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 – Risk of Israeli Civil Unrest

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/

QUESTION: Marty, your computer forecast for civil unrest beginning in 2026 is plainly correct. Is this becoming a global phenomenon?

Jason

ANSWER: I have stressed that the computer has warned that this is (1) Global Civil Unrest, and (2) It is an International political risk assessment against the abuse of Republics.

There is evidence of a widening wave of civil unrest across Europe and parts of Asia, including Serbia, India, and Indonesia. However, it is not one coordinated revolutionary movement. Different countries are experiencing protests over inflation, energy prices, education, corruption, housing, unemployment, and declining confidence in political institutions. Our models forecasting that we are in the midst of an energy crisis also thanks to the hatred of Russia that has spread from Ukraine to the rest of Europe. Some countries want to abandon Ukraine like Italy. This is the smartest thing they can do and they will have to break with the EU.

This rise in civil unrest is a threat to the unity of the EU. This is why the EU must demonize Putin for Russia is the best enemy to retain unity and power they can buy for the money. They will need to act to create the external threat from Russia as if this was still the old cold war of capitalism vs communism. They must act before April when the French elections are coming and they can lose Germany to AfD and France and that undermines the EU’s existence when civil unrest is directed at their policies. This is why the EU is now courting Canada and the UK to join to keep the EU alive and to provide their youth to fight Russia to keep the jobs of bureaucrats in Brussels. They understand this rising civil unrest threatens their existence because of their stupid climate change, COVID, and migrant policies.

Youth-led demonstrations are spreading across Europe, particularly in France, Belgium, Italy, Albania, and Serbia. We are witnessing global protests  activity in Indonesia and other countries outside Europe. The victory of Serbian youth is encouraging others around the world. I have always said that civil unrest becomes a CONTAGION that often results in revolutions.

The common economic theme is significant: rising living costs and declining expectations are bringing younger generations into confrontation with established political systems. This is the fall of Republics that I have been warning about.

Countries experiencing significant unrest in Europe and the Balkans

France Education, cost of living, government spending, police confrontations Severe, expanding
Belgium Student demonstrations, education funding, police clashes Elevated
Italy Education, inflation, energy costs, labor demonstrations Elevated
Serbia Student-led anti-corruption movement, political accountability Major political upheaval
Albania Corruption, living costs, government accountability Elevated, sometimes violent
Spain Housing affordability, evictions, economic dissatisfaction Large-scale mobilization
Portugal Housing costs, public services, police responses Elevated
Greece Education, austerity concerns, living costs Active demonstrations
Austria University funding cuts Significant demonstrations
Germany Education funding, military service, youth dissatisfaction Mobilization increasing
Ireland Student fees, university funding, housing affordability Notable protests

France is currently one of the most serious flashpoints. Reuters reported hundreds of thousands marching on October 24, with violence developing in Paris and Marseille after largely peaceful demonstrations.

Serbia is particularly important because its student-led movement has already demonstrated the ability to alter the political balance. The movement developed over a longer period and should not simply be characterized as an extension of the recent French protests.

Asia and Southeast Asia

Indonesia Fuel prices, subsidy cuts, forest fires, government spending Renewed protests
India Youth unemployment, education, voting rights, policing Expanding movement
Pakistan Fuel inflation, economic hardship, political tensions Persistent unrest
Nepal Corruption, economic hardship, political reform Continued instability
Bangladesh Political transition, party tensions, fuel costs Localized instability
Sri Lanka Living costs, fiscal pressures, corruption concerns Vulnerable to renewed unrest
Philippines Corruption, accountability, economic grievances Significant recent protest history
Timor-Leste Youth-led political grievances Significant recent protest history

The clearest new development is Indonesia. On October 28, students demonstrated in Jakarta against rising prices, energy-subsidy cuts, and the government’s handling of major forest fires. Similar protests have occurred in other affected regions.

India is another important country to watch. Reuters and The Atlantic describe growing youth mobilization involving employment, education, and allegations concerning electoral administration.

From what our sources in Asia have revealed is that there are more than 1,200 demonstrations across South Asia connected to the economic effects of the Iran and Ukraine conflicts that have developed since the February start of the Iran war. This has been particularly pronounced issues that have increased in Pakistan and Nepal. This is evidence of a regional pattern our computer has warned about. The danger here is that a further escalation of this energy crisis will destabilize the world as a whole.

