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.

PRIVATE BLOG – Nickel – Preparing for War?

Private blog posts are exclusively available to Socrates subscribers. To sign-up for Socrates or to learn more, please visit Ask-Socrates.com.

https://ask-socrates.com/

In his 1936 book, ‘The General Theory of Employment, Interest and Money,’ John Maynard Keynes argued that aggregate demand was too volatile to be stable and would lead to inflation or recession. His theory honed in on spending as a means of price control. Low aggregate demand, Keynes argues, would lead to high unemployment and stagflation. Government could intervene through fiscal policies to increase aggregate demand, as an example, increased government spending could tame inflation. According to Keynes, interest rates could also be adjusted to encourage spending and stimulate demand. So why are these theories failing miserably today?

To begin, the United States had a balanced budget when Keynes presented his theory. The government is now the biggest borrower, acting in its own self-interest under Adam Smith’s theory of the invisible hand that Keynes spent his career attempting to deny. According to Keynes, “there is no self-correcting mechanism in a free market economy that automatically restores full employment.” He believed that the government could change the business cycle but arguably regretted this notion on his deathbed.

Keynesian economics gave the government the green light to manipulate the economy, or at least make numerous failed attempts to do so. There is that old joke about communism that you can vote your way in, but must shoot your way out, seemingly fitting to the utter disaster governments have created regarding our economic situation.

The government is by far the biggest borrower. Raising interest rates can have no impact on demand, as the government will simply borrow more, and the central banks have no control over government spending. In a historic act of defiance, Powell came out during the Biden administration and warned that government spending was completely unsustainable. It is extremely rare to see the Fed criticize Washington, but the situation has become too dire for anyone with integrity to remain quiet. Powell plainly stated that the government was borrowing against future generations of Americans. Now, Powell must continually defend the pivot away from failed QE programs due to Trump’s insistence on lowering rates to the negatives.

The central bank seeks to align with Washington to maintain public confidence. During the Great Depression, Washington forced the Federal Reserve to implement QE policies to artificially lower rates to increase demand. Yet, when Washington ordered the Federal Reserve to do the same during the Korean War in 1951, the central bank first broke with Washington and refused to comply, as it knew it would hurt the economy, as America’s budget was no longer balanced.

Quantitative Easing has destroyed the Keynesian model, leaving central banks with no alternative means of controlling the economy. If they raise rates, the budget explodes. Keynesians advocate manipulating aggregate demand and fiscal spending that the central bank cannot control. However, the other component of Keynesianism is the use of taxation. Keynes argued that to stimulate demand, you lower taxes. He saw this correctly, but again, it does not fit with government agendas. The government is desperate for funding and believes citizens must pay. Taxes alone could never make a dent in government spending, but some politicians genuinely do not understand that reality.

There is no limit to what the government will spend with “money” that does not exist. Governments continue to borrow perpetually with no real intention of paying back their debts. This is one piece of the Sovereign Debt Crisis that will implode like a nuclear bomb, the likes of which we have never witnessed. The business cycle cannot be manipulated, and, moreover, the Keynesian model cannot account for declining confidence in both government and the economy.

The most frequently asked question of 2025: Is war inevitable?

I’ve spent my entire life attempting to prove the computer wrong. I’ve hoped that the cycle in motion could change and I’ve watched as events unfolded, right on target, that only Socrates could foresee. A cycle in motion remains in motion. The trajectory and speed may alter, but the end result is inevitable.

Below is perhaps the most popular article of 2025. I wish I could provide a different answer but I will always respond with the truth.

QUESTION: Well, here we are at the 15th, right on schedule. Your model turns up, and it looks like no deal. Would you care to comment?

Uri

ANSWER: Putin said their purpose would be “to remove the root causes of the conflict and move towards creating a long-term, durable peace in a historical perspective”. Zelenskyy said he was prepared to attend, but only if Putin also showed up, because “everything in Russia depends” on the Russian leader as if that is not the case in Ukraine. Trump also was not attending.

Zelensky is a Neo-Nazi and he takes orders from the EU and NATO. He wants every Russian dead. What would he do if Russia left the Donbas? He has outlawed them from speaking Russian, denied them any right to vote, outlawed Orthodox Christianity, and outlawed them from even celebrating Christmas. The Ukrainian people have a choice. Either to die for the Neocons, or rise up and overthrow Zelensky. Contacts in Romania realize the EU is trying to orchestrate them into war with Russia. The strategy here is to send the Eastern Europeans in to kill as many Russians as possible, and then Macron can invade Russia like Napoleon.

