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.

Americans “still trust Trump more than the Democrats — and in every category,” according to an ABC poll. The joke used in the piece is actually very telling: in politics, you do not need to outrun the lion, you just need to outrun the other candidate. That is a far more accurate description of modern democratic systems than any ideological explanation.

People do not suddenly develop blind trust in government. They shift confidence away from institutions they believe have failed them. When voters say they trust one political figure more than a party, it is often a vote against the establishment rather than a vote for a personality. Left-leaning policies failed. Every American suffered a decline in their quality of life during the Biden Administration as a direct result of his policies that curbed the US economy in favor of globalist policies. The Build Back Better community collectively agreed that America should no longer be the world’s leading superpower. Then an anti-establishment politician entered the arena and demanded nationalism. Meanwhile, the Democrats continue pushing the same failed policies that the majority no longer support.

Approval ratings for Trump’s presidency still sit in the low 40% range, with disapproval in the mid-to-high 50% range, depending on the aggregate, which demonstrates a deeply divided electorate rather than unified support. At the same time, surveys repeatedly show dissatisfaction with both major parties, leaving many voters mistrusting the political system as a whole. Modern polling is highly fragmented, and partisan interpretation dominates the narrative. One poll may show distrust of Trump on specific issues like inflation or foreign policy, while another shows voters trusting Republicans more than Democrats on key economic concerns.

In October, only 18% of Americans said they were “better off” under Trump compared to 22% today. Most realize that the nation’s economic reality is not the result of a single politician. Furthermore, the difference between an isolated politician and the entire Democratic Party is ever so slight. There is only a 1% difference, for example, in voters believing Trump solely is reducing the cost of living compared to Congressional Democrats.

In the end, the real takeaway is not that one side is overwhelmingly trusted. The real story is that confidence in the political class as a whole continues to decline, and voters are making choices based on credibility rather than absolute belief. That is a far more dangerous long-term trend than any single poll headline.

I don’t want a fifth anniversary. pic.twitter.com/mEFQwjiiAb

— Boris Johnson (@BorisJohnson) February 24, 2026

Boris Johnson took to social media to denounce the war in Ukraine. “I don’t want a fifth anniversary,” the former UK Prime Minister said. Yet, if not for Boris, there may not have been a first anniversary.

Surely Boris Johnson recalls his urgent trip to Ukraine in 2022. President Zelensky was poised to accept a peace agreement with Russia. Boris Johnson reemerges from the shadows whenever he hears word that a war may be winding down. Johnson’s visit to Kyiv in April 2022 symbolized political backing for continued resistance rather than compromise, especially during the period when negotiations in Istanbul were reportedly being explored. Would the most powerful government officials risk traveling there if Kyiv was under constant attack? Would they publicly stroll the streets in Russia’s alleged top target? All of the neocons visited Ukraine in 2022 to take pictures with Zelensky dressed in his military attire and pledge their nations’ resources to combating a common enemy.

Davyd Arakhamiia, leader of the Servant of the People, released a damning piece of information that has been swept under the rug as it proves Moscow attempted to end this war long ago. This key information is important to keep in mind as the Neocons have infiltrated all upcoming elections. Davyd was present during the peace talks with Belarus, Russia, and Turkey in 2022, shortly after the war began. Putin allegedly came to the meeting with a drafted peace agreement that would end the war if Ukraine granted Russia neutrality. The Permanent Neutrality of Ukraine and Security Guarantees contained 18 articles with “everything is spelled out, from military equipment to personnel of the Armed Forces of Ukraine.” Avoiding future NATO membership was part of the agreement, but Russia was willing to surrender and end the war then and there. 

Zelensky looked to his Western financiers who demanded he continue the war. Johnson made a “surprise” trip to Kiev as soon as the peace agreement was publicly discussed. The failed PM once again came out of the shadows in 2025 to denounce the 28-point peace plan drafted by the United States.

Once again, Boris Johnson is urging the West to escalate the war to “pressure Putin.” Peace has NEVER been the objective. Hundreds of thousands of lives could have been saved if not for these bloodthirsty neocons.

Hungary is deploying troops to protect its nation against Ukraine’s oil blockade. The war in Ukraine has mutated into something far larger and far more dangerous than the public is led to believe. Orban will “deploy soldiers and equipment to protect key energy infrastructure” as the tensions between Ukraine and Hungary boil over.

“I see that Ukraine is preparing further actions aimed at harming our energy infrastructure,” Orban noted, and thus the Hungarian military and police will be positioned around power plants, distribution stations, and control centers as a defensive measure.

