Join Us at the 2023 World Economic Conference in Orlando, Florida!

? Dates: November 17, 18, and 19 ? Location: Orlando, Florida, USA (or tune in from home with our virtual ticket options)

Are you ready to unlock the future of economics and finance? Prepare for an unforgettable World Economic Conference experience in sunny Orlando, Florida! This premier event is your gateway to insights, networking, and valuable resources that will supercharge your understanding of the global economy.

?️ What’s Included for In-Person Attendees:

1. Event Admission: Enjoy reserved seating assigned based on the order of ticket sales, ensuring you have a prime view of every presentation.
2. Presentation Slides: Gain access to the presentation slides from all speakers, allowing you to delve deeper into the topics discussed.
3. Video Recording: Can’t make it to a session? No worries! You’ll receive access to video recordings of all conference presentations, so you can catch up at your convenience.
4. WEC Event App: Connect with the conference on a whole new level. Access presentation slides, bonus reports, recordings, and more via the official WEC Event App.
5. Bonus Conference Materials: Get a package of bonus conference-related materials, including exclusive bonus reports and videos (as provided by Martin Armstrong).
6. Morning Information Sessions: Don’t miss out on important morning information sessions, screened on-site in the meeting room on Saturday and Sunday.
7. Networking Opportunities: Exclusive access to the Event App Networking Feature allows you to connect with fellow attendees, both in-person and virtual, fostering valuable professional relationships.
8. Culinary Delights: Savor delicious breakfast and lunch on Saturday and Sunday, prepared to keep you energized throughout the day.
9. Cocktail Reception: Kick off the conference in style at our Friday evening cocktail reception. Meet and mingle with fellow attendees while enjoying refreshing drinks.
10. Swag Bag: As a token of our appreciation, each in-person attendee will receive a swag bag filled with goodies, including an Armstrong Economics notebook, pen, and an event collector’s mug!

Unable to travel? We also have two different ticket options for those wishing to attend virtually! 

Don’t miss this opportunity to be part of a global gathering of economic and financial minds. Secure your spot at the World Economic Conference in Orlando, Florida, and gain the knowledge, connections, and resources you need to thrive in the world of finance and economics.

Space is limited, so act now and reserve your seat! Visit our Events page to register and join us in sunny Orlando this November.

Now available at all major retailers!

The eBook will be available shortly.

The second edition of “The Plot to Seize Russia – The Untold History” is now available for purchase in paperback and hardcover on Amazon and Barnes and Noble. The ebook will be available shortly.

Book description:

“Take care of Russia,” Boris Yeltsin said as he departed his presidency in August 1999. These words were directed at current Russian president, Vladimir Putin. Yeltsin specifically picked Putin as his predecessor to prevent the takeover of Russia.

So, who was Yeltsin warning against? Newly declassified documents from the Clinton Administration prove that there was a plot to rig the Russian election of 2000. These never-before-seen documents confirm numerous attempts to implement pro-Western policies using the Russian oligarchy headed by Boris Berezovsky.

On the other side were the communists who desired a return to the glory days of the Soviet Union. As one of the largest international hedge fund managers, author Martin Armstrong found himself in the middle of perhaps the greatest espionage, or attempt at a regime change for Russia, in modern history.

The Plot to Seize Russia pulls back the curtain to expose the most extraordinary attempt to seize power in modern history, but with the pen rather than armies. These declassified documents reveal a plot that has altered our thinking about the relations between the United States and Russia. The thirst for power comes seething through every line of these papers that alter our perception of reality, change the course of history, and now threaten us with World War III.

PRIVATE BLOG – Why Iran has Won

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/

One of the greatest mistakes Western policymakers repeatedly make is assuming that other cultures think the same way they do. They approach international conflicts through a secular lens of power, economics, and negotiation. But when dealing with Iran, they are confronting a political system deeply intertwined with religious ideology. When an Ayatollah or senior clerical leader is killed, the event does not necessarily weaken the movement. In many cases, it strengthens it.

