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.

QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong, I appreciate that you are nonpartisan. You called out Kushner and his sidekick and explained that since they were not actual government employees but volunteers, they did not have to comply with the Freedom of Information Act like Hillary and her private server. I can see how you have forecast that, going into 2032, confidence in government on both sides will collapse.

Do you think Kushner will be investigated for treason?

DP

ANSWER: My red flag was raised when Jared Kushner played a key role in bringing former Goldman Sachs President Gary Cohn into the Trump administration during the first term. Kushner’s Role was critical. After Trump won the 2016 election, Kushner arranged a meeting between Cohn and Trump to provide a general briefing on the economy. Reports indicate that Cohn entered Trump’s circle through Kushner and Ivanka Trump, who were both critical advisors. Cohn ultimately left Goldman Sachs to serve as the Director of the National Economic Council. That was against everything people voted for Trump to end the inside deals with the Neocons & bankers.

The during the second term, Jared Kushner probably convinced Trump to listen to Netanyahu to start this war. The record indicates Kushner was present at the meeting. I believe even Rubio advised against it. Then to send Kushner and his sidekick as INFORMAL negotiators in the Middle East and Russia/Ukraine, I think was the worst possible decision and I believe they will not merely undermine the Republican Party, they will destroy Trump’s legacy and destroy the critical CONFIDENCE in government from both sides that will be why we end up in 2032. The Democrats will no doubt target them. They cannot help themselves. They will burn down the barn to get a mouse. This will only expose the distrust in government demanding political change as we head into 2032. Gallup Poll already has found:

Democrats: 91% hold this view, a sharp increase from 57% in 2024.

Independents: 90% hold this view.

Republicans: 83% hold this view, relatively stable compared to previous years.

The question of TREASON is a curious one. In the Roman Republic, the legal concept closest to “treason” was perduellio (roughly meaning “acting as an enemy of the state“), and its core prohibited acts included aiding the enemy, surrendering to the enemy, or colluding with the enemy. Regarding the specific scenario of “accepting money from the enemy,” history does record such events. As I have said, human nature never changes throughout the centuries.

However, according to the historian Livy, during the early Republic, the Vitellii brothers conspired with the exiled king Tarquinius Superbus, proposing to betray the Roman state in exchange for payment, and were ultimately punished as proditores (traitors). This case directly demonstrates that “betraying the state for money” constituted treason.

During Gaius Licinius Verres’ tenure as governor of Sicily (73–70BC), he was accused by Cicero of secretly colluding with pirates (Rome’s enemies) for personal financial gain, including releasing pirates and even hosting them in his home, conduct that Cicero characterized as treason (maiestas). Although Verres primarily faced charges of extortion, this case illustrates the legal and public opinion stance on officials who colluded with the enemy for profit. As they say, there is NOTHING NEW under the Sun.

The treason law in ancient Athens (known as prodolia) included in its scope of punishment “accepting gifts from enemies” (taking gifts from them). This meant that receiving money from an enemy and engaging in corresponding actions could potentially constitute betrayal of the city-state.

However, the historical cases actually recorded often involved military commanders, and the charges frequently intertwined military failure, corruption, and betrayal. For example, the famous case of Timotheus. He was prosecuted through a “treason indictment” (graphē prodosias) and ultimately sentenced to a massive fine of 100 talents. According to records, the reason he was accused was “taking bribes from allies” in order to seek reduction of tribute payments for them, this was more like corruption involving foreign interests, but the charge was categorized under treason.

The Athenian generals, Pythodorus and Sophocles, lost the battle in the Sicilian expedition. They fled fearing being charged. They were tried in absentia and sentenced to death. The charges often involved both corruption and betrayal; the generals feared being prosecuted for “corruption or betrayal” upon returning home.

During Medeval times, the core of the famous English 1351 Treason Act was “compassing the death of the king,” “levying war,” or “adhering to the king’s enemies and giving them aid and comfort.” Receiving foreign money to influence policy, unless it directly constituted aiding enemies in wartime, was generally difficult to fit within this narrow definition.

However, cases involving “foreign money” are mostly tied to espionage or wartime treason. For example, during World War I, Frenchman Bolo Pasha was prosecuted for treason for receiving German funds, and the prosecutor argued that “receiving German money itself was sufficient for the death penalty,” though the money was not actually used against France.

Then there was the Irishman Roger Casement who was convicted of TREASON under the 1351 Treason Act for seeking German support for Irish independence, but this was “aiding the enemy,” not merely “influencing policy.”

Benedict Arnold (1741-1801) was never formally tried and convicted by a court for “treason” in the modern legal sense. He was declared a traitor through a legislative resolution after his plot to surrender the vital American fortress at West Point to the British in exchange for MONEY and a military commission was exposed. He had previously been court-martialed only for other misconduct charges (unrelated to treason) while serving in the Continental Army. After learning that Major John André had been captured with the incriminating documents, Benedict Arnold fled to the British.