Our model peaked intraday in the last quarter of 2024, with the third quarter of 2024 as the highest quarterly closing. The correction was to be into the first Quarter, and then the second quarter was a Directional Change. We will now head into the third quarter of 2025, which should reflect the failure of any peace deal because any ceasefire is only to regroup and rearm Ukraine. There is no resolution to this, and the EU will NEVER allow Ukraine to have peace.

There was a peace deal. Putin withdrew his tanks around Kiev, and Boris Johnson flew to Ukraine and instructed Zelensky not to sign any peace deal. More than one million Ukrainians are now dead. My sources in the US military confirm that all the claims that Russia has lost 1 million are fake news. This is all to push for war. Europe does NOT want peace. They are broke, and without war, the people will be storming their parliaments with pitchforks to hang these politicians on the street, for everything they were promised will vanish in a sovereign default. They NEED a distraction, and that is war with Russia, the same as Carney ran against Trump in Canada and avoided all domestic economic damage carried out by the Liberal Party.

It is NOT a question of IF but only WHEN

That’s our Computer – not my personal opinion.

The year 2025 was not defined by a single shock, but by a decisive break in confidence. Governments repositioned, as did central banks, but both have realized they are unable to stop the cycle in motion. The public no longer trusts those in charge of monetary or fiscal policy and confidence was the dominant theme of the year.

The drums of war loudly rang throughout the world. The Middle East saw intense conflict between Israel and Palestine. The West gained strategic partnerships with formerly ousted partners and created new enemies. Europe continued to build its defenses as it braces for World War III, promoted by its own neocons who have refused to accept peace. Nations drifted deeper into debt as they prepared for the inevitable, propelling the sovereign debt crisis. Russia acknowledged that it is at war with NATO and has increased its nuclear power. There were over 110 ongoing wars across the globe in 2025, and tensions are intensifying.

Economic warfare persisted. April’s tariffs and market correction sent shockwaves through the economy. Nations were forced to rethink trade and restrategize all imports/exports. War tensions rose in the East as all eyes are on Taiwan. China and the US remain at odds and are fighting for the title of “financial capital of the world.” China’s growing middle class and technological advancements rapidly accelerated.

Donald Trump taking office marked a global shift away from the globalist agenda–for now. Trump steered the US in a 180-degree direction from Joe Biden’s policies on energy, immigration, trade, and most importantly, war. I warned that Donald Trump’s election could delay the inevitable but not prevent it. As expected, the opposition has opposed the president every step of the way, which led to the longest government shutdown in US history. Confidence cracked once more when it was revealed that Joe Biden did not assume authorship of his presidency, leaving the public to wonder who was in charge of leading the world’s top economy for the past four years.

The push toward the Build Back Better agenda collapsed after Trump, and we witnessed countless nations vote for candidates with nationalist ideologies. Klaus Schwab’s exit from the World Economic Forum was unexpected and marked a change in vision from the bureaucratic elites who can no longer rely on the lies of climate change to control the masses. The new leadership of the WEF signaled a new direction for the globalists. They have not relented on their mission but altered it to adjust to the changing tides.

The dawn of the AI age has led to a new rise of institutions and reframed the future. Semiconductor chips are of utmost priority, as well as rare earth minerals, both of which are in tight supply. Automation has begun to replace workers. Jobs are in tight supply as businesses no longer trust in tomorrow and will not expand even if there is an opportunity to borrow at lower rates.

The most widely read content reflected that reality. When Vietnam erased and froze 86 million bank accounts tied to digital ID compliance, the response was immediate and global. Readers understood this was not about Vietnam, but about the future of money itself. That concern deepened as similar systems expanded elsewhere. Thailand’s biometric control model illustrated how surveillance, banking, and identity are converging into a single permission-based framework. Digital IDs and CBDC are not only valid concerns but concrete plans. Governments are increasing surveillance, tightening their grip on the masses who no longer trust them. Capital has poured into equities and tangibles as a hedge against governments.

The most engaged blog posts of 2025 shared a common thread: capital controls, digital identity, surveillance, war risk, sovereign debt, and the loss of credibility in government data. It is clear that the public has lost all hope in a reliable government. Trust has been lost, and people are seeking ways to protect themselves from increasingly authoritarian regimes.

2025 was the confirmation year. As we move into 2026, volatility will not come as a surprise. The Economic Confidence Model points to a heightened risk of financial stress, political instability, and sudden shifts in capital flows as confidence in institutions continues to erode. This is the phase in the cycle when governments are forced to react, often resorting to control measures as volatility rises. Although 2026 will be far from a calm year, the computer will continue to guide the way and provide a bit of predictability amid an unstable world.