The most important connection between Europe and Asia is economic rather than organizational. The combination of higher energy prices, fiscal pressures due to the Sovereign Debt Crisis accelerated by the rise in interest rates, stagnant real incomes because of increasing taxes, housing affordability problems as capital has fled government bonds to private assets, and distrust of political elites over corruption and the lack of ability to address these concerns by any democracy process, is creating similar grievances in countries with otherwise very different political systems.

Young people are particularly sensitive to these conditions because they often have fewer assets, weaker employment security, and greater exposure to housing costs. The socialists want to impose wealth taxes and attack capital but that sends investment into hiding resulting in even less employment.

The Ukraine/Iran-related energy shock is a common source of pressure. However, it would be incorrect to attribute all these demonstrations to that conflict alone. Serbia’s movement, for example, developed well before the latest European protest wave over corruption. The energy crisis accelerate the discontent.

What the computer has shown is that the international pattern deserves serious attention, particularly where economic grievances are combining with demands for political accountability. France, Serbia, Albania, India, and Indonesia are especially important to monitor. But large demonstrations are not necessarily revolutions, and the majority of documented protests remain peaceful.

The strongest evidence of further escalation would be sustained nationwide strikes, repeated violent confrontations, defections from governing coalitions (military/police), and/or a breakdown in normal government operations. Zelensky’s attack on Russian refineries will reduce Russian exports of wheat and the Middle East relies on 80% of their grain from Russia while Iran is 100%. Our computer forecasts for the continued escalation in energy prices and just now as Qatar is restricting its LNG exports, the fragility of the world political economy is being torn apart and this is what 2032 is all about.

Italy’s Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini is openly challenging the policy of sending billions of euros and military equipment to Ukraine indefinitely. Salvini was reelected leader of the League party on October 25, securing 465 votes against 146 for his challenger, and immediately declared that he intends to bring the issue before Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s government. Europe has spent more than four years financing a war with Russia, and now members of the Italian government are publicly questioning how long their citizens should be expected to continue paying for it. The political disagreement is significant because Salvini is not an opposition politician shouting from the sidelines. He is a deputy prime minister whose party is part of Italy’s governing coalition.

“We must work towards peace,” Salvini told the League’s party congress. “Over the past five years, we have supported the Ukrainian people in every possible way.” He then declared that the League should seek a mandate to present its position to the Council of Ministers: “We cannot continue to send money and weapons to Ukraine.” The Italian government has already authorized packages of military equipment, and Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani confirmed on October 26 that another package is ready for delivery.

Salvini has been making this argument for some time, but his language has become increasingly direct. Speaking in Brussels on October 14, he said, “We have given a lot. Italians, the French, and Europeans have given a great deal.” He questioned whether the assistance had always reached its intended recipients rather than becoming entangled in corruption. He added, “We certainly cannot go on indefinitely gifting billions to Ukraine,” before concluding, “Now is the time for diplomacy.” That last statement raises a question the European political establishment has been reluctant to confront because they WANT war to prevent their inevitable economic crisis.

The issue with corruption is particularly refreshing to hear from a European politician. Ukraine has experienced major investigations involving government officials and public funds. In November 2025, an investigation into an alleged $100 million energy corruption scheme prompted Zelensky to seek the dismissal of two cabinet ministers. Salvini responded at the time by questioning whether additional Italian financial assistance could be misused. Taxpayers are entitled to demand accountability for public money, particularly when governments are making commitments without a clearly defined endpoint.

Italy has its own serious financial problems. Its public debt remains above 130% of GDP, one of the highest ratios in Europe, and the government must finance public services, pensions, infrastructure, and interest payments while facing persistent economic pressures. Italy is also part of the eurozone and cannot independently create its own monetary policy to accommodate every new fiscal obligation. The war has contributed to enormous changes in Europe’s energy markets, while sanctions and the reduction of Russian energy imports have imposed additional adjustment costs on European businesses. The precise economic burden differs among countries, and Russia’s invasion itself was a major cause of the disruption. Still, Italian households and manufacturers have a legitimate interest in the financial consequences of a conflict that continues year after year.

Salvini has also raised the question of restoring economic relations with Russia after the fighting ends. He argued that Europe should eventually resume purchasing energy wherever it is most economical. “Once the war ends, we need to buy where it costs less,” he said. Italy was among the European countries heavily exposed to Russian natural gas before the invasion. Replacing those supplies required changes to import infrastructure, commercial contracts, and energy procurement. Energy security has an economic price, and governments must decide how much their populations should pay for particular foreign-policy objectives. Salvini’s argument reflects the concerns of businesses that want greater predictability in energy costs and international trade.

