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.

??? Meanwhile in Ireland

Security team made up of most foreign Migrants beat a Farmer trying to access his own land.

‘They’ have imported an army to deploy against indigenous Citizens and it’s begun.

You will start seeing more of this everywhere. pic.twitter.com/WQxpqrOysk

— Concerned Citizen (@BGatesIsaPyscho) May 23, 2026

The European Union has now reached the point where it openly tells nations how many migrants they should accept and what they must pay if they refuse. They no longer even pretend that member states are sovereign countries. Ireland, a nation that fought for centuries to determine its own destiny, is now being told that decisions about its borders, communities, housing, and future will be made by bureaucrats in Brussels.

Under the EU Migration and Asylum Pact, Ireland will participate in what Brussels calls a “mandatory solidarity mechanism.” Each year, the European Commission determines how many asylum seekers should be relocated across participating member states. Countries are expected to contribute either by accepting relocated migrants, providing operational assistance, or making financial contributions. The current framework establishes a minimum annual EU-wide target of 30,000 relocations and a financial contribution of €20,000 for each migrant turned away. While Ireland is not assigned a fixed permanent quota in advance, it is now part of a system where Brussels can determine what contribution is expected from Dublin under the annual solidarity mechanism.

This is what centralized planning always becomes. Every empire eventually reaches the stage where the people making decisions are so far removed from reality that they begin governing through formulas, quotas, and statistics instead of common sense. They sit in offices creating migration targets while ordinary citizens are trying to find housing, afford rent, secure medical care, and keep their communities intact.

Ireland is already facing one of the worst housing crises in its modern history. Rents have surged to record levels. Home ownership has become unattainable for many young people. Homelessness has climbed to unprecedented levels. Public services are under strain. Yet the answer from Brussels is not to address the causes of these crises. The answer is to import additional obligations and then punish any nation that refuses to comply.

The bodycam footage of Henry Nowak has just been released.

An 18-year-old who was stabbed FIVE TIMES called the police for help.

His attacker told officers Henry was a racist.

So they handcuffed the victim.

Henry told them over and over:

"I've been stabbed."
"I can't…

— Benny Johnson (@bennyjohnson) June 1, 2026

The above video is quite disturbing but it has sparked a new wave of resistance across the United Kingdom. Henry Nowak, an 18-year-old kid, was stabbed five times by a migrant. The police officer refused to help Nowak and claimed he was racist for accusing the migrant of violent assault. Not only did officers refuse to help Henry Nowak, but they also arrested him as if he were the aggressor. Henry Nowak died in handcuffs.

Keir Starmer has come out to offer crocodile tears only after the bodycam footage was released. For those outside of the UK–the murder took place SIX MONTHS AGO! Then it took Starmer two days to respond because he was forced into a corner by public outcry. Starmer disarmed his population but made a carveout for Sikhs to carry “ceremonious knives.” Meanwhile rape cases are through the roof and women cannot even carry pepper spray. The failed UK government flooded the borders with dangerous criminals. They forced citizens to pay for the invaders’ tax-subsidized lives. No one is permitted to complain or they will be a dreaded “racist” because to be white means you should be filled with shame for existing.

Labour policies are precisely why authorities prioritized alleged racism over a violent attack. You can assault three police officers ON CAMERA and walk away without charges if you’re a migrant. If you’re a white Brit who posts an image online that may be deemed offensive, then you will be removed from society. People are now attending vigils with masks on as they fear Starmer’s Gestapo will arrest them for racism. It is safe to say Starmer hates British people and is an anti-white apologist. His two-tiered justice system ensures that Brits are no longer safe at home.

Apparently this video isn’t enough evidence to convict the guy in blue for assaulting all three police officers

Yet Lucy Connolly got two years in prison for an off colour tweet – prosecutions Keir Starmer encouraged

Labour’s two tier justice system has to end…

— Chris Philp MP (@CPhilpOfficial) May 29, 2026

Europe’s leadership no longer appears capable of recognizing the consequences of its own actions. Citizens across the continent have repeatedly expressed concern over migration levels. Elections throughout Europe have increasingly become referendums on border policy. Governments have fallen. Political parties once considered fringe have surged into the mainstream. Yet Brussels responds by centralizing even more authority.

The pattern is familiar because history is full of examples. Centralized governments always believe they possess superior wisdom. They assume local populations are incapable of making decisions for themselves. They insist that every problem can be solved through regulations, mandates, quotas, and directives. Then they are shocked when public anger explodes.

