy and became personal. COVID was the final nail in the coffin. Families stopped speaking to one another. Friendships ended, and neighbors viewed each other as enemies. Every election became a battle between good and evil. The left convinced itself that Trump supporters were destroying the country, while the right concluded that the establishment would do anything to remain in power. The left fractured and then divided as years of divisive race, gender, and sex-based policies caused the group to completely lose track of its messaging. The hostility reached levels not seen in modern American history.

Now we are witnessing another transformation. The divide is no longer simply between the left and the right. Increasingly, it is between the left and America itself. Look at the NBC numbers. Only 29% of Democrats say they are extremely or very proud to be American. Think about that for a moment. We are not talking about dissatisfaction with a president or Congress. We are talking about pride in the nation itself.

What makes this even more disturbing is that politicians have begun saying the quiet part out loud. We now have candidates openly declaring they do not support the United States, do not support the military, and look down on America itself. Twenty years ago such statements would have ended a political career overnight. It would have been unthinkable for either side to openly declare hostilities toward the nation they claim to represent. Universities have spent years teaching young people that America is uniquely evil, ironically shielding them from the realities of history. Activists portray the nation as fundamentally illegitimate. The result is exactly what this poll shows. A generation has been raised to believe that patriotism is evil while resentment toward their own country is somehow righteous.

A growing portion of society no longer believes America deserves to exist in its current form. The initial push boosted globalist morale, but we are left with a broken population that is too deep into self-loathing to be productive. This segment of the population is eager to vote for a pro-globalist, anti-America candidate because they want to see the nation fail. You are no longer debating tax rates or spending priorities. You are debating whether the country itself is worth preserving. That is a very dangerous place to be, and the poll numbers suggest we are moving deeper into that territory rather than away from it.

Kevin Warsh is now stepping into one of the most difficult jobs at a time when inflation is rising again, energy prices are climbing because of the Middle East conflict, and confidence in central banks remains fragile. What immediately stands out is that Warsh is not another Jerome Powell. He has spent years criticizing the Federal Reserve itself, arguing that many of today’s economic problems were created by central bank policy rather than solved by it.

One of Warsh’s most important positions is his rejection of the idea that inflation was merely the result of supply chain disruptions or temporary events. He has repeatedly argued that excessive government spending and Federal Reserve policy fueled inflation. Reuters summarized his position by noting that Warsh views inflation as a consequence of policy decisions and has been highly critical of the expansion of the Fed’s balance sheet. That is a significant departure from the excuses that dominated the discussion over the past several years.

What I find interesting is that Warsh appears determined to dismantle many of the communication tools that have defined modern central banking. He has criticized “forward guidance,” questioned the value of constant forecasts, and appears to favor a much less predictable Federal Reserve. Markets have become addicted to every word spoken by central bankers. Investors now spend more time trying to decipher press conferences than studying the underlying economy. Warsh seems to believe that central banks should stop pretending they can micromanage expectations years into the future.

When he was sworn in, Warsh pledged to “lead a reform-oriented Federal Reserve” while “learning from past successes and mistakes” and “escaping static frameworks and models.” The Federal Reserve has increasingly become an institution trapped by its own theories. The economy changes while the response remains the same.

The irony is that Trump may have selected someone who agrees with him about the failures of Powell and the Federal Reserve, yet disagrees with him on the solution. Warsh believes the Fed lost credibility because it waited too long to fight inflation. Trump wants growth and lower borrowing costs. Those objectives can coexist for a while, but if inflation remains elevated because of war, energy prices, or government spending, Warsh may find himself making decisions Trump does not like.

The larger issue is that no Fed chairman controls the business cycle. This is where politicians always get it wrong. Trump wanted lower rates. Biden wanted lower rates. Every administration eventually wants lower rates. Yet interest rates ultimately move with confidence and capital flows. The mainstream Keynesian view has always assumed rates are simply a policy tool. History shows something very different. Rates generally rise with strong markets and confidence and decline during bear markets and economic contractions. The Federal Reserve follows the trend far more often than it creates it.

Warsh enters office during what our models have projected as a Panic Cycle year. The international war cycle is turning up, government debt continues expanding, and geopolitical uncertainty is increasing. Investors expecting a magic solution from a new Fed chairman will likely be disappointed. Warsh may reform how the Fed communicates. He may challenge some of the assumptions that dominated the Powell era. But the real issue remains confidence. If confidence in government continues declining while geopolitical tensions continue rising into 2027, then no central banker will be able to prevent the consequences. The Fed does not control the cycle. The cycle controls the Fed.

Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko said what many leaders will not say publicly. Speaking to Al-Arabiya English, he accused Israel of carrying out a “Holocaust” in Gaza and said: “They already have a bad reputation in the world because of the bombing of Gaza.” He added that Gaza had been “wiped off the face of the earth” and warned that “there is no military solution.” Coming from Lukashenko, the West will dismiss it immediately because they hate the messenger. But that does not erase the condition of Gaza.

The reported Palestinian death toll surpassed 73,000, with more than 173,000 wounded. Save the Children reported in 2025 that more than 20,000 children had been killed. UNICEF said more than 50,000 children had been reportedly killed or injured. Hospitals, schools, homes, roads, water systems, and basic infrastructure were destroyed. This was not a precision operation. Gaza has been completely removed from the map. The Israeli people do NOT support their government and are largely appalled at what Netanyahu has done.

Nearly the entire population of Gaza, roughly 2.1 million people, has been displaced at least once, making it one of the largest displacement crises in modern history. Entire cities were reduced to rubble. Some estimates indicate that well over half of all structures in Gaza were damaged or destroyed.

Netanyahu claimed the goal was to destroy Hamas. That did not happen. Hamas still exists. Analysts have continued to warn that Hamas retained operational capability and would resist disarmament. So what was accomplished? Gaza was destroyed, children were buried, civilians were displaced, and yet the organization Israel claimed it would eliminate remains part of the discussion. That is not victory. You cannot bomb an ideology out of existence.

There has long been speculation surrounding the Ben Gurion Canal project, a proposed alternative to the Suez Canal connecting the Red Sea to the Mediterranean. Released documents prove that this plan has been in the works for decades. When Gaza is reduced to ruins and then people begin discussing strategic corridors, reconstruction plans, resorts, ports, and new trade routes, the public naturally asks who benefits. Lukashenko himself criticized what he described as plans to build a resort on land where people were killed. But the main objective is providing the West with a new artery to trade in the Middle East.

Revealing the horrors of Gaza is punishable by death. Gaza became the deadliest conflict for reporters ever recorded. The Committee to Protect Journalists, the International Federation of Journalists, Reporters Without Borders, and numerous press freedom organizations have all documented unprecedented losses among media workers. Depending on the methodology used, estimates range from roughly 190 to more than 260 journalists and media workers killed since the war began, the overwhelming majority of them Palestinian. The Costs of War Project described Gaza as the deadliest conflict for journalists in modern history. Many were killed while reporting from hospitals, refugee camps, media tents, and civilian areas. Others died alongside their families in airstrikes.

There are plenty of on-the-ground journalists in every corner of conflict. The percentage of journalists who died reporting on Gaza does not coincide with other conflicts. Rumors have swirled that many of these journalists were deliberately targeted, and let’s be honest, such a concept should not be considered a conspiracy or a far-fetched proposition for a government intent on a scorched-earth policy.

Gaza is no longer the daily story because the cycle has shifted to Iran, Lebanon, and the next war. The public is emotionally exhausted, the cameras move, and the destroyed land remains behind. But history does not forget. The war cycle is not finished. It is expanding. Gaza was not the end of the story. It was a warning of what comes next when leaders believe war is policy and civilians are merely collateral damage. Is Lebanon next?

What concerns me going forward is Lebanon. The negotiations with Iran were reportedly supposed to include broader regional de-escalation, yet Israeli officials have repeatedly stated that Israel intends to maintain freedom of military action in Lebanon and reserves the right to continue operations regardless of any agreement reached elsewhere. If a peace deal leaves Iran standing but the fighting simply shifts north into Lebanon, then peace has not been achieved at all.

Few people seem to remember that the United States spent more than $1 billion constructing what is expected to become the second-largest U.S. embassy complex in the world in Lebanon, a 43-acre fortress that dwarfs most government facilities in the country. The timing and scale of that project have raised questions for years about Washington’s long-term strategic expectations for the region. The cycle continues to suggest that the Middle East is moving through a broader period of instability rather than approaching a lasting settlement. Gaza has been devastated, Iran remains unresolved, and Lebanon increasingly appears positioned as the next potential flashpoint. The danger is that politicians will declare peace while the war simply moves to the next battlefield.