His position is not new. Only months after Russia invaded Ukraine, Salvini declared, “The most powerful weapon will be diplomacy, not missiles or warheads.” He called for diplomats rather than additional weapons shipments and repeatedly warned against allowing the conflict to escalate into a direct confrontation between NATO and Russia. Salvini has also faced criticism for his earlier political relationship with Moscow and his reluctance to condemn Putin as forcefully as other European leaders. Those associations remain part of the political debate surrounding his position. Nevertheless, the question of whether military assistance should continue indefinitely can be examined on its own merits, regardless of the politician raising it.

Italy is already drowning in sovereign debt, struggling with stagnant growth, and facing enormous obligations to its own citizens. Yet Brussels continues treating European taxpayers as though they possess unlimited funds to finance a foreign war with no defined conclusion. Why should an Italian worker struggling to pay his electricity bill, or a pensioner watching inflation destroy his purchasing power, be expected to finance another government’s military expenditures indefinitely?

Italy did not invade Ukraine, and its citizens should not be handed an open-ended financial obligation for a conflict their government cannot independently resolve. There is a legitimate argument that supporting Ukraine serves European security, but that does not eliminate the need to establish limits, calculate the costs, and obtain the consent of the people paying the bill. Italy’s government was elected to represent Italians, not to write blank checks on behalf of Brussels or Kyiv. A nation that cannot adequately finance its own domestic obligations must seriously question how long it can continue borrowing to finance a war abroad.

Pakistan has taken the extraordinary step of attempting to restrict Taiwanese commercial airlines from using its airspace in support of Beijing’s One-China policy. Defense Minister Khawaja Asif told Bloomberg that Pakistan’s aviation authorities recognized only mainland China, declaring, “We have permitted only Chinese airlines to fly over Pakistan.” Within days, China Airlines and EVA Air began rerouting flights between Asia and Europe, with at least a dozen aircraft reportedly flying over Russia instead.

Pakistan appeared to be taking a harder position against Taiwan than China itself, which permits Taiwanese commercial airlines to use its airspace. However, the situation became even more revealing when Pakistan’s own newspaper, Dawn, reported that documents subsequently authorized the Taiwanese carriers to use Pakistani airspace through March 27, 2027. This is what happens when geopolitical alliances begin interfering with ordinary international commerce.

The initial restriction was significant because Pakistan became the first country reported to have excluded Taiwanese commercial airlines specifically on the grounds of the One-China policy. Pakistan has recognized the People’s Republic of China since 1951 and consistently supported Beijing’s position that Taiwan is part of China. But recognizing Beijing diplomatically and preventing civilian aircraft from crossing national airspace are entirely different matters. Pakistan was effectively extending its political recognition policy into commercial aviation, creating additional costs and operational complications for airlines carrying ordinary passengers between Europe and Asia. The fact that Islamabad subsequently authorized flights does not erase the significance of its defense minister’s statement. It demonstrates how quickly political decisions can disrupt international transportation.

The economic consequences were immediate. Flight-tracking data showed China Airlines and EVA Air avoiding Pakistan beginning around October 25. Some flights were redirected over Russia, a route Taiwanese carriers had largely avoided since the invasion of Ukraine in February 2022. Others faced the possibility of longer southern routes through regions already affected by the war in the Middle East. Every additional hour in the air means more fuel, higher operating costs, additional crew requirements, and potentially greater scheduling complications. Airlines operate on relatively narrow margins, and the cost of political confrontation ultimately finds its way into ticket prices and commercial expenses.

What makes this particularly interesting is Pakistan’s relationship with China. Beijing has invested billions through the China-Pakistan Economic Corridor, a major component of the Belt and Road Initiative. The corridor includes transportation infrastructure, energy projects, and facilities intended to improve Pakistan’s connectivity with international markets. China is also Pakistan’s largest supplier of military equipment. Chinese-made aircraft played a prominent role during the May 2025 confrontation between Pakistan and India, illustrating how deeply the military relationship has developed. Islamabad increasingly depends upon Beijing for investment, technology, and strategic support, particularly as tensions with India continue.

China has become an important creditor and financial partner. When a nation depends upon another country for infrastructure investment, military equipment, and financial support, foreign-policy decisions inevitably become intertwined with those economic relationships. This does not prove that Beijing ordered Pakistan to restrict Taiwanese aircraft. There is no publicly established evidence of such an instruction.