US LAW ON TREASON

Under U.S. law, a person acting for the U.S. government accepting payments from a foreign government would generally not be considered treason. Treason is defined very narrowly by the U.S. Constitution, and such an act would more likely fall under other federal criminal statutes, ethics regulations, or specific prohibitions regarding foreign gifts. The Strict Constitutional Definition of Treason legally is defined exceptionally narrow and is explicitly outlined in Article III, Section 3, Clause 1 of the U.S. Constitution. According to this clause, treason against the United States consists only in:

Levying War against the United States; or

Adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort

Crucially, for an act to constitute treason, the foreign government in question must qualify as an “Enemy” of the United States. This generally requires a state of open hostilities or war. The U.S. Supreme Court has interpreted this to require a formal declaration of war or actual armed conflict; merely accepting money from a foreign government that is not an active enemy in a war does not meet the constitutional threshold for treason . The Framers intentionally made the definition strict to prevent the charge of treason from being used as a political weapon against dissent as historically it was abused for just speaking out against the King.

Legal and Ethical Issues Besides Treason

While accepting foreign payments might not be treason, it is still subject to strict regulation and can be illegal under other laws.

Federal Gift Regulations:

Under the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act, U.S. government employees generally cannot accept gifts or payments from foreign governments valued over a minimal threshold (often cited as $100 or a similar limit depending on the specific regulation and context). If a foreign government offers a gift exceeding this limit, the employee must generally turn it over to the government or seek specific approval .

Bribery and Ethics Rules:

If the payment is made with the intent to influence an official act, it could constitute bribery under federal criminal law (such as 18 U.S.C. § 201). Additionally, government ethics principles strictly prohibit employees from soliciting or accepting gifts from entities that might seek official action or do business with their agency .

Just for the record, I cannot accept a gift from a foreign government and under securities law, I cannot even buy tickets to Disneyland to give to a  CEO of a company for that is considered to be paying a bribe. I question if Kushner and his sidekick could be charged with Treason unless they accepted anything from Iran, when we are in an active wartime that could be construed as providing aid and comfort to Iran’s war effort, the act does not legally qualify as treason. However, it would almost certainly violate federal gift acceptance rules, ethics regulations, or anti-bribery laws.

I would suspect that that Kushner is blinded by the money, and assumes he can get a pardon on Trump’s last day, or he will flee to Israel. The chaos this has introduced is mind-boggling. Based on current legal understanding, the president likely cannot validly pardon himself, but the Constitution does permit pardoning family members—even those who carried out a bribery scheme on his behalf. The legality of a self-pardon remains untested and highly contested. This maybe Kushner’s ace-in-the-hole.

However, a person cannot rely on a future presidential pardon to deliberately break the law with impunity. While the President’s pardon power is broad for past offenses, it cannot be used to authorize or license future crimes, and a pardon granted as part of a corrupt bargain (like a bribe or to obstruct justice) can itself be illegal. The fact that Kushner is a family member, if it could be shown that Trump benefited at all, then any pardon maybe null and void.

As I said, this is going to be sheer chaos and we are likely to see this completely bring down the two-party system and raise the specter that government is just too corrupt and that may be what 2032 ultimately resolves.

The Inevitable Pardon

Core Legal Principle: Pardons Only Cover Criminal Liability
The U.S. Constitution grants the President pardon power that extends ONLY to federal criminal offenses. It does NOT extend to civil lawsuits, NOR does it extend to state-level criminal charges. Even if Trump tries to pardon him as Biden did, the Democrats could (1) use a state to pursue him that could gather evidence, and (2) go after him civilly. This will all undermine the CONFIDENCE in government overall. The Democrats may assume they will score a victory, but they are burning down the barn to get the mouse.

I have often been asked why I would not join the “club” to become a multi-billionaire. The answer is simple. I was a TRADER not a market-manipulator just to make money. I enjoyed the challenge of figuring out the markets and how they function. You cannot possibly spend that kind of money anyway so all you can do with it is bribe other people to do things you want done. Sorry, I have never been interested in such schemes. Trying to make billions this way is for POWER – not accomplishment. But there are people who think the more zeros they have means they are better than everyone else. You can’t take it with you on the way to the sky. I was more interested in solving mysteries and accomplishment than making money as if that is somehow magnanimous. Many think accomplishment is to add zeros. That does not make you more important than someone else at the end of your time.

The richest man in Rome was Marcus Crassus. That was not enough. He wanted glory. He led a military campaign against the Persians, lost, and they poured melted gold down his throat to kill him to symbolize his wealth.

India is giving the world something worth paying attention to through its expanding economy and domestic market. The IMF’s October World Economic Outlook puts growth at 7% for India’s 2026–27 fiscal year, up from 6.4% in July. The following year is also projected at 7%, up from 6.7%. These are forecasts, but the direction of the revisions matters. Higher energy costs and international turmoil have not prevented India from performing better than the IMF previously expected.

The IMF projects global growth of 3.1% in 2026, advanced-economy growth of 2.1%, and Chinese growth of 4.5%. India’s fiscal-year figure is not an identical calendar-year comparison, but the momentum difference is substantial. The IMF attributes India’s stronger outlook to domestic demand and services activity, with demographics, structural reforms, and a growing internal market supporting its potential. This is an economy where the opportunity to expand remains considerable.