In Shiite Islam, the concept of martyrdom sits at the center of religious identity. The defining event for the Shia world was the death of Imam Hussein at the Battle of Karbala in 680 AD. Hussein, the grandson of the Prophet Muhammad, was killed after refusing to submit to what he regarded as illegitimate rule. His death became the foundational narrative of Shia resistance. To this day, millions commemorate Ashura every year, mourning Hussein’s death and celebrating the idea that righteous martyrdom is preferable to submission to injustice.

This is not merely historical symbolism. The religious narrative reinforces the belief that suffering and sacrifice in the face of oppression ultimately leads to divine justice. The Quran repeatedly praises those who die in the path of God. One verse states that those killed in the cause of God should not be considered dead but alive with their Lord receiving provision (Quran 3:169). Another passage declares that God has “purchased from the believers their lives and their wealth in exchange for Paradise; they fight in the cause of God, kill and are killed” (Quran 9:111). These passages shape a worldview in which death during a struggle against perceived injustice can be interpreted as spiritual victory.

From that perspective, killing a religious leader such as an Ayatollah risks transforming that individual into a symbol of sacrifice. Instead of eliminating the movement, it can reinforce the belief that the struggle itself is righteous. In a secular political system, the death of a leader may weaken an organization. In a religious revolutionary system, it can unify followers under the banner of martyrdom.

The Western mindset approaches assassination very differently. When a leader is killed in the United States or Europe, the reaction is generally political or emotional rather than religious. When President John F. Kennedy was assassinated in 1963, the event shocked the nation and certainly increased patriotism and unity for a time. Yet Americans did not interpret his death as a religious sign or martyrdom that would justify continuing a sacred struggle. It was viewed as a national tragedy, not a divine narrative unfolding.

This difference is profound. Western societies mourn their leaders, investigate the crime, and eventually move forward politically. The death does not typically transform the leader into a theological symbol driving long-term resistance or warfare. In the Shia tradition, however, martyrdom is embedded in religious identity itself. The story of Karbala is reenacted every year precisely to reinforce that belief.

This is why Western policymakers often misunderstand the psychological dynamics of such conflicts. The assassination of leaders like Qassem Soleimani did not collapse Iranian influence in the region. Instead, it triggered massive demonstrations and strengthened the narrative that Iran was engaged in a sacred struggle against external enemies.

When a Shia religious authority is killed, the event is interpreted through the lens of Karbala. The leader becomes another martyr in a long line of figures who died resisting oppression. That narrative carries enormous emotional power. It binds communities together and legitimizes continued struggle.

Politicians in Washington often believe removing a leader will end a conflict. Yet in ideological and religious movements, the opposite frequently occurs. Killing a leader can transform a political confrontation into a moral crusade, reinforcing the belief that the faithful must continue the struggle no matter the cost.

Understanding this cultural and religious framework is essential. Without it, policymakers will continue to miscalculate the consequences of their actions. History repeatedly shows that wars are not fought only with weapons. They are also fought with ideas, beliefs, and narratives that can outlive any individual leader.

What we are witnessing across the United States is not just people relocating. It is the migration of income itself, and the numbers now confirm the scale. According to the latest IRS data, California lost $11.9 billion in adjusted gross income in a single year, while New York lost $9.9 billion. At the same time, Florida gained $20.6 billion, Texas gained $5.5 billion, and states like South Carolina and North Carolina each gained roughly $4 billion. This is not theoretical. This is measurable capital movement, and it is accelerating.

The critical point is that the IRS is not tracking opinions or surveys. It is tracking tax returns. These figures represent actual households, actual income, and actual wealth moving from one jurisdiction to another. The data is based on year-to-year address changes on filed tax returns, capturing both the number of households and the total income they take with them. When billions in adjusted gross income leave a state, that is not just population loss. That is a direct hit to the tax base.

What stands out immediately is the imbalance. Florida alone gained more than $20 billion in income from new residents in just one year, making it the largest beneficiary of domestic migration. In places like Palm Beach County, incoming residents reported average incomes of $178,085 compared to $98,527 for those leaving. That tells you exactly what is happening. This is not a random movement. This is higher-income individuals relocating and concentrating wealth in specific regions.

At the same time, high-tax states are seeing the reverse. The states losing the most income—California, New York, Illinois, New Jersey, and Massachusetts—are also among those with the highest tax burdens. California’s top tax rate sits at 13.3%, while New York City residents can face combined state and local rates approaching 14.8%. When you combine those tax levels with high costs of living, the outcome becomes predictable.