The people did not create Europe’s migration crisis, nor did they create the wars that have displaced millions. The people did not design the foreign policies that destabilized entire regions. Yet ordinary citizens are expected to absorb the consequences while being told that resistance is somehow immoral.

The lesson of history is simple. When governments stop listening and start imposing, they eventually discover that public patience is not unlimited. Europe’s leaders would be wise to remember that before they continue down a path that is dividing the continent more with every passing year.

The latest polling continues to show that Marine Le Pen remains one of the strongest political forces in France. Depending on the matchup, candidates from the National Rally remain highly competitive and, in some surveys, lead potential rivals heading into the 2027 presidential election. Even many of Le Pen’s political opponents openly acknowledge that the nationalist movement is closer to power than at any point in modern French history.

Europe is entering a period where governments increasingly fear their own voters. As economic conditions deteriorate, energy costs rise, migration pressures intensify, and living standards decline, establishment parties are discovering that the public no longer automatically accepts the old political order. When that happens, the temptation becomes overwhelming to remove opponents through legal mechanisms rather than defeating them at the ballot box.

Marine Le Pen’s legal battle has now become one of the most important political stories in Europe. Prosecutors have asked French courts to uphold a five-year ban that could prevent her from running for president in 2027. If upheld, the ruling would effectively remove one of the country’s leading candidates from the race despite her continued strength in the polls.

The establishment insists this is merely the impartial application of law. Perhaps. Yet ordinary people look around Europe and see a different pattern emerging. They watched anti-establishment parties rise in Italy, Germany, Austria, the Netherlands, Romania, and France. They see courts, bureaucracies, intelligence agencies, and supranational institutions increasingly involved whenever those movements gain momentum. Whether one agrees with Le Pen or not is beside the point. The issue is confidence in the democratic process itself.

When voters believe a candidate is being removed administratively because they might win, confidence collapses further. Once people conclude elections are managed rather than decided, the political system enters a very dangerous phase. History is full of examples where governments attempted to preserve stability by limiting political competition. It rarely ends well.

France faces a July court decision that may determine whether Le Pen remains eligible to run. Even her political rivals are already adjusting their strategies based on the possibility that she could be excluded from the election entirely. Jordan Bardella is increasingly being positioned as a potential replacement candidate if the courts rule against her.

The broader trend is what concerns me. Across Europe, confidence in institutions continues to decline while support for populist and anti-establishment parties rises. The French establishment may succeed in preventing Marine Le Pen from running. What they cannot prevent is the underlying trend that created her support in the first place. Rising living costs, migration concerns, energy insecurity, sovereign debt burdens, and growing distrust of Brussels are not going away because a court issues a ruling.

The question facing France is becoming very simple. Will voters be allowed to decide the future of their country, or will that decision increasingly be made by institutions that claim to be acting in the name of democracy while simultaneously limiting the choices available to the electorate? That question extends far beyond France. It is becoming one of the defining political questions of our time.

There was a time when the American Dream meant buying a home, raising a family, and building a future. Today, an increasing number of Americans are discovering that simply keeping health insurance can cost more than the roof over their heads.

The latest data shows that Affordable Care Act marketplace premiums are soaring into 2026. Insurers are raising premiums by an average of roughly 20% to 26%, depending on the market, marking the largest increases in years. Some estimates suggest that if subsidy programs are not renewed, millions of Americans could see their monthly insurance bills more than double. In some cases, families are now paying more for health insurance than they pay on their mortgage.

The politicians sold Obamacare as the solution. They promised lower costs, more competition, and affordable healthcare. Instead, what we witnessed was the exact opposite. Deductibles exploded, premiums climbed year after year, and the insurance market consolidated into fewer and fewer players. The average American now faces a system where they pay thousands of dollars annually in premiums only to discover they still have to meet deductibles that can run into the many thousands before coverage even begins.

The entire structure was built on the assumption that enough healthy people would enter the system to offset the costs of those requiring expensive treatment. That never worked as advertised. Young and healthy Americans increasingly opted out whenever possible because the costs became absurd. The result has been a shrinking risk pool and rising premiums that feed on themselves. Insurance companies openly admit they are raising rates partly because they expect healthier people to abandon coverage as costs rise.

