Economic News

QUESTION: You said that Trump is listening to the Neocons in his administration and in DC. Would you please name names? Why did Trump back off on the Tomahawks? GW ANSWER: I believe the Neocons influencing Trump are Rubio, Bessert (Ex-Soros now running Treasury), and Lindsey Graham, among others. I believe all are war mongers, and I believe that they have sold to Trump this idea that the US is all-powerful and can destroy Russia in the blink of an eye. They have convinced a PAWN to wrongly believe it is a QUEEN on the chessboard of geopolitics. I believe it was Rubio who sabotaged the Budapest meeting because they, NATO, and the EU do not want peace.   https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Putin-10-25-Response-Oilk-Sanctions.mp4   I have been dealing with governments for 50 years. They know I have back-channels in every direction. You cannot intimidate Putin into surrendering. If he did, he is either dead by the hand of a Russian Neocon, like JFK was assassinated by our Neocons (CIA), or there will be a third coup as they did to Khruschev after the Cuban Missile Crisis, and then against Gorbachev when the Russian Neocons feared he would accept the offer to join NATO. Putin made it clear that no self-respecting country can back down to such absurd pressure. This is not Colombia or Venezuela. Russia is an equal partner in military power, and this Neocon tactic of always imposing sanctions is asinine and foolish. They cannot point to a single incident in which sanctions have ever worked even once. These neocons have NEVER won a single war. In the words of Trump, for anyone else, they are LOSERS! For the life of me, in Trump’s language, the Neocons are a herd of losers who are the greatest threat to humanity, far more than Putin. For they never repent and can only see as far as the end of their nose. They are incapable of ever changing their mind, and they are certainly incapable of ever learning from their last mistake. Rubio has been a Neocon for as long as I know. PDF Version Free Download Russia Peace Deal-7-F Audio Version   https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Russia-Peace-Deal-6-F.pdf.mp3   Let me explain something so nobody gets their hopes up. Yes, I was called in for a debriefing and I was asked to write a peace proposal. NATO’s Neocon leader Rutte admitted there was no peace proposal on the table. However, I was NOT called in by Trump directly. I did ask whether this was on the side, and I was told no, that President Trump sanctioned it. That does NOT mean they will act on the proposal I spent 4 days drafting. I was shocked that I was even asked – absolutely. They did listen, for they knew my position beforehand.   https://www.armstrongeconomics.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/Rutte-Nato-in-WH-Trump-10-25.mp4   Trump can pretend he is not giving weapons to Ukraine but handing them to NATO, whom Trump stated that they can “do with them as they like.”  I had expected more from him than this. That was a grave mistake. These Neocons have ensured that whatever possible dialogue between Putin and Trump has taken a shot in the head. Putin said that this is an “unfriendly act,” and Medvedev said rightly so that this is an “act of war.” Anyone who knows their military history knows that is a true statement and NOT Russia propaganda or threats. Trump can rewrite history and claim this war would never have taken place under him, but that is not true. Trump was the first to give Ukraine lethal weapons on December 24th, 2017. The decision to provide lethal weapons to Ukraine during Donald Trump’s first term was the result of a broad consensus within his administration and pressure from Congress, rather than a single person telling him to do it. The British counterfeited American currency to undermine the US economy, to disrupt its ability to fund the war, precisely what Trump is doing to Russia. Both Hitler and Napoleon also counterfeited British currency to undermine the UK economy, so they too could not fund the war against Germany under Hitler or France under Napoleon.   