Europe has been deeply split over how to handle Russian energy and the war against Moscow. Hungary and Slovakia heavily rely on Russian energy and cannot bend to Brussels at the expense of their economies. Orban recently vetoed a €90 billion EU loan to Ukraine unless oil flows through the Druzhba pipeline resume, illustrating that Budapest’s priorities are no longer aligned with Brussels.

Under stress and loss of confidence, nations shift from collective alliance goals to nationalist survival strategies. Hungary’s actions are not a spontaneous security reaction; they are emerging amid an intensifying domestic political campaign ahead of a critical April election. The people are beginning to view the European Union as a hindrance rather than an alliance. Hungary has become the black sheep of the bloc.

The war in Ukraine has ceased to be just a battlefield conflict. It is a catalyst for realignment within Europe, and it is exposing the cracks between governments that see the conflict as a strategic priority and those that see it as a liability. What we are witnessing is the beginning of a deeper fragmentation in Western policy, where alliances are tested not only by external adversaries but by the internal cycles of confidence, power, and national survival.

PRIVATE BLOG – The Stock Market Crash or a Bear Trap?

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/

PRIVATE BLOG – UK & France Handing Nukes to Zelensky

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 press refuses to honestly review the facts because they are caught up in pushing socialism and they try to look the other way when some indicators show resilience and fail to understand that we are in the midst of paradigm shift in the economy just as we were during the 19th century moving from agriculture into the industrial revolution and from that into a service economy due to taxes and regulation, and then the DOT.COM economic shift with the internet that put a lot of small local stores out of business. Now we have the paradigm shift that is far more complex for this is not just the AI bubble like the DOT.COM bubble, but the final leg of the Sovereign Debt Crisis that is spreading from the peripheral economies in Asia and Europe that will eventually overtake the United States as the FREE MARKETS force political change.

GDP Growth blasted past ALL expectations in the July-September quarter to reach an annualized 4.3%, the strongest performance in two years compared to the EU at 1.5%. Economic growth has surged to its fastest pace in two years and the new job creation has been in the private sector compared to the Biden years of expanding government.

The benchmark S&P 500 is up nearly 18%, easily beating the average annual return of 10.5%. The Democrats constantly claim that the top 10% of American only benefit from that, which is a lie since that ignores all the pension funds.

The Democrats argue that the Consumer Price Index, which stood at 3% in January, remains near the same level as of November – well above the Fed’s 2% target, which is unrealistic and arbitrary. What they fail to point out is that is a recession of depression, typically assets decline with inflation and cash becomes king. This is a warning sign that we are in the last leg of a Sovereign Debt Crisis globally.

The federal deficit for 2025 now stands at $1.8 trillion, with interest payments on the debt hitting $1 trillion for the first time. I have been warning for decades that when we are in this Ponzi Scheme of perpetual borrowing and NEVER paying off anything, that a 3-year-old with a pocket calculator can figure out that the interest expenditures will rise forcing spending on social programs and military to shrink. The Democrats would prefer to destroy the economy and constantly raise taxes just so they can win the next election and never once look at this from even a 5-year plan no less than 20-year outcome.

The economy has proven more resilient to tariffs and policy uncertainty than many predicted. The job market deterioration has been in the public sector as government employment is declining and they need to find a real productive job that contributes to GDP growth since government employment is no different from hiring a maid to clean your house. She does NOT add to your household income, she consumes it. That is why we call government employment “public service” for it reduces economic productivity; it does not contribute to it.

The Democrats are truly destroying the United States just as the socialists are destroying Europe. They refuse to face reality that every nation that has moved to the left fails. The Democrats refused to stand for even a statement of putting Americans before illegal aliens. Constitutionally, as well as internationally, only a citizen can vote. I cannot vote in UK elections even though I still have my English drivers license. The Democrats just have to oppose whatever Trump does no matter what. They claim that requiring an ID to vote will prevent 20 million poor and minorities from voting. They portray blacks are stupid.

Many see the Democrats as not just racist in these comments that African Americans are too stupid to have an ID so they cannot vote, but many are seeing that they are the source of White Supremacy. Gavin Newsom has just exposed how the Democrats think of African Americans as stupid. If someone is poor, they still need ID to get welfare and food stamps regardless of their race. You need ID to drive a car, get on a train, or hop on a plane. The implications of this opposition to ID to vote can only impact illegal aliens which the opened the flood gates to let them poor into the country to retain power. I have stated before,

I had the mandate to negotiate with Australia for Hong Kong to try to buy an island back in 1997 to allow them to flee when Hong Kong was to be handed back to China. I met with former Prime Minister Paul Keating who was running the Treasury at that time and no matter what I offered the answer was NO. I finally asked if this was a racist issue. He said no. If Australia allowed them to migrate from Hong Kong they were fleeing socialism so they would vote conservative and change the politics of Australia. That was the real objective of the Democrats and that is why they oppose an ID to vote to retain power.