The One-China principle has become one of Beijing’s most important diplomatic demands. China maintains that Taiwan is part of its territory and that the People’s Republic of China is the sole legitimate government of China. Taiwan, which has approximately 23 million people and its own elected government, rejects Beijing’s sovereignty claims. Most countries recognize Beijing diplomatically while maintaining varying degrees of unofficial economic relations with Taipei. Pakistan has adopted a particularly firm position in support of Beijing, repeatedly opposing Taiwanese independence and supporting China’s position in international organizations.

This is where the broader War Cycle becomes important. Taiwan is one of the most dangerous geopolitical flashpoints because any military confrontation could involve China, the United States, and regional powers. The consequences would extend far beyond the island itself. Taiwan occupies a critical position in international semiconductor manufacturing, while the surrounding waterways carry enormous volumes of global trade. A serious military confrontation would threaten shipping, insurance, energy transportation, electronics production, and financial markets. Countries are already being pressured to determine where their loyalties lie, and the Pakistani airspace dispute demonstrates that this confrontation is no longer confined to military exercises or diplomatic statements.

There is considerable irony in the fact that Taiwanese airlines began using Russian airspace after avoiding it for more than four years. The Western confrontation with Russia has already complicated aviation routes between Europe and Asia. The war involving Iran has created further disruption across the Middle East. Now Pakistan’s initial decision threatened another important corridor. Airlines cannot simply fly wherever they please. Every country controls access to its sovereign airspace, and international routes depend upon a network of permissions and agreements. When geopolitical conflicts close several corridors simultaneously, the remaining routes become increasingly important and expensive.

India’s position adds another dimension. Pakistan and India have fought multiple wars, while India maintains an increasingly complicated relationship with China. New Delhi has expanded commercial and technological engagement with Taiwan without establishing formal diplomatic relations. Pakistan’s alignment with Beijing therefore carries implications beyond the Taiwan Strait. The China-Pakistan partnership gives Islamabad strategic support against India, while Beijing benefits from a regional partner positioned along important transportation and economic corridors. The relationship reflects national interests rather than mere diplomatic symbolism.

The larger issue is that the world is increasingly dividing into competing geopolitical blocs. China is expanding its diplomatic and economic influence, Russia is strengthening relationships outside the West, and the United States is attempting to maintain its strategic position in Asia. Pakistan is closely aligned with Beijing while simultaneously maintaining important relations with Washington. These relationships are not always compatible, and countries are being forced to make decisions that carry consequences for trade and investment. The more governments use economic infrastructure to enforce political positions, the more fragmented international commerce becomes.

Beijing continues to insist upon its territorial claims, Taiwan continues to reject those claims, and governments throughout Asia are calculating the consequences of taking sides. The international War Cycle is unfolding through economic and diplomatic pressure as well as military confrontation. The Pakistani aviation dispute is a small incident compared with the potential consequences of a war over Taiwan, but it demonstrates how easily geopolitical conflicts can begin disrupting the systems upon which international commerce depends.

The American dream of homeownership is becoming increasingly dependent upon whether your parents have assets. A new analysis from Rocket Mortgage found that the share of homebuyers under 35 purchasing property with a co-applicant over 55 increased 21% between 2018 and 2025. Approximately one in 30 younger buyers now has an older co-applicant on the mortgage. Meanwhile, total home purchases among Americans under 35 have declined 15% over the same period. The cost of entering the housing market has increased so dramatically that family wealth is becoming a determining factor in who can purchase a home and who remains trapped renting.

We have reached the point where income alone tells us very little about a young person’s financial circumstances. Two people can earn identical salaries, have comparable education, and work equally hard, yet live in completely different economic realities. One has parents who own their home outright, investment accounts, perhaps a family trust, and enough accumulated assets to help with a down payment or guarantee a mortgage. The other comes from a family that has no accumulated wealth to transfer. The first individual can begin building equity immediately while the second spends years trying to save enough money to enter the market. The difference is not necessarily intelligence, ambition, or work ethic. It is access to assets accumulated by previous generations.

Rocket’s analysis found that approximately 3.3% of younger homebuyers purchased with a co-applicant over 55 in 2025. In Anaheim, California, where the median home price approaches $1 million, that figure was nearly 8%. Los Angeles, San Diego, South Florida, and New York also recorded elevated rates of older co-applicants. In comparatively affordable cities such as Milwaukee and St. Louis, the figures were closer to 2.3% and 2.4%, respectively.

Zillow’s 2026 Consumer Housing Trends Report found that 45% of Generation Z mortgage buyers used a gift or loan from family or friends to finance their down payment. Among millennials, the figure was 34%. A separate LendingTree survey found that 78% of Gen Z homeowners surveyed had received some form of financial assistance with the down payment on their current home, compared with 56% of millennials and just 12% of baby boomers.