First of all, Tomahawks are capable of carrying a nuclear bomb. From a Russian perspective, they MUST respond assuming that they are carrying a nuke. Putin gave an interview, and he mentioned the Tomahawks. Putin bluntly stated that if Trump stupidly handed this NATO puppet Zelensky, the response would be “serious if not stunning.” There is no question that if I were Putin, I would be forced to respond with such overwhelming force that Ukraine would be buried in the ashes of geopolitical insanity, only to be discovered by archaeologists a 1,000 years from now. There is no way these Neocons will ever invite Putin to their home for dinner. Just as Trump admitted that Zelensky and Putin hate each other, the same is true with these Neocons. It’s like expecting Iran and Israel to become friends. We are closer to nuclear war today than we were in 1961 with Berlin and 1962 with Cuba. Zelensky is irrational, corrupt, and consumed with hatred. He has no business negotiating anything on behalf of the Ukrainian people when his polls have collapsed to 23%. He should not even be allowed to represent dogs in Ukraine, let alone people. By 1961, both the US and the USSR had large, sophisticated nuclear arsenals and multiple delivery systems (long-range bombers and intercontinental ballistic missiles). The Berlin confrontation was not in a distant theater like Korea, but in the heart of Europe, where US and Soviet troops faced each other directly with the only the Berlin Wall separating the two adversaries. The Cuban Missile Crisis (1962) is rightly considered the moment the world came closest to nuclear war. The 1961 Berlin Crisis was a direct precursor. Khrushchev was emboldened after seeing what he perceived as Kennedy’s weakness during the 1961 Vienna summit. He then gambled again by placing missiles in Cuba in 1962, partly to pressure the US over Berlin. The

ASIA: The major Asian stock markets had mixed day today: • NIKKEI 225 increased 658.04 points or 1.35% to 49,299.65 • Shanghai increased 27.901 points or 0.71% to 3,950.312 • Hang Seng increased 192.17 points or 0.74% to 26,160.15 • ASX 200 decreased 13.80 points or -0.15% to 9,019.00 • SENSEX decreased 344.52 points or -0.41% to 84,211.88 • Nifty50 decreased 96.25 points or -0.37% to 25,795.15 The major Asian currency markets had a mixed day today: • AUDUSD decreased 0.00025 or -0.04% to 0.65096 • NZDUSD decreased 0.00069 or -0.12% to 0.57473 • USDJPY increased 0.249 or 0.16% to 152.810 • USDCNY increased 0.00132 or 0.02% to 7.12633 The above data was collected around 14:09 EST. Precious Metals: • Gold decreased 23.1 USD/t oz. or -0.56% to 4,103.01 • Silver decreased 0.512 USD/t. oz or -1.05% to 48.408 The above data was collected around 14:12 EST. EUROPE/EMEA: The major Europe stock markets had a mixed day today: •  CAC 40 decreased 0.15 points or 0.00% to 8,225.63 •  FTSE 100 increased 67.05 points, or 0.70% to 9,645.62 •  DAX 30 increased 32.10 points or 0.13% to 24,239.89 The major Europe currency markets had a mixed day today: • EURUSD increased 0.00082 or 0.07% to 1.16265 • GBPUSD decreased 0.00209 or -0.16% to 1.33052 • USDCHF increased 0.0003 or 0.04% to 0.79555 The above data was collected around 14:18 EST. US/AMERICAS: US Market Closings: Dow advanced by 472.51 points (+1.01%) to 47,207.12 S&P 500 advanced by 53.25 points (+0.79%) to 6,791.69 NASDAQ advanced by 263.07 points (+1.15%) to 23,204.87 Russell 2000 advanced by 30.81 points (+1.24%) to 2,513.47 VIX declined by 0.93 points (-5.38%) to 16.37 Canada Market Closings: TSX Composite advanced by 166.79 points (+0.55%) to 30,353.07 TSX 60 advanced by 10.37 points (+0.58%) to 1,789.67 Brazil Market Closing: Bovespa advanced by 357.99 points (+0.25%) to 146,078.97 ENERGY: The oil markets had a mixed day today: • Crude Oil decreased 0.224 USD/BBL or -0.36% to 61.566 • Brent increased 0.017 USD/BBL or 0.03% to 66.007 • Natural gas decreased 0.0346 USD/MMBtu or -1.03% to 3.3094 • Gasoline increased 0.0006 USD/GAL or 0.03% to 1.9274 • Heating oil increased 0.0068 USD/GAL or 0.28% to 2.4098 The above data was collected around 14:24 EST. •   Top commodity gainers: Lithium (0.80%), Rubber (0.52%), Copper (0.51%), and Bitumen (0.57%) •   Top commodity losers: Orange Juice (-2.94%), Coffee (-2.41%), Feeder Cattle (-2.81%), and Live Cattle (-2.42%) The above data was collected around 14:31 EST. BONDS: Japan 1.6590%(-0.19bp), US 2’s 3.49% (-0.010%), US 10’s 3.9980%(-0.7bps); US 30’s 4.59% (+0.011%), Bunds 2.6242% (+4.63bp), France 3.4340% (+5.44bp), Italy 3.4150% (+3.99bp), Turkey 29.82% (+5bp), Greece 3.30% (+5.7bp), Portugal 3.008% (+3.8bp), Spain 3.158% (+4.1bp) and UK Gilts 4.435% (+0.03bp). The above data was collected around 14:34 EST.