What makes this even more significant is that the migration is being driven disproportionately by higher earners. IRS data consistently shows that households with $200,000 or more in income play an outsized role in net migration flows. In practical terms, that means a relatively small number of people can move a very large amount of taxable income. When they leave, they do not just reduce the population. They reduce revenue potential.

There is also a structural shift underway. States attracting capital tend to share common characteristics: lower taxes, lower housing costs, and policies that encourage development. In fact, analysts note that states gaining wealth are often those increasing housing supply, which helps keep costs down and attracts migration. This is not about ideology. It is about environment.

The longer-term consequence is a divergence in economic trajectories. States gaining income expand their tax base without raising rates. States losing income face a shrinking base and increasing pressure to maintain spending. That creates a feedback loop. As revenue declines, governments look to raise taxes further, which encourages additional outflows.

This is not a short-term trend. IRS migration data has been tracking these flows for decades, and the pattern has become increasingly pronounced in recent years. The rise of remote work has only accelerated what was already in motion by removing geographic constraints that once tied income to location.

What matters here is not just where people are moving. It is why they are moving. When individuals begin to calculate that relocating can save them tens of thousands of dollars annually in taxes alone, the decision becomes economic, not emotional. Once that calculation spreads, the migration becomes systemic.

The United States is effectively undergoing an internal redistribution of capital. Wealth is concentrating in regions that offer favorable conditions, while high-cost, high-tax states are experiencing steady erosion. This is not driven by a single policy or event. It is the cumulative result of incentives.

Governments can debate the causes, but they cannot alter the outcome. Capital moves. It always has. The only difference now is the speed and scale at which it is happening.

What most people fail to understand is that governments do not lose control overnight. They lose it gradually, and then they respond in stages. First comes rising debt. Then comes higher taxation. When that fails to produce the expected revenue, the next step is not reform. It is restriction.

We are now entering that phase where governments begin tightening their grip on capital. It starts subtly. Expanded IRS reporting requirements. Increased scrutiny on bank transactions. Lower thresholds for what is considered “suspicious activity.” These are not random policy decisions. They are part of a broader shift toward monitoring and ultimately controlling the movement of money.

The justification is always the same. Prevent tax evasion. Combat financial crime. Ensure fairness. But behind that narrative is a much deeper problem. Governments are facing structural deficits that they cannot resolve through growth alone. When spending exceeds revenue and debt continues to rise, they must either cut spending, raise taxes, or prevent capital from escaping. Historically, they choose the latter two.

We are already seeing early signs of this shift. Discussions around taxing unrealized gains, proposals for wealth taxes, and increased enforcement efforts all point in the same direction. These policies assume that capital is static, but once people begin to move their money or themselves, the response changes. Governments begin looking for ways to stop that movement.

Digital infrastructure is what makes this possible today in a way it never was before. Every transaction is tracked. Every account is monitored. The banking system itself becomes the enforcement mechanism. You no longer need physical barriers when financial barriers can be imposed instantly.

The danger is not a single sweeping policy. It is the accumulation of smaller measures that gradually remove financial freedom. By the time people realize what has changed, the system is already in place.

QUESTION: A follow-up. Will Socrates survive you? Have you taught anyone else how to program AI as you do?

PB

ANSWER: The lawyers are working on creating a 501(c)(3), which is a specific tax-exempt status granted by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to nonprofit organizations operated exclusively for religious, charitable, scientific, or educational purposes. This status, defined in section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code, provides significant federal income tax exemptions, which are vital in my case.

When Scotty beams me up, the IRS could claim that Socrates is worth $100 billion and demand that my heir pay tax on it. Naturally, they would not have that kind of cash, so the government would just seize the asset. Thus, the only way to ensure it continues without me is to donate it to a 501(c)(3) under the scientific and educational category

We have a team of programmers who work on the front end and are currently working on Version 2.0 to allow people to ask Socrates questions. This is what Socrates published back on March 27th, 2026. Things still appear to be heating up in June.

Socrates no longer needs me. I am becoming redundant. My goal has always been to replace me.