PRIVATE BLOG – Will Silver hit $104?

Private blog posts are exclusively available to Socrates subscribers. To sign-up for Socrates or to learn more, please visit Ask-Socrates.com.

https://ask-socrates.com/

In 1935, Roosevelt introduced “The Social Security Act,” which passed in Congress. However, the act was described as “Old Age, Survivors, and Disability Insurance.” At first, the Act covered only industry and commerce. It was later extended to include farm operators in 1955. The SS tax was to be 3% of income up to an established limit.

The Amish pay taxes because the Bible said: “paying unto Caesar what is Caesar’s.” In 1956, the IRS informed the Amish that they were now subject to Social Security and would have to pay. One Amishman was quoted in a November 1962 Reader’s Digest article: “Allowing our members to shift their interdependence on each other to dependence upon any outside source would inevitably lead to the breakup of our order.” The constitutional question that has never been decided is what happens when the taxing power of government violates the First Amendment and Freedom of Religion? It clearly states: “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…”

In 1802, Jefferson wrote to the Danbury Baptists of Connecticut that there should be “a wall of separation between church and state.” They feared that a minority religion could be subjugated by the Federal Government, acknowledging a national religion. The Johnson Amendment, named for Lyndon Johnson, is a provision in the U.S. tax code that prohibits all 501(c)(3) non-profit organizations from endorsing or opposing political candidates. If churches involve themselves in politics, then indeed that creates a reverse problem where the state can be taken over by one religion and oppress all others; so it can go both ways. Historically, religions have often seized governments and outlawed all other religions.

In this instance, concerning taxation in direct conflict with religion, a group of Amish presented a petition to Congress, with 14,000 signatures. Naturally, Congress ignored them. The Amish reasonably questioned what possible harm they could do by not paying into Social Security. “We do not want to be burdensome, but we do not want to lose our birthright to everlasting glory, therefore we must do all we can to live our faith!”

The IRS moved to go after the Amish and seize their bank accounts. The problem was – they had none! The IRS then sought to go after anyone buying milk from the Amish and attach their payments to divert them to the IRS. Most simply refused for such a scheme would happen just once and end the business. The IRS, refusing to consider any religious principle, moved in to seize property. In this case of the Amish, that meant cows and horses. They would rather have the Amish die than respect anyone’s rights to religion.

Valentine Byler of the Amish community in Pennsylvania owed four years of IRS taxes. The IRS, of course, added interest and penalties to raise it to $308.96. Byler argued his religion forbade paying for insurance. The IRS said that was a “technicality” and that it was really just a tax. Vyler has no bank account to seize, so they issued a summons to appear in court for a charge of contempt. The judge in Federal District Court in Pittsburgh, Pa, according to a Reader’s Digest article, “angrily demanded of the IRS agents, ‘Don’t you have anything better to do than to take a peaceful man off his farm and drag him into court?’” The Judge then dismissed the case.

The IRS never gives up. The IRS had to issue a statement on April 18, 1961, in which they said:

Since Mr. Byler had no bank account against which to levy for the tax due, it was decided as a last desperate measure to resort to seizure and sale of personal property.

The IRS seized three of Byler’s six horses while he was actually plowing the ground for the spring planting. The IRS then sold the three horses at auction on May 1, 1961, getting $460. They then used this to satisfy the $308.96 and then charged him $113.15 in expenses and graciously returned $37.89. The incident made national news and was being used by the Communists to show how capitalism was ruthless. The New York Herald Tribune, reported the story with the bold headline: “Welfarism Gone Mad.”

The IRS Chief of Collections was forced to respond claiming he was unaware of the plowing situation. “Plowing never occurred to me. I live in an apartment.”  To show the mentality of those who are bureaucrats, he then said: “We don’t ask people their race or religion when we administer the tax laws. People have no right to use their religion as an excuse not to pay taxes.”

The IRS was then compelled to issue a press release in 1961, stating the Amish stance that “Social Security payments, in their opinion, are insurance premiums and not taxes. They, therefore, will not pay the ‘premium’ nor accept any of the benefits.”

The Amish met with the IRS Commissioner in September 1961 in Washington, DC. They cited several Bible passages, including I Timothy 5:8, which says, “But if any provide not for his own, and especially for those of his own house, he hath denied the faith and is worse than an infidel.”