Seven percent growth compounds into something powerful. If sustained for ten years, it would almost double real economic output. That shows why a sustained growth advantage changes the position of a country. Businesses gain customers, investment can support additional capacity, and a larger economy creates possibilities that did not exist a decade earlier.

What interests me is the domestic market. A country that develops a larger base of consumers and businesses has more than one source of demand. Export opportunities remain important, but the economy is less dependent on waiting for a foreign customer to place the next order. An entrepreneur can see opportunities in his own country. That changes incentives. People become willing to establish businesses, improve skills, and commit money when they believe tomorrow offers something beyond merely paying yesterday’s bills.

Demographics give India an opportunity, but a population does not become prosperous simply because it is large or young. People need productive employment, infrastructure, and the freedom to build businesses. The encouraging part of the IMF’s assessment is that it identifies actual demand and services activity alongside demographic potential. There is movement behind the promise. India still has considerable work to do, but it has a reason to do it: an economy growing fast enough to reward improvements in its productive capacity.

The energy problem has not disappeared. The IMF reportedly projects Indian inflation at 5% this fiscal year and a current-account deficit of 1.5% of GDP, compared with 0.7% previously. Those figures underline the cost of imported energy and the need to preserve stability while expanding. Growth is not permission to ignore the balance sheet. India’s achievement is that the outlook has improved despite those pressures, not that it has somehow escaped them.

India also gained from the trade routes disrupted by the Ukraine war and Western sanctions. As Europe turned away from Russian energy, Indian refiners bought discounted Russian crude and expanded sales of finished fuels abroad. Reuters reports that India exported 4.1 million metric tons of jet fuel to Europe in 2025, nearly three times its 2021 volume, and supplied almost 15% of Europe’s aviation-fuel imports over 2022–2025. India maintained commercial relationships across opposing geopolitical camps and captured business others had abandoned. Europe still needed fuel, Russia still needed buyers, and Indian refiners earned their place between them. That opportunity has since narrowed after the EU prohibited imports of products made from Russian crude from January 21, 2026. But the lesson remains. Sanctions can redirect commerce toward countries willing and able to act as intermediaries. India pursued its own economic interests, and its businesses benefited from the gap between political declarations and the world’s continuing need for energy.

Capital moves toward opportunity. Investment means people can build businesses, acquire skills, and earn a living that their parents could scarcely have imagined. That gives a population a reason to believe it has a future, and that confidence encourages further investment. The established powers seem to believe their position is permanent, as though capital owes them loyalty while they make it more expensive to operate. It owes them nothing. India still has serious problems to overcome, but a country opening opportunities for its people has something that a country taxing and regulating those opportunities away cannot manufacture by decree.

I have written extensively about India’s economic rise and how the people are witnessing their economy expand in real time. Manufacturing is growing, foreign investment is pouring into technology and infrastructure, and an emerging middle class is finally experiencing opportunities that previous generations could only dream of. Yet there is another side to India that cannot be ignored. The 2026 Global Hunger Index ranked India 100th out of 122 countries, placing one of the world’s fastest-growing major economies in the category of serious hunger.

The numbers are disturbing. According to the Global Hunger Index, 9.8% of India’s population remains undernourished. Nearly three out of every ten children under five, or 29.3%, suffer from stunted growth, while an astonishing 19% experience wasting, meaning their weight is dangerously low relative to their height. The under-five mortality rate stands at 2.7%. These are children who are being deprived of the nutrition necessary for proper physical and cognitive development during the most critical years of their lives. This is not simply a matter of families being unable to afford certain luxuries. We are talking about basic food security in a country that has become an increasingly important player in the world economy.

India’s population exceeds 1.4 billion people. Even a relatively small percentage represents an enormous number of human beings. A 9.8% undernourishment rate translates into roughly 140 million people when applied to that population. That is an entire nation of people living without sufficient nutrition. Meanwhile, India is attracting multinational corporations, expanding its manufacturing base, and competing with China for international investment. Generations of the caste systems still prevail despite it being dismantled.

There has certainly been progress. India’s child stunting rate has fallen from approximately 50% in 2000 to 29.3%, and its overall hunger score has improved considerably over the past two decades. Now India received a hunger score of 24.1 in 2026, still within the serious category, and its child wasting rate remains exceptionally high.

The expansion of technology centers in Bengaluru, Hyderabad, and other major cities has created opportunities for skilled workers and attracted substantial foreign capital. But a farmer in a remote village does not automatically benefit because an American corporation establishes another technology operation in India. Growth in national GDP does not mean every household experiences an equivalent improvement in living standards.

Capital is moving toward the country because businesses recognize its enormous domestic market, young population, and expanding industrial capacity. India does not need to become another China to succeed, nor should its progress be dismissed because it has not yet eliminated poverty.