Leer en Español From currency peg to currency band: Until 2005, China’s renminbi was pegged at CNY 8.3 per USD. From that moment on the government shifted to a managed float, allowing the currency to move within 2% of a daily rate set by China’s central bank, the PBOC. This change led the renminbi to depreciate by around a quarter over the decade that followed—a consequence of China’s massive trade surplus. Afterwards, from the mid-2010s to 2022, the currency further lost value as investors soured on China’s economy and the PBOC reduced its intervention in the FX market. Over the last two years, however, the currency has been broadly stable, largely as the PBOC has itself set a fairly stable exchange rate in order to limit depreciatory pressures. As a result, the renminbi has recently traded more like a currency that’s de facto pegged in a narrow trading band.  Renminbi internationalization still in the early stages: The Chinese government is making an effort to boost the attractiveness of the renminbi overseas. A decade ago the authorities introduced the cross-border international payment system (CIPS) as an alternative to the U.S.-dominated SWIFT system. Beijing has signed renminbi swap lines with dozens of foreign central banks, and pushed to settle more of its own trade in domestic currency. However, the renminbi still accounts for just 2% of international currency usage, compared to over 50% for the U.S. dollar. Restrictions on the exchange rate—which as mentioned have increased in the last couple of years—plus capital controls and concerns over sudden shifts in policymaking are likely to preclude the CNY from unseating the USD as the world reserve currency any time soon.  Our panelists’ forecasts for the exchange rate: The Consensus of the 50+ panelists we poll is for China’s renminbi to gradually appreciate over the coming years, and to move back below CNY 7.0 per USD by the end of the decade; monetary easing by the Federal Reserve will narrow the interest rate gap between the U.S. and China. However, any moves in the exchange rate are likely to be gradual, given the government’s focus on preserving stability above all else.   Insight from our panelists:  On the short-term outlook for the currency, Goldman Sachs analysts said:  “CNY continues to screen as significantly undervalued, with the degree of undervaluation now comparable again to the period of the China shock in the mid-2000s. While there is always substantial uncertainty around FX fair value metrics, recent economic performance—large export market share gains and a surge in the current account surplus—help corroborate these model estimates.”   On the outlook for renminbi internationalization, EIU analysts said:   “China will promote the use of the renminbi as a reliable international currency, at a time when confidence in the US dollar is eroded by Mr Trump’s policies. The outlook for reniminbi internationalisation is mixed, however. China could commit a greater amount of overseas aid and loans, along with other forms of support (including in supply chains), in exchange for the expansion of the renminbi’s role in global settlement and financing, as well as a reserve currency. Nevertheless, despite the growing percentage of the renminbi in trade settlement, the currency continues to make up less than 2% of global trade invoicing—suggesting limited (albeit growing) uptake in international trade. The renminbi will not emerge as a credible substitute to the US dollar in the medium term.” Our latest analysis:  New Zealand’s central bank slashed interest rates in October.  Germany’s industrial production slumped in August.  The post How will China’s currency fare in the coming years?  appeared first on FocusEconomics.