Government intervention always leads to higher costs. Education became unaffordable after federal student loan programs flooded universities with guaranteed money. Housing prices exploded after decades of government intervention in mortgages and interest rates. Healthcare followed the same path. The government subsidizes demand while simultaneously regulating supply, creating a system where costs simply continue rising regardless of who occupies the White House.

Then the number one reason families fall into bankruptcy is illness. These insurance companies will fight doctors tooth and nail, refusing to cover life saving procedures. One of the most outspoken critics of the modern health insurance system has been Dr. Elisabeth Potter, a Texas-based surgeon who specializes in breast cancer reconstruction. Potter gained national attention after revealing that United Healthcare contacted her during surgery to question whether a cancer patient truly needed an overnight hospital stay. United then threatened Potter for posting a video of the incident on social media, warning her to take it down before they intervened. She took the opposite approach and became a patient advocate.

Potter has argued that physicians now spend countless hours battling prior authorizations, denials, and bureaucratic obstacles rather than treating patients. She has described the system as one where corporations with a fiduciary duty to maximize profits are effectively making medical decisions for patients they have never examined. Her criticism struck a nerve because it confirmed what millions of Americans already suspect: the greatest obstacle to receiving care is often not the illness itself, but navigating an insurance system that has become so complex and profit-driven that even doctors are struggling to work within it.

More than 24 million Americans are enrolled in ACA marketplace plans, with roughly 22 million receiving subsidies. Without government assistance, many could not afford coverage at all. That is the dirty secret. The system increasingly survives not because it became affordable, but because taxpayers are subsidizing costs that continue moving higher every year.

Meanwhile, healthcare spending in the United States now exceeds $5 trillion annually. Every participant in the system demands a larger share of the pie, and the bill is ultimately passed to the consumer. This is part of the broader sovereign debt crisis that our models have warned about for decades. Governments continually create programs that appear affordable in the beginning, only for the true costs to present themselves later.

Understanding the World Economy

An Introduction to Cycles of Confidence

Most people are taught to view the economy through headlines, political debates, and short-term events. Yet beneath the daily noise are long-term cycles that influence markets, governments, business activity, and even society itself.

Join Martin Armstrong for a special educational event designed to introduce attendees to the concept of confidence cycles and how they shape the world around us. This presentation will provide an accessible overview of the theories and observations that have made Martin Armstrong one of the most recognized independent economic thinkers in the world.

This event is not limited to investors, traders, or finance professionals. It is intended for anyone interested in understanding the forces that drive economic change, including students, business owners, retirees, professionals, entrepreneurs, and curious minds seeking a broader perspective on the world economy.

What You’ll Learn:

• The role confidence plays in economic and political change

• How cycles influence markets, governments, and society

• Why economic trends often repeat throughout history

• The interconnected nature of the global economy

• The foundations of Martin Armstrong’s approach to analyzing world events

Important Information:

• This is an educational event only

• No financial advice will be provided

• No market forecasts or investment recommendations will be discussed

• This event is designed as an introduction to the concepts behind cycles of confidence

• The event will not be live-streamed

• Attendance is available exclusively in-person

This event is also an excellent opportunity to introduce friends, family members, or colleagues to Martin Armstrong’s work. If you have ever wanted to share these ideas with someone important in your life, this presentation provides the perfect starting point.

We do not anticipate offering this event again in the foreseeable future. For those interested in gaining a deeper understanding of Martin Armstrong’s theories on the global economy, this may be a unique opportunity.

Learn. Understand. See the Bigger Picture.

Reserve your seat today:
https://armstrongeconomics.ticketspice.com/understanding-world-economy

Nobody elected Google to manage the ecosystem. Yet here we are.

Alphabet, Google’s parent company, has quietly spent the better part of a decade developing what it calls the “Debug” project. The latest proposal seeks approval to release tens of millions of laboratory-bred mosquitoes across California and Florida. We are told not to worry because these are the “good” mosquitoes. We are assured they are male mosquitoes and therefore do not bite. We are told they carry a naturally occurring bacteria known as Wolbachia that will interfere with reproduction and reduce mosquito populations.

For generations, governments and corporations have repeatedly assured the public that interventions into nature would be harmless. DDT was once considered a miracle. Countless pesticides were approved before later being restricted. Entire rivers were polluted in the name of progress. Every generation is told that the experts have everything under control until something goes wrong.

What makes this case particularly remarkable is who is behind it. This is not a public health agency. This is not a university research department. This is one of the largest technology companies on earth. The same corporate structure that dominates online advertising, search results, artificial intelligence, data collection, mapping, cloud computing, and digital communications now wants to engineer mosquito populations on a massive scale.