Nevertheless, there is a considerable difference between becoming a major economic power and achieving widespread prosperity. India can report impressive GDP growth while millions of families continue living in conditions that should be unacceptable for a nation with such extraordinary resources and capabilities. A nation cannot measure its success solely by stock market performance, manufacturing output, or the number of multinational corporations establishing operations within its borders. The real achievement will come when economic expansion reaches the families who have been excluded from prosperity for generations

Politicians NEVER connect the dots like political pundits and economics no less the Fake New networks. What you are seeing in Europe, is a global uptrend in civil unrest, but one that is manifesting at the voting booth. We are witnessing it in the UK, Ireland, the United States, and Canada. Nobody seems to pay attention to the global trend and only focus on the local issues or partisan sentiment. The British Columbia snap election, called by soon-to-be former Premier David Eby, was held yesterday. And to his shock, the NDP lost ground.

Eby publicly acknowledged that voters had “sent a serious message” and admitted that the government “had not done enough.” He later described this narrow victory as a “near-death experience,” saying it made him realize he needed to “deliver results for British Columbians”. He also stated that he “learned more during the election period than in his entire political career before”. These statements reflect that he was fully aware of the difficult situation, and was obviously surprised at the result.

The NDP government called this election as a potential power grab, intending to extend an already NDP majority government, with 2 years left in the current term, by an extra 2 years.

The strategy backfired, and British Columbians voted in a new Conservative Party majority. People voted for CHANGE from a government that created massive deficits, campaigned for higher taxes across the board, and made no mention of Land Title Rights, which have become a major potential issue for British Columbia landowners.

The new government has said all of the right things with regards to reducing government, creating affordability, providing better healthcare, protecting BC workers from US tariffs, increasing public safety, but the question becomes – At what cost?

The change of government has certainly put a pause on a major exodus from British Columbia to other more friendly jurisdictions for now.

The question to be asked now: Is the CHANGE in government too late? The S&P rating for British Columbia is Single A with a Negative outlook.

With a current deficit of $14 billion and significant government spending already in the works, the new Conservative government has a big task at hand.

Can they do it?

I have been warning that the computer has been forecasting significant global political change leading into 2032. This core prediction provides the road map into 2032. This will mark the collapse of republican forms of government, which will be attributed to systemic corruption and mathematical insolvency within the Western system.

Here we have in the upcoming French elections, the opposition outright calling for a default on the debt since it is impossible to pay off the debt and this is impacting EVERY country in the West. Our computer has given us the time line. It is not partisan or biased. It just looks at the numbers and projects out from there.

At this point, if you CANNOT see the political change unfolding all around you, you simple are in a state of denial and prefer NOT to see anything. Germany, France, UK etc. with the USA soon to arrive.

QUESTION: Marty, your Civil Unrest models targeted 2026 coinciding with international war. We have seen the Middle East erupting as you warned and now France with Macron is like Nero playing the fiddle while Paris burns. He is sending in 70,000 troops to the street this weekend. That’s half the Ukrainian troops that have deserted.

The waves of riots that have so convulsed France in recent weeks are in fact already rippling across Europe. I heard Greece is starting to have protests. Milan last weekend, where Meloni condemned “hooligans” trashing the city; in Brussels, protestors clashed with police, also inspired by events in France, thousands have marched in Portugal; in Spain, tens of thousands of people have taken to the streets in cities including Madrid, Valencia and Barcelona.

Your computer is amazing. Does it pick up human nature as part of the economic cycle? Will this spread to the USA?

Robert

ANSWER: Macron seems to be playing the fiddle as Paris burns as you said. I have said many times, these things become CONTAGIONS. Rome overthrew its king in 509BC and within months Athens did the same and Democracy was born and spread to other Greek states. The American Revolution was 1776 and that prompted the French Revolution in 1789. We saw Tiananmen Square in Beijing, China in 1989 and within month the Berlin Wall fell. The 1848 European Revolutions began in Sicily and spread to Europe overthrowing the French government then too. This is spreading throughout Europe and it will come to North America going into 2028.

Our model works because it is based on reality – not academic hypothesis. Look, every economic theory is worthless from Random Walks & Efficient Market Theory to Keynesian Economic & Marxism. They all assume rational behavior and that society can be forced to act as they theorize. The European Central Bank (ECB) introduced NEGATIVE interest rates in June 2014 and ended them in July 2022. For 8 years they used this theory believing they could PUNISH people for not spending money. It failed and stifled economic growth.

I am a TRADER not an academic. What I had to do was understand market behavior to survive.  The wildest theory was Efficient Market Theory assuming people act rationally and all information is in the market determining price. Only an academic would come up with such nonsense for anyone who has traded markets REAL TIME, know the well-known and long-standing Wall Street proverb:

“Buy the rumor, sell the news.”

To trade a market, you must pay attention to how psychology, emotions, social influences, and cognitive biases affect economic decisions. It challenges the traditional economic assumption that individuals consistently make rational choices designed to maximize their financial well-being. That is UNREALISTIC. This is why many core economic principles like Supply & Demand, Comparative Advantage etc, came NOT from academics, but traders. A guy cannot write a book on how it feels to give birth. Some things in life REQUIRE hands-on experience.

In 2020, I warned that real estate would RISE with the first uptick in interest rates. Many thought I was nuts. When mortages rates kept declining, the average person is not stupid. They waited because it might be cheaper tomorrow. As soon as the first uptick took place, people ran out and locked in mortgages. The same took place in Japan back in 1988. The Consumption Tax Act was passed by the Japanese Diet in December 1988, and came into effect on April 1, 1989. People ran out and bought ahead of the tax and this yielded the false impression that the economy was booming contributing to the December 1989 Bubble top. People rushed to buy appliances etc. because it would be more expensive with the new tax. When the tax came in, people stopped buying and the recession began.