The Centre for Strategic and International Studies determined that the definition of a civil war is a conflict in which at least 1,000 people are killed. The institution likened the definition to the 1791 Whiskey Rebellion that broke out due to excessive taxation, and believes the US is on the brink of another civil war. The first wave of the ECM following the 1776 revolution bottomed in 1784, the postwar adjustment phase, when the economy stabilized after independence. From there, the cycle advanced toward the 1792 peak, marking the first wave of rising confidence in the new system. That peak corresponded with Alexander Hamilton’s fiscal consolidation, the creation of the Bank of the United States, and of course, the excise tax on whiskey. By 1794, as the ECM turned down into the 1798.6 low, we witnessed the collapse in localized confidence manifest as rebellion. Washington ordered federal troops to restore order, which many are juxtaposing to the current administration’s use of the National Guard in cities across America. The current private wave began in 1985.65, and confidence in the system has continually decreased since then. The last public wave in 1934.4 began in the throes of World War II recovery, with the nation believing in a better tomorrow after securing victory over the Axis powers. By the end of that wave, we saw the rise of the welfare state, Bretton Woods, and the failure of Keynesian policy. The current private wave will last until 2037.25, but will peak in 2032.95. Capital has fled into private assets such as real estate, equities, and crypto. No one is buying government debt. There are macro and micro problems looming. Within the states, there is an extreme division between two polar opposites points of view. We are currently amid the second-longest government shutdown in US history because neither side can agree on how to spend federal funds. One side envisions a Marxist utopia, while the other extreme sees technocratic control over consumerism. The division cannot be repaired. The cycle can never be controlled or altered, although countless men have tried and failed over the course of history. The United States is due for another massive civil war, but this time, it will be far larger than a mere revolution over taxes. Governments across the world will experience an uprising that causes their demise post-2032, and a new system will emerge. This is not my opinion – it’s just time.

The Centre for Strategic and International Studies determined that the definition of a civil war is a conflict in which at least 1,000 people are killed. The institution likened the definition to the 1791 Whiskey Rebellion that broke out due to excessive taxation, and believes the US is on the brink of another civil war. The first wave of the ECM following the 1776 revolution bottomed in 1784, the postwar adjustment phase, when the economy stabilized after independence. From there, the cycle advanced toward the 1792 peak, marking the first wave of rising confidence in the new system. That peak corresponded with Alexander Hamilton’s fiscal consolidation, the creation of the Bank of the United States, and of course, the excise tax on whiskey. By 1794, as the ECM turned down into the 1798.6 low, we witnessed the collapse in localized confidence manifest as rebellion. Washington ordered federal troops to restore order, which many are juxtaposing to the current administration’s use of the National Guard in cities across America. The current private wave began in 1985.65, and confidence in the system has continually decreased since then. The last public wave in 1934.4 began in the throes of World War II recovery, with the nation believing in a better tomorrow after securing victory over the Axis powers. By the end of that wave, we saw the rise of the welfare state, Bretton Woods, and the failure of Keynesian policy. The current private wave will last until 2037.25, but will peak in 2032.95. Capital has fled into private assets such as real estate, equities, and crypto. No one is buying government debt. There are macro and micro problems looming. Within the states, there is an extreme division between two polar opposites points of view. We are currently amid the second-longest government shutdown in US history because neither side can agree on how to spend federal funds. One side envisions a Marxist utopia, while the other extreme sees technocratic control over consumerism. The division cannot be repaired. The cycle can never be controlled or altered, although countless men have tried and failed over the course of history. The United States is due for another massive civil war, but this time, it will be far larger than a mere revolution over taxes. Governments across the world will experience an uprising that causes their demise post-2032, and a new system will emerge. This is not my opinion – it’s just time.