The project itself is run by Verily, Alphabet’s life sciences division. Debug combines software engineers, robotics specialists, AI systems, automation experts, and mosquito biologists. They have spent years building automated mosquito factories capable of producing millions of insects per week. Computer vision systems sort male from female mosquitoes while robotic systems manage breeding and deployment. This is industrial-scale biological engineering that will now become a social experiment.

The problem according to Google: “Mosquitoes kill more people than every other animal combined. One species, Aedes aegypti, carries diseases such as dengue, Zika, yellow fever, and chikungunya which make hundreds of millions of people sick every year. And these diseases are spreading faster than ever.”

Their stated objective is to reduce mosquito populations without widespread pesticide use. Studies involving Wolbachia have shown reductions in mosquito populations and lower transmission of certain diseases. Singapore reported reductions in dengue risk exceeding 70% in areas where Wolbachia programs were implemented. The CDC has acknowledged that Wolbachia-based mosquito suppression can reduce target mosquito populations and notes that these mosquitoes are not genetically modified.

Why should the public automatically trust any institution that asks for permission to alter the natural environment on this scale?

This is not the first time modified mosquitos have been released on the population. Bill Gates has been involved in mosquito projects for years, long before Google entered the arena. Through the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, he has funded research into both genetically modified mosquitoes and Wolbachia-based mosquito programs designed to suppress malaria, dengue, Zika, and other mosquito-borne diseases. Gates has openly championed the release of engineered mosquitoes, arguing that technology can be used to alter insect populations and reduce disease transmission. The Foundation supported projects involving biotechnology firm Oxitec, which developed genetically modified mosquitoes carrying self-limiting genes intended to collapse wild mosquito populations over time. Gates has also heavily promoted the World Mosquito Program, which breeds millions of Wolbachia-infected mosquitoes and releases them into communities throughout Latin America, Africa, and Asia.

Whether one agrees with these programs or not, what is remarkable is the philosophy behind them. A handful of billionaires, technology companies, and global foundations increasingly view nature itself as something that can be engineered, modified, and optimized. Gates has praised facilities producing more than 30 million mosquitoes per week and has argued that mass releases are necessary to combat future disease outbreaks. Google is now pursuing its own large-scale mosquito deployment through Verily’s Debug project. The public is being asked to trust that these interventions will work exactly as intended, yet history is littered with examples of experts assuring everyone that there was nothing to worry about until unforeseen consequences emerged years later. The issue is no longer simply mosquitoes. It is the growing belief among technocrats that every aspect of the natural world can be redesigned from the top down by unelected institutions operating far beyond public scrutiny.

We are living through a period where public trust has collapsed. Governments concealed information during COVID and unleashed a deadly cocktail of mRNA vaccines on the global population. Pharmaceutical companies received legal protections that ordinary businesses could only dream about. Regulators routinely move through revolving doors into the industries they supposedly oversee. The public has been repeatedly told to trust experts who later turn out to be wrong.

Now the same population is expected to calmly accept the release of tens of millions of engineered insects because another collection of experts says everything is safe.

What could possibly go wrong?

Corporate agriculture turned food into a chemistry project. A recent consumer test of Driscoll’s conventional strawberries found 12 pesticide residues, including eight described as PFAS-linked “forever pesticides,” while the organic sample came back non-detect. Why are Americans expected to eat food treated with chemicals that other nations restrict or prohibit?

The USDA will run out and tell you that over 99% of tested foods fall below EPA tolerance levels. That is the same bureaucratic trick they always use. They define the allowable poison, then congratulate themselves when the poison is within the legal limit. The average person does not eat one chemical in isolation. They eat strawberries, spinach, grapes, apples, processed food, contaminated water, and whatever else the industrial food machine has dumped into the supply chain.

The Environmental Working Group ranked strawberries third on its 2026 Dirty Dozen list, noting Americans eat about eight pounds of fresh strawberries per year and with them “dozens of pesticides.” When children are eating these berries, when pregnant women are eating these berries, when families are told fruit is healthy, then the burden should be on these companies to prove the product is clean, not on consumers to become chemists in the grocery aisle.

There are videos circulating the internet of consumers leaving fruit outside overnight only to find it untouched in the morning. The animals won’t eat these substances. Even the bugs are avoiding the very produce on American grocery shelves.