People RESPOND on ANTICIPATION. I have said many times, my mother and her sister locked in 10-year CDs at the very high in interest rates in 1981 and they DID NOT ask me for advice. When I asked why she did that, she said when would she ever get 20% again. The average person is OFTEN the real forecaster and the pundits respond to the data, which means the people act FIRST!!!!

Traditional economics crafted by academics with ZERO trading experience typically assume that people respond logically to prices, incentives, and available information. Any seasoned trader knows that people frequently make decisions based on rumor, fear, greed, confidence, habit, and expectations, even when those decisions contradict their economic interests. The 1987 Crash asked fund manager why they sold. They said the Dow fell 1,000 points, nobody knew why, so they did not know if it would against tomorrow so they sold. It was LACK of information that caused the panic!!!!!

The Neocons have destroyed the world economy for they too always impose sanctions trying to PUNISH the people to force them to overthrow some government they do not like. Removing Russia from SWIFT resulted in splitting the world economy with the alternative system CHIPS. There is NO evidence that sanctions have ever worked even once.

They imposed sanction on Cuba in 1960 and are still there and the government is still there. Remove all sanctions, the people will prosper, and then they will take a stand against the government as we now see in France. Historical cases show that sanctions NEVER force a government to abandon a core strategic interest purely because of economic pressure. When the United States imposes sanctions with the explicit goal of changing a government’s behavior, the record demonstrates they only punish the people who then hate America. This is why the United States has a reputation outside of that it is imposing IMPERIALISM. These policies fail to work just as Keynesian Economics has failed.

The computer tracks the markets in advance of the numbers tapping into the TRUE nature of how markets and the economy function by Behavioral Economics, which flies in the face of the academics. A correlation of civil unrest and war has shown that when the economy is moving into recession, that is when things happen.

Turn the economy DOWN, and you get civil unrest and war. As I have said, war does not come when everyone is fat and happy.

We are seeing protests now throughout Europe and you are correct, they have begun in Greece as well. It is spreading across all of Europe. With the Democrats coming into power this November, they are going to be vindictive as hell and the economy in the USA will turn down. They will raise taxes across the board and that is something you DO NOT do going into a global recession, which I have warned would accelerate from 2026 into 2028. This will heat up from February 2027. They will target Kushner for “volunteering” to negotiate and it has been alleged he is pocketing a shit-load of money far beyond what one can spend meaning he would be seeking power. Not being a government employee, he assumes, like Hillary and her private server, he does not have to reveal his deals. He is the risk of taking down the Republican Party.

The Democrats will NEVER learn because they cannot admit that progressiveness has NEVER worked once and it undermines the economy and eventually leads to its collapse. Wall Street is moving out of NYC thanks to Mandami and he will not relent. Where real estate was always in high demand even in North Jersey all because of NYC, that has already turned the corner and will decline sharply into 2028. Major New York banks are indeed shifting operations to other states. For at least one major bank, JPMorgan Chase, employment in Texas has already surpassed that in New York City.

JPMorgan Chase is the most typical case. According to its CEO Jamie Dimon’s shareholder letter and multiple reports, JPMorgan’s workforce in Texas has grown from approximately 26,000 in 2015 to approximately 32,000 today, while its New York City employees have decreased from 30,000 a decade ago to approximately 24,000. Dimon has also stated explicitly that JPMorgan now has more employees in Texas than in New York.

Goldman Sachs is building a large campus in Dallas, expected to accommodate approximately 5,000 employees. However, Goldman Sachs’ New York office remains its largest U.S. location, with approximately 7,800 employees, while the Dallas-Fort Worth area has approximately 4,500 employees. Therefore, for Goldman Sachs, Texas is expanding, but New York still holds the top position for now.

Are banks shifting operations abandoning NYC? The answer is Yes! Driven by tax, cost, and policy factors, banks such as JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs, and Morgan Stanley are expanding their presence in Texas (particularly Dallas).

Just look to the hard-left in France candidate Jean-Luc Mélenchon has proposed just defaulting on the National Debt of France. He claims the ECB holds 19% of France’s current debt. He has correctly states that that there have been many historical precedents and that another cancellation would not be so unusual. The last time France defaulted on its sovereign debt was in 1797, during the period of the Directory, in an event known as the “bankruptcy of the two-thirds” (banqueroute des deux tiers).

Napoleon created the Caisse d’amortissement (sinking fund) to manage the national debt and constantly intervened in its operations, frustrating his finance minister. To bailout the nation, lacking the ability to sell debt under severe financial strain in 1812 (largely due to the disastrous Russian campaign), he had used the army’s treasury to lend to the state: In 1808, he arranged for the army’s treasury to “lend” 84 million francs to the state, which was then repaid with government bonds. He could not sell debt, so he  took the pension funds of the army to finance the state without going to the public.