Ilhan Omar was born in Mogadishu, Somalia, on October 4, 1982. She shouts at Trump during the State of the Union putting on a display that illustrates the cultural differences at issue. She does not like any curtailment of illegal immigration and the outrageous fraud of the Somali community in Minnesota.  In a June 23 article, the Star-Tribune wrote that it “could neither conclusively confirm nor rebut the allegation that he is Omar’s sibling” that she married her brother. In 2002, Omar, then 19, religiously married Ahmed Hirsi, but not legally. Omar and Hirsi had two children, but in 2008, they obtained a religious divorce. The following year, in 2009, Omar married Ahmed Nur Said Elmi both religiously and legally. Little is known of Elmi.

 According to the book Lyndon Johnson and the American Dream, Johnson said the following to Senator Richard Russell, a Democratic Senator from Georgia:

“These Negroes, they’re getting pretty uppity these days and that’s a problem for us since they’ve got something now they never had before, the political pull to back up their uppityness. Now we’ve got to do something about this, we’ve got to give them a little something, just enough to quiet them down, not enough to make a difference. For if we don’t move at all, then their allies will line up against us and there’ll be no way of stopping them, we’ll lose the filibuster and there’ll be no way of putting a brake on all sorts of wild legislation. It’ll be Reconstruction all over again.”

President Johnson, was a master of legislative politics, and was acutely aware of the enormous political risk he was taking with the Civil Rights Act. He made several comments on this issue.

• “There goes the South for a generation.” This is the most commonly cited version, reportedly said to an aide as he signed the Civil Rights Act of 1964 .

• “We just delivered the South to the Republican Party for a long time to come.” This version was recounted by presidential aide Bill Moyers, who said Johnson was feeling “melancholy” right after the signing, fully aware of the political cost .

Johnson’s prediction was not just casual speculation; it was a calculated understanding of American politics at the time. Before 1964, the “Solid South” was a Democratic bastion, built on the legacy of the Civil War and Reconstruction . By championing civil rights, Johnson knew he would shatter this coalition.

Johnson’s prediction proved accurate almost instantly. In the 1964 election, although he won in a landslide, he lost five Deep South states (Louisiana, Mississippi, Alabama, Georgia, and South Carolina) to the Republicans.

It was Barry Goldwater, who had voted against the Civil Rights Act, appealed to white Southerners who felt abandoned by the national Democratic Party.

LBJ demonstrates the manipulation of the African Americans making a series of well-documented, blunt statements predicting the exact political outcome of manipulating the blacks to support the Democrats which was the original slave owner party against Abraham Lincoln and the Republican Party that was anti-slavery.

What they have done with the African Americans they are now doing with illegal aliens.

When the National Election Study first asked the question in 1958, about 73% of Americans said they trusted the federal government to do what is right most or all of the time. Today, that number has collapsed to roughly 17%, one of the lowest readings in nearly seven decades. This is not a partisan anomaly. It is a structural decline that began in the 1960s and 1970s during the Vietnam War, Watergate, and rising economic instability, and it has never fully recovered since.

Confidence is the foundation of every political and economic system. I have said countless times that inflation, currency crises, and civil unrest are not merely monetary events, but rather, they are confidence events. When trust in government falls, people begin to disengage from institutions, question policy legitimacy, and ultimately shift capital and allegiance away from public systems. Pew data shows rising frustration across both parties, with roughly half of Americans in each political camp describing themselves as frustrated with the federal government.

Even in recent years, only about two in ten Americans say they trust Washington to do what is right most or all of the time, while the majority say they trust it only some of the time or never. That is a profound psychological shift.

Trust tends to rise during external crises and collapse during prolonged domestic political conflict. After 9/11, trust temporarily rebounded, yet the long-term trend resumed downward following wars, financial crises, and political polarization. This cyclical behavior aligns perfectly with the broader Economic Confidence Model. Institutional trust peaks during periods of perceived unity and declines during fragmentation and fiscal stress.

Declining trust in government is one of the most reliable leading indicators of political restructuring. The late Roman Republic saw collapsing confidence in the Senate before the rise of authoritarian rule. The French monarchy lost legitimacy long before the financial crisis triggered the revolution. Confidence always breaks before structural change becomes visible.

When the National Election Study first asked the question in 1958, about 73% of Americans said they trusted the federal government to do what is right most or all of the time. Today, that figure has fallen to roughly 17%, placing confidence near the lowest levels in nearly seventy years. This is not a minor fluctuation tied to one administration. It is a structural decline that began in the 1960s amid war, political scandal, and economic volatility and has trended downward ever since.