The deeper problem is the farming system itself. California grows around 90% of the strawberries in America. At the state level, strawberry production has relied heavily on fumigants such as 1,3-D and chloropicrin. These chemicals are not harmless fairy dust. 1,3-D has been treated as a cancer-risk chemical, and chloropicrin was once used as a choking agent in war. Reports have shown these fumigants are used near schools and farmworker communities, and regulators have permitted exposure frameworks that critics say protect production more than people.

There should be lawsuits. “FDA approved” means absolutely nothing. It is an absolutely useless agency that is beholden to corporations over the people. Consumers deserve to know what was sprayed, where it was sprayed, what residues remained, what the companies knew, what regulators ignored, and whether labeling created a false sense of safety. If a product is marketed as wholesome, natural, fresh, and safe while containing residues that would not pass standards elsewhere, then the public has every right to demand accountability.

This is about the industrial corruption of food itself. America was once the breadbasket of the world. Now we have allowed monopolized agribusiness, chemical companies, captured regulators, and political cowards to transform the grocery store into a legal poison aisle.

The government will not fix this voluntarily because it never does. The agencies protect the system first and the people second. The only thing that moves these people is exposure, lawsuits, boycotts, and public outrage. If companies want to sell food to American families, then make it clean, prove it is clean, and stop hiding behind tolerance levels written by the same regulatory empire that has failed the public for decades.

A sick population can be easily controlled. They make us sick, prescribe pills, and force a lifetime of prescriptions and medical treatments not covered by greedy insurance companies. Government and corporations profit off our pain. Globalist entities openly discuss controlling the food and water supplies. This is why the World Economic Forum suggested banning individuals from gardening and growing their own food. This is why the likes of Bill Gates and other psychopathic pretend philanthropists are buying farmland and creating synthetic meats that cannot be distinguished from natural meat. Fresh produce and real sources of protein are becoming harder to obtain. Small farms are struggling to stay afloat. What is happening to the food supply should be on the front page of every paper, but these articles make 30-second news clips before they are forgotten. Pay attention to what is happening with the food supply, for they are actively using this as a way to control the population.

Jerome Powell is now warning that the Federal Reserve is undergoing a “stress test” and that political interference threatens public confidence in the institution. He stated that “the public would lose faith” if administrations could remove Fed officials over policy disagreements and argued that democratic institutions can be “torn down all too quickly.”

What is interesting is not what Powell said. It is what he did not say.

The Federal Reserve has spent years demanding independence from elected officials while simultaneously expecting the public to trust its judgment after one of the largest inflationary episodes in modern history. Powell himself admitted previously that the Fed was late in recognizing inflation, famously calling it “transitory.”

The real stress test is not whether politicians criticize the Fed. The real stress test is whether the public still believes central bankers know what they are doing.

Throughout history, central banks have always claimed they must remain independent. The argument is simple. Politicians think in election cycles. Central bankers are supposed to think in long-term economic cycles. There is truth in that. If every administration could simply fire central bankers whenever interest rates became politically inconvenient, monetary policy would become nothing more than an extension of campaign strategy. Powell warned that if one administration succeeds in removing Fed officials over policy differences, future administrations will follow the same path.

Governments borrow beyond reason. Debt accumulates for decades. Then central banks are forced into impossible choices. Raise rates and governments struggle to finance their obligations. Cut rates and inflation returns. Every major sovereign debt crisis throughout history eventually places the central bank in the crossfire because there is no solution that satisfies everyone.

The United States national debt continues to expand while interest costs consume an increasing share of federal revenue. Politicians want lower rates because debt service becomes too high, and they falsely believe lower rates will spur confidence. Markets want stability. Savers want protection from inflation and borrowers want cheap credit. Everyone deeply needs to believe in a better tomorrow, or they will panic and hoard for survival. These objectives conflict with one another.

Powell said democratic institutions take years to build and can be destroyed quickly. He is correct. However, public trust is earned through performance. The Federal Reserve’s credibility was damaged not because politicians criticized it. Credibility was damaged when inflation exploded after years of assurances that price pressures were “transitory.”

The larger cycle is what matters. Around the world, confidence in institutions is declining. Governments, courts, media organizations, universities, and central banks are all facing challenges to their authority. Powell himself acknowledged that the Fed is merely one institution among many now facing scrutiny.

Powell sees political pressure as the Fed’s stress test. I would argue the greater stress test is whether citizens still believe the people running these institutions deserve the trust they once commanded.