The Sovereign Debt Crisis and the Middle East is the most under-reported financial crisis in Human History. It has been accelerated by the clever Weaponization of Debt that nobody seems to have even contemplated. We are dealing with the Illusion of Perpetual Wealth, combined with the Illusion of a Great Dollar Crash, in which, in both cases, people are completely distracted from the real crisis brewing behind the curtain around the globe, which is about to explode and take the world by surprise.

We are staring into the eyes of a massive financial crisis that culminates in a confrontation between Public and Private Assets. The computer has been right on projecting the event and the timing. The energy crisis is already unleashing civil unrest around the globe, which our computer forecast would coincide with international war. The shortage of fertilizer combined with the shortage of diesel fuels are also impacting the shortage of food. Add to this mess, the Sovereign Debt Crisis

Sovereign Debt Crisis and the Middle East

Because of the Importance of This Institutional Report that would normally be $1500, we are making this available to our entire readership at only $500

? ?? ALERTE INFO : Retour des agriculteurs avec un « feu de colère » à 20 km de Paris, à Saint-Nom-la-Bretèche, pour dénoncer la flambée du prix du carburant.

Un cœur en soutiens aux agriculteurs‼️

(Image : LucAuffret) pic.twitter.com/wTkc13ublW

— Wolf ? (@PsyGuy007) April 7, 2026

France is once again approaching a familiar breaking point, and energy is at the center of it. Diesel prices across Europe have surged sharply in 2026 as geopolitical tensions in the Middle East disrupted supply routes, pushing Brent crude back above key resistance levels and filtering directly into transport and agricultural costs. In France, non-road diesel, which is critical for farming, has risen substantially over the past year, eroding already thin margins in agriculture. At the same time, electricity costs remain elevated compared to pre-2022 levels, despite government intervention, leaving producers exposed to sustained input inflation.

The agricultural sector has been particularly vocal. France has roughly 400,000 farms, and many operate on margins that cannot absorb double-digit increases in fuel and fertilizer costs. Fertilizer itself is heavily energy-dependent, linking natural gas prices directly to food production costs. When energy rises, food prices follow, and this has already been reflected in EU food inflation, which peaked above 15% in recent cycles and remains structurally elevated. The knock-on effect is that farmers face higher input costs while consumers resist higher prices, compressing profitability from both sides.

Protests are building along these fault lines. Farmer unions and independent groups have threatened renewed blockades of highways, logistics hubs, and wholesale food markets if the government fails to provide further relief. France has a long-standing pattern of escalation where tractors are used to shut down key transport arteries, and authorities are well aware of how quickly localized demonstrations can become national disruptions. Previous rounds of protests have already forced Paris to roll out billions in subsidies and tax concessions, but those measures have not resolved the structural issue, which is energy dependence combined with policy constraints.

The French government continues to attempt targeted relief, including fuel rebates and caps on electricity prices, but these interventions are temporary by design. They do not change the underlying exposure to global energy markets. Once those supports are reduced or removed, the pressure returns immediately. That is why these protests tend to recur in waves rather than dissipate entirely.

Energy costs are no longer viewed as an external shock but as a failure of domestic policy to shield the population from volatility. When that perception takes hold, protests move beyond sector-specific demands and begin to question the direction of national leadership itself.

What we are now witnessing with sanctuary cities is not simply a political disagreement, it is the breakdown of the rule of law at the structural level. The federal government is now openly questioning whether it should continue providing core services, including customs processing at international airports, to cities that refuse to comply with federal immigration law.

Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin has made that position clear in direct terms, stating, “If they are a sanctuary city, should they really be processing customs into their city?” and further pressing the issue by pointing out the contradiction, “If they’re a sanctuary city and they’re receiving international flights… but once they walk out of the airport, they’re not going to enforce immigration policy?”

Sanctuary cities are, by definition, jurisdictions that limit cooperation with federal enforcement, effectively creating a dual system of governance within the same country. Once you reach that point, you are no longer dealing with a unified legal framework, you are dealing with fragmentation.

Mullin has also made it clear that the federal government is being forced into difficult decisions, stating that “we’re going to have to start prioritizing things at some point” as funding battles intensify. That statement is critical because it signals a shift from negotiation to enforcement.