As we head into 2028, the world economy will go into a sharp recession. As I said, where the American Revolution of 1776 inspired the French to revolt in 1789, this time France is spreading civil unrest to the rest of Europe and with the Democrats being prowar with Russia claiming they are supporting Democracy excusing the lack of elections in Ukraine because they are at war, NEVER have elections been suspended in the USA or UK during time of war. They just hate the Russian people all because Hillary claimed she would have won but for Putin.

So, prepare. The Democrats will bring the very unsound finance to the USA and only then will we see tensions rise with the prospect that the USA will also separate for the LEFT cannot sleep at night when they know someone has more money than they do. So look well at France and the riots. France has FREE health care, paid parental leave, paid family leave, FREE child care, FREE preschool, 5 weeks paid vacation, a 35-hour work week, generous unemployment and housing benefits, and heavily subsidized higher education. The forecast published by the Bank of France in December 2025  for GDP growth is (0.9%). France is just unsustainable. The socialists are like the slave owners of the 19th century. They prefer not to work, and exploite the “rich” to fund their life style transforming them into economic slaves.

Reliable sources report that two masked men set fire to Starlink antena in Bulgaria when it was said that Musk turn down Starlink for Ukraine. Then when it was to be turn on, oops, the Ukrainian in their typical vengeance destroy the antena that the Ukrainian military used.

According to reports from multiple news sources, two masked individuals did set fire to Starlink antennas in Bulgaria, but the incident did not occur in Ukraine, but at a secret facility near Sofia, the capital of Bulgaria. According to Bulgarian opposition lawmaker Ivaylo Mirchev, two masked men broke into a secret facility near Sofia and set fire to 11 out of 17 Starlink antennas used for communication with SpaceX satellites.

These antennas were reportedly providing critical communication connections for the Ukrainian military. Bulgarian Prime Minister Rumen Radev subsequently confirmed the investigation into the incident, but refused to disclose details, stating that he was cooperating with partner agencies and that releasing information prematurely would affect the results.

This incident is not isolated. In late September, a similar Starlink ground station arson attack also occurred in Poland, where Polish authorities identified it as sabotage and suspected Russian involvement. Lithuanian officials have linked the arson attacks in Bulgaria and Poland together, viewing them as part of a series of sabotage operations aimed at undermining Ukraine’s military capabilities. This time, the Bulgarian installation was set on fire after Starlink was curtailed.

It should be noted that the claim of “two masked Ukrainian men” has initially set forth. The Bulgarian side has now only identified the perpetrators as “two masked individuals,” without specifying their nationality. Reports mentioning the involvement of Ukrainian nationals refer to the Polish case, where Polish authorities detained a Ukrainian citizen suspected of participating in reconnaissance for the arson attack.

Ukraine blew up Nord Stream. They have no regard for anyone just as Zelensky told Trump to F-Off he would not stop destroying Russian refineries. The audacity of Zelensky destroying Nord Steam, undermining the Germany economy and Europe as a whole and then negs for money is beyond imagination.

Here is the Economist interview of the lead of Germany’s AfD. The Economist is one of the most LEFTIST magazines in the world.

PRIVATE BLOG – US 10 Yr Rate Drops – WHY?

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/

The United States has reached a point where the government is spending more than $1 trillion annually simply to pay interest on money it has already borrowed. The Treasury Department reported that the federal deficit reached $1.99 trillion for fiscal year 2026, an increase of $217 billion from the previous year. Total government spending climbed to $7.4 trillion while revenues amounted to only $5.4 trillion. Yet the most alarming figure is buried within that enormous spending bill. Net interest payments reached $1.05 trillion, while gross interest costs climbed to $1.36 trillion. Washington is now spending approximately $2.9 billion EVERY DAY in net interest, and that money does absolutely nothing to reduce the outstanding principal.

The interest expense alone has surpassed the entire national defense budget. Net interest is now the third-largest federal expenditure behind Social Security and Medicare, exceeding spending on Medicaid, veterans’ benefits, and numerous other government programs. Interest costs increased 8% over the previous fiscal year, while federal revenue increased only 3%. Washington collected more money from taxpayers, yet the cost of servicing its accumulated debt rose nearly three times as fast. Approximately 19 cents of every dollar collected by the federal government is now consumed by net interest payments. That money cannot build infrastructure, improve education, or provide additional services because it is being transferred to creditors for debts incurred by previous administrations and Congresses.

This is precisely what I have explained about the Sovereign Debt Crisis. Governments have absolutely no intention of repaying their debts. They continually roll over existing obligations while issuing additional debt to finance current spending. The politicians pretend that borrowing is a permanent source of revenue, but every bond eventually matures and must either be repaid or refinanced. When interest rates rise, the cost of refinancing becomes increasingly expensive. Washington became accustomed to artificially low rates during the pandemic and behaved as though that arrangement would continue indefinitely. The average interest rate on outstanding federal debt has now reached approximately 3.53%, more than double its 2021 level. Even that average understates the pressure from newly issued securities carrying higher market yields.