Confidence is the real foundation of any political and economic system. Inflation, debt crises, and social unrest are confidence events. As trust in government deteriorates, the public disengages from institutions, questions policy, and shifts capital and behavior away from public systems they no longer believe are acting in their interest.

The data show that only a small minority of Americans now trust Washington to do what is right most of the time, while the overwhelming majority say they trust it only some of the time or never. That represents a profound psychological shift from the postwar era, when government was widely viewed as competent.

Looking forward to the 2032 ECM turning point, the trajectory of government confidence in the United States is unlikely to stage a sustained recovery. The Economic Confidence Model implies that we are in a phase of declining public-sector confidence and rising skepticism toward centralized authority into the late 2020s. That does not mean an immediate collapse, but rather continued volatility in trust, punctuated by brief rallies during crises followed by deeper erosion as fiscal pressures, political polarization, and institutional overreach intensify. As we approach 2032, the model suggests a further migration of confidence away from government and toward private assets, alternative systems, and localized structures of governance.

Top EU Neocon Kaja Kallas is against war, well, she’s against war that does not benefit her. “We don’t need another war in this region. We already have a lot,” Kallas said in regard to US and Iran tensions.

Europe is facing an existential crisis over Russia, and Kallas herself has repeatedly framed Moscow as the primary enemy whose very existence threatens the entire continent. That position has dominated EU policy for years, with enormous political, military, and financial capital already committed to Ukraine and the confrontation with Russia. In that light, her warning that “the region does not need a new war” if tensions with Iran escalate is less about humanitarian restraint and more about geopolitical prioritization.

Europe has been pouring funding, weapons, and political capital into the Ukrainian conflict, and the last thing Brussels wants is the United States shifting military attention to the Middle East. If Washington becomes consumed by Iran, the burden of confronting Russia shifts back onto Europe, which is economically and militarily unprepared to handle it alone. Europe has been scheming ways to defend itself without the US, but the truth of the matter is that US protection has been embedded in every defense mechanism since the end of World War II.

Kallas even acknowledged that Iran is currently in a weakened position and that this moment should be used for diplomacy rather than escalation. “We should really be using this time to find a diplomatic solution,” Kallas commented, yet, simultaneously refuses to acknowledge any possibility of peace negotiations between Russia and Ukraine.

EU Neocons do not want their top financier to stretch its finances and manpower. Worse, the EU certainly does not want to provide its own resources to assist its ally in combating a conflict in the Middle East.

? GLOBAL SPEECH CONTROL AGENDA

The United Nations is now openly calling for “coordinated global action” to police what it labels disinformation and hate speech online.

Let that sink in.

An unelected international body — with no democratic mandate over sovereign citizens — is… pic.twitter.com/YRqissu1eR

— Jim Ferguson (@JimFergusonUK) February 23, 2026

The United Nations is now openly discussing “coordinated global action” to combat what it defines as disinformation and hate speech online, and this should not be dismissed as some abstract policy debate. This is a structural shift toward the internationalization of speech regulation, and that carries profound political and economic implications.

The UN’s recent digital governance initiatives, including its policy briefs tied to the Global Digital Compact, explicitly call for stronger international cooperation to address online misinformation, platform accountability, and content governance across borders. The stated objective is to create safer digital spaces and reduce harmful content, yet the mechanism being proposed is coordinated oversight at a global level.

An unelected international institution proposing frameworks that influence what information is acceptable raises concerns. The UN has no direct democratic mandate over the citizens of individual nations, yet its policy direction increasingly encourages governments and platforms to align with shared global standards for speech moderation and information control. This is being framed as a necessary response to misinformation, extremism, and social instability in the digital age. The globalists want to control our ability to access and process information.

The core issue is not whether misinformation exists. It always has. Every era has dealt with propaganda, rumors, and competing narratives. What is different now is the scale and the proposed solution of centralized digital oversight coordinated at the international level. Why should a select few determine fact from fiction? The power is unimaginable.

What one administration labels misinformation may later prove accurate, and what is defined as harmful speech can shift with political priorities. History is filled with examples where dissenting views were initially censored only to later become accepted truths in matters of war policy, economic forecasting, and public health.

The future regulatory battleground will not be limited to finance, taxation, or energy, but increasingly to information itself. In a digital economy, whoever influences the flow of information indirectly influences public confidence, political legitimacy, and even economic behavior. The real question is no longer whether misinformation exists. The structural question is who defines truth, who enforces that definition, and how far institutions are willing to go to maintain narrative authority in an era of declining global trust.