The LendingTree findings are particularly interesting because 24% of Gen Z homeowners reported receiving down payment assistance through an inheritance or trust fund, while 27% received help directly from their parents. These are not enormous fortunes. A family that purchased a home thirty years ago, paid down its mortgage, and invested consistently may have accumulated enough equity to help its children. Another family may have inherited property from grandparents. Some parents are now purchasing homes outright for their adult children, while others are lending them money at rates below those available from banks. We are witnessing the transfer of accumulated assets becoming an increasingly important factor in determining the economic opportunities available to the next generation.

There is a substantial difference between income, assets, and net worth, and this distinction is becoming critical. Income is the money you earn. Assets are what you own or can access, while net worth is the value of those assets after subtracting liabilities. A young professional may have a high salary but relatively little accumulated wealth. Another young adult may earn substantially less yet have access to a family trust, inherited property, or parents willing to contribute $150,000 toward a home. On paper, the second individual may not personally possess a remarkable net worth. Economically, however, that person has access to capital that can change the entire trajectory of their financial life.

Parents are increasingly becoming the financial institution that makes homeownership possible. The National Association of Realtors reported that first-time buyers represented only 21% of home purchases during the year ending June 2025, the lowest share in its records dating back to 1981. The Urban Institute has also found that the number of young adults purchasing homes declined more than 26% between 2021 and 2024.

When parents become co-borrowers, they are assuming legal responsibility for the mortgage. If their child cannot make the payments, the lender can pursue the co-borrower. Depending upon the arrangement, their credit and borrowing capacity may also be affected. Parents who use retirement savings or borrow against their own homes to help their children could be placing their future financial security at risk. Family assistance may be beneficial when the assets are genuinely available, but borrowing against one generation’s retirement to finance another generation’s overpriced home can simply transfer financial vulnerability from the young to the old.

The financial structure of the economy has changed. A young adult with access to inherited property, a trust, or parental financial support can begin life with an entirely different set of opportunities from someone who must build everything from wages alone.

The American housing market is becoming an example of how capital accumulates across generations. Families that acquired property before the enormous inflation in asset prices are in a position to help their children purchase homes. Those without accumulated assets must compete in the same market using income that has not kept pace with the cost of ownership. There is nothing wrong with parents helping their children, and many have worked their entire lives to provide precisely that opportunity. The troubling development is that such assistance is becoming an increasingly important factor in whether young Americans can participate in homeownership at all.

We are watching the emergence of an economy in which family assets can matter more than individual earnings when determining who gets ahead. The next generation will not begin from the same financial starting line. Some will receive homes, down payments, trusts, or access to family capital, while others will inherit nothing and face decades of mortgage payments at prices previous generations could scarcely have imagined. The widening divide between those who possess assets and those who depend entirely upon wages will have lasting consequences for housing, family formation, consumer spending, and the broader economy. This is what happens when asset inflation outruns the productive economy for an entire generation.

QUESTION  Mr. Armstrong, Your advice is opposite Warren Buffett told shareholders in May 2025.

“We wouldn’t want to be owning anything that we thought was in a currency that was really going to hell, and that’s the big thing we worry about with the United States currency,”

Would you comment on that?

Jeb

ANSWER: Look, I do not like to criticize other analysts. Warren is a domestic player. He viewed the world through the old-world view that was taught in school about Random Walks, Quantity of Money, and Keynesian Economics. All of those theories have crumbled into dust. By that comment referencing the dollar, it is kind of out of date since there is no other currency that is the alternative.

The backing of the dollar has NEVER been gold or some commodity. That is the concept from the old days of a barter economy – I’ll give you a chicken for potatoes. The real Wealth of a Nation is its people. It is the productivity, not how much it has in commodities. If that were true, the Russia should be the financial capital since they are the richest nation on earth with an estimated $75 trillion in natural resources. Further proof is that the two defeated countries were Japan and Germany. But their people were exceptionally industrious. They rose to the leading economy in their respective regions WITHOUT gold reserves.

What makes the United States the financial capital and the largest economy is (1) the freedom of our people to invent things, (2) the anti-Marxist philosophy of a free market. We have the largest CONSUMER-BASED economy to which everyone else needs to sell their products from Asia and Europe.