Leer en Español From currency peg to currency band: Until 2005, China’s renminbi was pegged at CNY 8.3 per USD. From that moment on the government shifted to a managed float, allowing the currency to move within 2% of a daily rate set by China’s central bank, the PBOC. This change led the renminbi to depreciate by around a quarter over the decade that followed—a consequence of China’s massive trade surplus. Afterwards, from the mid-2010s to 2022, the currency further lost value as investors soured on China’s economy and the PBOC reduced its intervention in the FX market. Over the last two years, however, the currency has been broadly stable, largely as the PBOC has itself set a fairly stable exchange rate in order to limit depreciatory pressures. As a result, the renminbi has recently traded more like a currency that’s de facto pegged in a narrow trading band.  Renminbi internationalization still in the early stages: The Chinese government is making an effort to boost the attractiveness of the renminbi overseas. A decade ago the authorities introduced the cross-border international payment system (CIPS) as an alternative to the U.S.-dominated SWIFT system. Beijing has signed renminbi swap lines with dozens of foreign central banks, and pushed to settle more of its own trade in domestic currency. However, the renminbi still accounts for just 2% of international currency usage, compared to over 50% for the U.S. dollar. Restrictions on the exchange rate—which as mentioned have increased in the last couple of years—plus capital controls and concerns over sudden shifts in policymaking are likely to preclude the CNY from unseating the USD as the world reserve currency any time soon.  Our panelists’ forecasts for the exchange rate: The Consensus of the 50+ panelists we poll is for China’s renminbi to gradually appreciate over the coming years, and to move back below CNY 7.0 per USD by the end of the decade; monetary easing by the Federal Reserve will narrow the interest rate gap between the U.S. and China. However, any moves in the exchange rate are likely to be gradual, given the government’s focus on preserving stability above all else.   Insight from our panelists:  On the short-term outlook for the currency, Goldman Sachs analysts said:  “CNY continues to screen as significantly undervalued, with the degree of undervaluation now comparable again to the period of the China shock in the mid-2000s. While there is always substantial uncertainty around FX fair value metrics, recent economic performance—large export market share gains and a surge in the current account surplus—help corroborate these model estimates.”   On the outlook for renminbi internationalization, EIU analysts said:   “China will promote the use of the renminbi as a reliable international currency, at a time when confidence in the US dollar is eroded by Mr Trump’s policies. The outlook for reniminbi internationalisation is mixed, however. China could commit a greater amount of overseas aid and loans, along with other forms of support (including in supply chains), in exchange for the expansion of the renminbi’s role in global settlement and financing, as well as a reserve currency. Nevertheless, despite the growing percentage of the renminbi in trade settlement, the currency continues to make up less than 2% of global trade invoicing—suggesting limited (albeit growing) uptake in international trade. The renminbi will not emerge as a credible substitute to the US dollar in the medium term.” Our latest analysis:  New Zealand’s central bank slashed interest rates in October.  Germany’s industrial production slumped in August.  The post How will China’s currency fare in the coming years?  appeared first on FocusEconomics.

Erik Loomis What drives Trump’s politics is nostalgia for the age of coal, when dirty fuel and no environmental regulations created his version of a great America. The post The Rise, Reign, and Fall of American Coal appeared first on The Nation.

At min 0:29 of this clip from FoxBusiness: I suspect Antoni views these predictions as “suspicious” only because they run counter to his priors. Remember this is the guy who looked at the import price index, and concluded tariffs hadn’t raised prices facing American households and firms, forgetting that the import price index doesn’t include tariffs… In any event, Antoni takes issue with the 55% tariff pass through to consumers, saying that none of the apocalyptic price increases had yet shown up. I would say (as a person who actually took a PhD field exam in international economics) that there is actually substantial evidence of price increases to consumers, especially once one takes into account the timing of actually implemented tariffs (remember all those “pauses”), and the time taken for pass through to occur. Regarding actual effective tariff rates, vs. Trump-declared tariff rates, we can show the disjuncture: Figure 1: Average effective tariff rate (blue), and average declared tariff rate (tan), both in %. Source: OECD Interim Economic Outlook, Paweł Skrzypczyński. The “effective” tariff rate shown above is calculated by dividing tariff revenue by imports. The relevant effective tariff rate only took off to around May, to 8.3%, while the Trump-declared tariff rate was much higher, much earlier. I think we can expect to see much higher effects once price data is reported again.      