This is precisely the type of breakdown that unfolds during periods of broader systemic stress. The sovereign debt crisis, rising geopolitical tensions, and internal political divisions are all converging at the same time, and governments respond to that pressure by attempting to reassert control.

Sanctuary cities represent a direct challenge to that control, and the response is now escalating accordingly. The implications extend far beyond immigration because once the federal government begins selectively withdrawing services, whether it is funding, enforcement, or infrastructure support, it creates a chain reaction. Major cities like New York, Los Angeles, Chicago, and San Francisco are not isolated municipalities, they are economic hubs that handle millions of international travelers and billions in trade. Any disruption to customs operations alone would ripple through tourism, supply chains, and business activity, amplifying economic pressure at a time when the system is already under strain.

This is where the situation becomes dangerous because it introduces a new layer of uncertainty into the economy. Businesses and capital do not respond well to fragmented legal systems or political conflict between levels of government. Capital flows toward stability, and when stability is questioned, it begins to move. That is the core principle that has driven every major financial shift throughout history.

What Mullin has effectively done is put consequences on the table. For years, sanctuary cities have operated with limited federal pushback, but that appears to be changing. Once consequences are introduced, whether through funding cuts, service withdrawal, or legal action, the dynamic shifts entirely. Cities are forced to choose between maintaining their policies or preserving access to federal resources, and that is where the real conflict begins.

This is no longer about immigration alone. It is about who governs and enforces, and whether a nation can function with competing systems of authority.

The American housing market is revealing a shift that goes far beyond rising interest rates, because what we are witnessing is the disappearance of the entry-level buyer, and once that foundation erodes, the entire structure of the market becomes unstable.

The data is striking. The income required to purchase a typical home has climbed to around $111,000, a level far beyond what most young workers earn, while the median age of first-time homebuyers has surged to 40. That alone tells you everything. A generation that should be forming households in their late 20s and early 30s is now being pushed a decade or more down the timeline.

At the same time, nearly two million “missing households” have been identified, representing young adults who, under normal conditions, would have entered the housing market but simply cannot. This is not a demand problem. It is an affordability collapse.

The implications extend beyond real estate. Housing has always been a primary driver of economic activity, influencing everything from construction to consumer spending. When young people are unable to buy homes, they delay other major life decisions, which feeds back into the economy as slower growth and reduced momentum.

What policymakers fail to acknowledge is that this is not simply the result of interest rates. It is the consequence of years of artificially inflated asset prices combined with stagnant wage growth. The system has been stretched to the point where even small increases in borrowing costs can shut out entire segments of the population.

From the standpoint of capital flows, housing has become less about shelter and more about investment, and that shift has created a market where prices are sustained by capital rather than affordability. The entry point for new buyers rises continuously, eventually reaching a level where participation becomes impossible.

QUESTION: You have to be the most accomplished programmer ever. Socrates even forecast that this peace meeting would fail. No neural net would produce such a forecast. Your AI methods are beyond what anyone else has. Will you ever agree to reveal how to code?

PB

ANSWER: To be honest with you, probably not. I just have way too much on my plate. As a programmer, you should know. You should never even tinker with something that works, for you may lose that magic. The computer picked up war with Iran last December.

The computer is monitoring everything including future elections. If voters perceive that the US lost the war against Iran, the Republicans will lose Congress and the president would be facing impeachment motions from Democrats. If, on the other hand, voters perceive that this conflict with Iran was worth it and life returns to normal by the summer, then, and only  then, would the Republicans have a better chance of breaking even in November’s midterm elections. Add to this pressure, the Israeli elections where Netanyahu needs to appear to win. A ceasefire or peace with Iran that accomplished nothing but actually left Iran strategically with a victory controlling the Strait of Hormuz, this is a disaster for both.

I taught the computer how I would personally analyze. I did not create a neural net, dump in the data, shake well, and hope it figured everything out all by itself. To do that necessitated EXPERIENCE as a trader on an international level – not domestic. I rejected all the classic economic BS that does not work and never has.

Even former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker came to realize that Keynesian Economics failed during the 1970s. Yet, all the TV pundits still talk in Keynesian terms and people forecast markets based on what the Fed will do next. Even Larry Summers admitted no economist has EVER forecast a recession in advance since WWII.