This why when Bretton Woods collapsed, they swore the dollar would collapse. It rose in value. That is when they had to explain why they were wrong. They came up the notion that the dollar was then backed by oil. But oil was at best 6% of the world commerce. Germany and Japan had to prise their products in dollars to sell to the American consumer. It is the PEOPLE who are the backing of a currency – not a commodity. Look at South America. They cannot get off the ground because people like Lulu are real communists and are still fighting class-warfare. That is what China and Russia learned – the idea of socialism and Marxism hands more power to government and now some bureaucrat will tell you when to plant a crop. That failed and their people do not want to surrender their freedom.

The real value of the stock market declined into 1977 from the 1929 high all because of socialism. Big Government was to control society, eliminate recessions and depressions, and that is still what we are today taught in this Marxist CONFIDENCE game. It was Milton Friedman who in 1970 who stood up and said that the “Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits.” The academics came up with Stakeholder Economics during the Great Depression in 1932. That was NOT an original idea of Klaus Schwab. The academics turned companies into welfare organizations and you see that the book value of companies collapsed and bottomed finally in 1977 after 48 years. The WEALTH OF A NATION is not its commodities, but the productivity of its people. The academics turned corporations into welfare operations. That became the takeover boom of the ’80s because you could buy a company, sell its assets, and double or triple your money.

COMMENT: Well, your computer did it again. They were calling for the Federal Police to arrest many Bolsonaro supporters. Jilmar Tatto told the Chamber that he has direct information from the PF that “a lot more people will be arrested” and that the agency already has everything it needs. Bolsonaro has fled to Miami. You are right. Brazil is a dangerous place to have any investment. Lula is a vicious communist.

Juan

REPLY:Yes, Bolsonaro and his family left the country and arrived in Miami. Brazil is a corrupt leftist state, and foreign capital should get out before it can no longer do so. The computer is showing a sharp rise in volatility in 2027. The country will undoubtedly end up in revolution. The left is always the most violent. They cannot sleep at night because someone has more than they do. Can you imagine that whoever wins an election gets to imprison their opponent? In Ukraine, in October 2026, Zelensky approved sanctions against the previous head of state Poroshenko and others, citing national security threats. He had to flee Ukraine, which also has a history of imprisoning previous politicians. So much for democracy in Ukraine.

The Tenth Commandment’s prohibition against coveting a neighbor’s goods demonstrates that this attitude of socialism has been the dark side of humanity from ancient times. Hundreds of millions have died over this economic battle. The Russian Civil War and aftermath, 1917–1922 killed up to 12 million defending against Marxism. Mao killed some 77 million who opposed this Marxist idea. Stalin killed about 17–20 million attributable to his repression, Even the communist coup attempt in Indonesian estimated deaths were up to 1 million. This list goes on and on. This is why it is the Tenth Commandment for all it does is lead to social wars over greed.

The surviving Sumerian legal and wisdom texts that predate the Ten Commandments also contain earlier prohibitions against theft. This is the DARK SIDE of humanity. This was introduced in the USA and Teddy Roosevelt even started the Progressive Party for the 1912 election. They introduced the Income Tax in 1913 to get those filthy rich bastards who had more than them.

Brazil is split 50/50. You cannot oppress 50% of the country and impose your Stalinisttic repression. There will be no choice for Brazil that there is no civilized way to address the injustice, which always leads to violence. Brazil is not a place for foreign investment. Get out before you cannot.

Every Socialistic Society Has Collapsed. It fosters Class Warfare that ALWAYS leads to the destruction of society. There are no exceptions

QUESTION: Marty, do you think the Federal Reserve is listening to you when you say that raising rates will not bring down energy prices? Socrates did not show any Directional Change here in October.

Bill

ANSWER: Perhaps. All central banks are caught between a rock and a very hard place. They are expected to raise rates to fight inflation, to sterilize the reckless spending from the politicians who think they can spend whatever they want, and it’s the central bank’s job to neutralize the inflationary effects. Look, this is a serious crisis. I cannot comment on what the Fed is using. I am sure they are aware of our forecasts and they know they really have no tool to actually control the economy

The real reason they cannot publicly acknowledge what I have to say on this subject is because this is a CONFIDENCE game. People need to “feel” someone is in charge like God in haven, but in the economy. If they stood up and said, we can’t control the economy, then government would lose power. They have to keep up the image that they are in control so vote for them and they will always make the world better. Larry Summers admitted they cannot forecast a recession, so how do you prevent something you cannot forecast?

We will deal with this in more detail at the WEC and a special report will be provided since this is a serious question

PRIVATE BLOG – The Fed Paradox With Interest Rates

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/