The numbers reveal how this process feeds upon itself. Federal debt held by the public increased by approximately $2 trillion during fiscal 2026, reaching $32.4 trillion, while total gross federal debt surpassed $40 trillion earlier this year. The government must borrow to cover its annual deficit while simultaneously refinancing trillions in existing securities as they mature. A one-percentage-point increase in the average interest cost on $40 trillion would eventually represent approximately $400 billion in additional annual interest, assuming the entire debt stock were affected. That increase would not occur overnight because existing fixed-rate securities retain their coupons until maturity, but the arithmetic demonstrates why the Treasury has become so sensitive to movements in the bond market.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent understands this problem because he comes from the world of global macro trading. He knows perfectly well that the Treasury cannot simply dictate what investors must accept as a return. The government can conduct buybacks, alter the maturity structure of its borrowing, and attempt to improve market liquidity, but none of those operations eliminates the underlying debt. Meanwhile, the Federal Reserve under Kevin Warsh can influence short-term rates, but it cannot command the 10-year or 30-year Treasury yield. If global capital demands higher compensation for inflation, currency risk, and the enormous supply of government securities, Washington must ultimately confront those market conditions.

Japan provides an important warning because it has spent decades attempting to manage an enormous sovereign debt burden through artificially suppressed interest rates. Japanese institutions are also among the largest foreign holders of U.S. Treasury securities. As Japanese government bond yields rise, those investors have a greater incentive to keep capital at home rather than finance Washington. This does not mean Japan must suddenly liquidate its American holdings. Even a reduction in future Treasury purchases matters when the United States must continually find buyers for enormous quantities of new and refinanced debt. Washington is competing with Japan, Europe, corporations, and private borrowers for the same international pool of capital.

The situation becomes even more absurd when politicians discuss cutting government spending. They argue endlessly over relatively small discretionary programs while interest costs are growing into one of the largest obligations in the entire federal budget. Interest payments are not optional expenditures that Congress can simply eliminate during budget negotiations. Treasury must honor its obligations if the United States intends to preserve the credibility of its debt. The more revenue consumed by interest, the less flexibility the government has to finance other commitments without additional borrowing or taxation. The political establishment has spent decades accumulating obligations, and now an increasing share of federal revenue is required merely to maintain the existing financial structure.

Consider what this means for the American taxpayer. The government collects income taxes, payroll taxes, corporate taxes, and numerous other forms of revenue, yet approximately one-fifth of federal receipts is now absorbed by interest on past borrowing. Americans are already confronting higher prices for housing, food, energy, insurance, and transportation. Washington continues demanding revenue from an economy where households are struggling to maintain their standard of living, and an increasing portion of that money is required to service the debt rather than provide any new public benefit. Politicians speak about the need for additional taxes, but the underlying spending problem remains untouched.

This is also why the notion that the Federal Reserve can rescue Washington simply by lowering interest rates is absurd. The Fed could reduce its overnight target, but that would not automatically lower long-term Treasury yields if investors remain concerned about inflation and fiscal sustainability. Attempting to suppress yields through massive bond purchases would introduce another problem by expanding central bank support for government financing. The United States already experienced the consequences of extraordinary monetary expansion during the pandemic. Americans are still paying the accumulated inflation bill, and repeating those policies would carry serious risks for purchasing power and confidence in the currency.

The most revealing aspect of the latest Treasury figures is that Washington is accumulating nearly $2 trillion in new deficits during a period when the economy is not experiencing a conventional recession. Revenue has reached approximately $5.4 trillion, yet the government still cannot come remotely close to balancing its books. Spending rose 6%, roughly twice the growth rate of revenue, while interest costs continued climbing. The political establishment keeps treating every new tax dollar as permission to spend even more, and nobody wants to confront the fact that the government has made itself increasingly dependent upon perpetual borrowing.

There is a fundamental difference between a government borrowing to finance productive infrastructure and one borrowing merely to maintain existing obligations. The latter becomes increasingly dangerous as debt servicing consumes a larger share of national resources. America has now reached the point where more than $1 trillion is spent annually on net interest, with no reduction in principal and no guarantee that refinancing costs will decline. The politicians will continue arguing over which party is responsible, but the debt has accumulated under both Republicans and Democrats because neither side has been willing to confront the long-term arithmetic.

The Sovereign Debt Crisis has never been about the government suddenly running out of dollars. The United States can create dollars, but it cannot create unlimited real purchasing power or compel international investors to hold its debt at whatever interest rate Washington prefers. The crisis emerges as confidence deteriorates and the cost of financing government becomes increasingly burdensome. We are watching that process unfold as interest payments consume more revenue, deficits expand, and the Treasury becomes increasingly dependent upon the willingness of global capital to finance its obligations.

The United States is now borrowing trillions annually while paying nearly $3 billion every day in net interest on its existing debt. That is an extraordinary financial burden for a government that continually promises the public more spending, more programs, and more benefits without explaining how any of it will ultimately be financed. The politicians have created a system where yesterday’s borrowing demands today’s taxes, and today’s borrowing guarantees an even larger interest bill tomorrow. They are not solving the debt problem. They are financing the cost of refusing to solve it.