The public outrage at the conduct of the IRS was international. The Amish argued they were entitled to an exemption based on the First Amendment. The IRS agreed to cease further seizures until the case was settled. Now, senators promised to try to pass a bill in Congress and everything stopped. The Amish hired a lawyer to challenge this conflict between the taxing power and the First Amendment. However, as the court date approached, they realized that if they lost in court, it would be over. They then looked to Congress to pursue a legislative exemption. Finally, in 1965, the Medicare bill was passed by Congress. Congress realized that if the Amish went to court and won, then others could challenge the right to tax conflicting with the First Amendment. Congress quietly put in on page 138 a clause exempting the Old Order Amish, and any other religious sect that conscientiously objected to insurance, from paying Social Security payments, providing that the sect had been in existence since December 31, 1950. The Senate approved in July, and President Lyndon B. Johnson signed it into law on August 13, 1965.

The open question remains simply this; the first explicit references to the tithe appear in Genesis 14, where Abraham tithes to Melchizedek, and in Genesis 28, where Jacob promises to give God “a full tenth.” But where did the idea to tithe come from? Many argue Abraham and Jacob were simply following the customs of the surrounding nations. But Scripture points in a different direction. In Genesis 26:5, God says, “Abraham obeyed my voice and kept my charge, my commandments, my statutes, and my laws.” In the New Testament, Jesus upholds the tithe in Matthew 23:23 (cf. Luke 11:42). He condemns the Pharisees for their tedious commitment to one part of God’s law, the tithe, while neglecting “the weightier matters of justice, mercy, and faithfulness.” Then he states, “These you ought to have done, without neglecting the others.”

One of the Five Pillars of Islam, zakat is a religious obligation for all Muslims who meet the necessary criteria of wealth. This too is not a charitable contribution, but is considered to be an obligatory tax or  alms. The payment and disputes on zakat have also been controversial in the history of Islam. The zakat is based on income and the value of all of one’s possessions or property. It has been traditionally set at 2.5% above a minimum amount known as nisab, which has also been greatly debated.

In Judaeo-Christianity, the “tithe” was a one-tenth of annual produce or earnings, formerly taken as a tax for the support of the church and clergy in Christianity. The question is, does exceeding the level prescribed as a “tithe” violate the First Amendment? If true, then any income tax imposed beyond 10% would violate the First Amendment. Since the Ten Commandments also prohibits coveting anything that belonged to a neighbor including his wife or property, it would appear that Socialism championed by Karl Marx violates the First Amendment and any tax should not exceed 10%. Hence, progressive taxation would be unconstitutional if not a flat tax. Some argue it also violates Equal Protection of the laws. The Tax at the time of Jesus’s statement to give to Caesar what is Caesar’s was less than 5%.

Historically, during the Roman Republic, the tax imposed was 1%. During times of war, the taxes would rise to 3%. Ever since Karl Marx, who said religion is the opium of the masses, politicians have loved Marxism and used it to exploit the people to the point governments are averaging now 40% of the entire economy. They have outpaced all other businesses beating the bankers and multinational corporations. They have become the 800 pound gorilla in the corner of the room nobody notices is even there. Politicians always preach against the “rich” which increases the wealth of government. As the IRS commented: “We don’t ask people their race or religion when we administer the tax laws. People have no right to use their religion as an excuse not to pay taxes.” This is obviously the spirit of Karl Marx.

COMMENT: Marty, all I can say is WOW! I have a PhD in economics. You drop bombshells here and there that are so profound they are beyond everything ever taught in economics. Your comment that social justice is incompatible with economic efficiency and individual liberty is right in front of our eyes. Nobody has ever laid Marxism and Keynesianism out to rest in so few words. I would wage a bet it will take just weeks before someone claims this was their idea when what is obvious is that to reach such a profound statement necessitates actual observation and experience. Nobody has that experience but you since you have dealt with governments around the world and major institutional investors. That statement sums up decades of false theories in economics that have suppressed society and is leading to war.

You should have your next generation conference ASAP before unscrupulous charlatans steal your work as they so often do.

HK

REPLY: Yes, I am trying to finish the Economic Confidence Model book. That is in there. I will try to do that Next Generation Conference ASAP while I still can. As far as the charlatans are concerned, the greatest risk that they pose is that they lack the historical database to substantiate their stolen ideas, but worse yet, when questioned, they lack the depth to actually offer solutions to the next turn of events. What I have been forced to learn comes from my clients. Even forecasting war came from dealing with clients and observing how money moves in advance. You do not get there from old theories that were predicated on fixed exchange rate systems.