Americans are increasingly financing the basic necessities of life because their paychecks are no longer stretching far enough. Buy-now-pay-later financing has exploded into a $160 billion industry, according to research cited by the Associated Press, with the use of short-term pay-in-four loans increasing nearly 80% since 2023. What began as a convenient way to purchase electronics or clothing is now being used for groceries, transportation, household bills, and even rent. We have reached the point where people are borrowing against their next paycheck to purchase things they need to survive today.

The Federal Reserve’s latest household survey found that 16% of American adults used buy-now-pay-later services in 2025, compared with only 10% in 2021. Among households earning between $25,000 and $49,999, the participation rate reached 23%, compared with 12% among those earning $100,000 or more. The Fed also found that 30% of users identified affordability as the single most important reason for using installment financing. Another 20% reported using these services for groceries or food delivery. Think about what those numbers are telling us. Millions of Americans are dividing relatively small purchases into installments because paying the entire amount upfront would place too much pressure on their finances.

The situation becomes even more alarming when examining repayment problems. The Fed found that 26% of buy-now-pay-later users made at least one late payment during 2025. Among users earning less than $25,000, that figure reached 40%, while 33% of those earning between $25,000 and $49,999 fell behind. Compare that with only 11% of users earning $100,000 or more. These are enormous differences that demonstrate how lower-income consumers are increasingly struggling to manage even short-term obligations. Of those who paid late, 64% reported being charged additional fees. The people least able to absorb another expense are often the very people being penalized for falling behind.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau uncovered another troubling pattern. Its study of 2022 borrowing found that approximately 63% of buy-now-pay-later borrowers had multiple simultaneous installment loans, while 33% borrowed from more than one provider. The average borrower originated 9.5 loans during the year, and roughly one in five borrowers took out more than one loan per month on average. This is how relatively small obligations accumulate into a serious financial burden. A consumer may believe that four payments of $25 are manageable, but what happens when that person has ten separate payment schedules running simultaneously? The money has already been committed before the next paycheck even arrives.

The Federal Reserve’s October 2026 Survey of Consumer Finances reveals that this financial deterioration extends far beyond installment purchases. The share of American families reporting that they were behind on loan payments increased from approximately 12% in 2022 to nearly 20% in 2025. Families devoting more than 40% of their income to debt payments increased from 6.5% to 8.6%, the highest share since 2013. The median debt-payment-to-income ratio climbed to 15.4%, while the overall debt-to-income ratio reached 94.9%.

The Fed reported that real median family income increased 7% between 2022 and 2025, reaching $82,200, yet median net worth increased only 2% after adjusting for inflation. The bottom quarter of households experienced a staggering 50% decline in net worth, while the wealthiest households continued benefiting from appreciating financial assets. Among families holding stocks, median stock holdings increased 36% to $77,400. This is why the stock market can continue making new highs while millions of people struggle to pay their bills. The financial press looks at rising asset prices and declares prosperity, but a family with no meaningful investments receives absolutely no benefit from that rally.

We must also understand what inflation has done to the average household since 2020. Prices surged during the pandemic, and those increases were NEVER reversed. The politicians continue discussing inflation as though a decline in the annual rate somehow restores purchasing power. It does not. A family that was spending $1,000 on necessities before the pandemic may now need approximately $1,300 to purchase a comparable basket of goods and services, depending on the items involved. Another 3% or 4% inflation increase comes on top of that already elevated expense.

The latest retail sales figures provide another example of how misleading the economic statistics have become. September retail sales increased 0.8%, but gasoline station sales surged 7.1% as energy prices rose. The retail sales control group used in GDP calculations increased only 0.1%, below expectations. Retail sales are reported in nominal dollars, meaning that higher prices can inflate the sales figures without consumers purchasing additional goods. When gasoline becomes more expensive, Americans still have to drive to work. The government records higher spending, but the consumer has less disposable income available for everything else. This is hardly evidence of improving living standards.

Bank of America Institute reported this week that nearly one in five households using buy-now-pay-later financing had repayments exceeding $500. Its analysts did not characterize the overall trend as an immediate crisis, but the growing reliance on installment financing deserves attention when combined with weakening labor conditions and rising household delinquencies. A person who uses credit strategically to avoid interest is in a very different position from someone who must finance groceries because there is insufficient money in the checking account.

We are developing two entirely different consumer economies. Those with substantial assets, investment income, and mortgages locked in at 3% can continue spending while benefiting from rising markets. Those dependent upon wages face higher rents, expensive vehicle financing, mounting insurance premiums, and increasingly difficult choices about ordinary household expenses. The latest Federal Reserve data show that nearly one in five families have fallen behind on loan payments, while the use of installment financing continues expanding. These people are not purchasing luxury yachts or speculating in the stock market. Many are simply attempting to maintain a standard of living that their income no longer supports.

The financial industry has discovered how to divide an unaffordable purchase into four manageable-looking payments, but it has not solved the underlying problem. Every installment is a claim against future income, and when enough of those claims accumulate, the household loses the flexibility to absorb even a minor emergency. Americans are being encouraged to finance the present with money they have not yet earned, while Washington continues spending money it must borrow. The numbers reveal an economy where financial pressure is building beneath the surface, and the people experiencing that pressure are increasingly the ones who can least afford another setback.