We’re officially one month away from the 2025 World Economic Conference — the most anticipated economic event of the year! This year’s conference promises to be unlike any before. With markets in flux, debt spiraling, and geopolitical tensions rising, understanding the global economy has never been more critical. At the WEC, you’ll gain exclusive insight into Martin Armstrong’s Economic Confidence Model (ECM) — the same model that has accurately forecasted turning points for decades. Why Attend? Exclusive economic forecasts from Martin Armstrong Deep insight into the ECM, the world’s most accurate long-term cyclical model Forecasts on capital flows, inflation, debt, and geopolitics shaping 2025 and beyond Network with attendees from over 30 countries, including investors, policymakers, and entrepreneurs “You don’t have to agree with me — just follow the model. It’s never been wrong.” – Martin Armstrong Seats are filling fast, and this is your opportunity to hear directly from the man whose models have guided governments, institutions, and investors through decades of global change. Reserve your spot today — visit the Events page to secure your ticket before it’s too late. In-person tickets are extremely limited and likely to sell out. And don’t miss the next Marty and Mike Podcast dropping this Friday where Martin and Mike dive into the latest market shifts and what to expect heading into the conference. The World According to Martin Armstrong is also available on Amazon for those interested in reviewing the major predictions on the Economic Confidence Model and the full story behind 20 predictions that came to fruition: Dow 40,000 (Predicted: Dec 2019 / Verified: May 2024) Trump’s 2016 win (Predicted: Aug 2015) Brexit (Predicted: 2015) The COVID crash (ECM turning point: Feb 21, 2020) The rise of populism, crypto, and civil unrest The collapse of trust in government and media The war cycle peaking into 2024-2025 Sovereign debt crisis beginning 2023 The downfall of woke corporations The failure of negative interest rates The countdown has begun — the world is changing, and the insights you gain at the 2025 WEC could make all the difference. We hope to see you there!

Leer en Español From currency peg to currency band: Until 2005, China’s renminbi was pegged at CNY 8.3 per USD. From that moment on the government shifted to a managed float, allowing the currency to move within 2% of a daily rate set by China’s central bank, the PBOC. This change led the renminbi to depreciate by around a quarter over the decade that followed—a consequence of China’s massive trade surplus. Afterwards, from the mid-2010s to 2022, the currency further lost value as investors soured on China’s economy and the PBOC reduced its intervention in the FX market. Over the last two years, however, the currency has been broadly stable, largely as the PBOC has itself set a fairly stable exchange rate in order to limit depreciatory pressures. As a result, the renminbi has recently traded more like a currency that’s de facto pegged in a narrow trading band.  Renminbi internationalization still in the early stages: The Chinese government is making an effort to boost the attractiveness of the renminbi overseas. A decade ago the authorities introduced the cross-border international payment system (CIPS) as an alternative to the U.S.-dominated SWIFT system. Beijing has signed renminbi swap lines with dozens of foreign central banks, and pushed to settle more of its own trade in domestic currency. However, the renminbi still accounts for just 2% of international currency usage, compared to over 50% for the U.S. dollar. Restrictions on the exchange rate—which as mentioned have increased in the last couple of years—plus capital controls and concerns over sudden shifts in policymaking are likely to preclude the CNY from unseating the USD as the world reserve currency any time soon.  Our panelists’ forecasts for the exchange rate: The Consensus of the 50+ panelists we poll is for China’s renminbi to gradually appreciate over the coming years, and to move back below CNY 7.0 per USD by the end of the decade; monetary easing by the Federal Reserve will narrow the interest rate gap between the U.S. and China. However, any moves in the exchange rate are likely to be gradual, given the government’s focus on preserving stability above all else.   Insight from our panelists:  On the short-term outlook for the currency, Goldman Sachs analysts said:  “CNY continues to screen as significantly undervalued, with the degree of undervaluation now comparable again to the period of the China shock in the mid-2000s. While there is always substantial uncertainty around FX fair value metrics, recent economic performance—large export market share gains and a surge in the current account surplus—help corroborate these model estimates.”   On the outlook for renminbi internationalization, EIU analysts said:   “China will promote the use of the renminbi as a reliable international currency, at a time when confidence in the US dollar is eroded by Mr Trump’s policies. The outlook for reniminbi internationalisation is mixed, however. China could commit a greater amount of overseas aid and loans, along with other forms of support (including in supply chains), in exchange for the expansion of the renminbi’s role in global settlement and financing, as well as a reserve currency. Nevertheless, despite the growing percentage of the renminbi in trade settlement, the currency continues to make up less than 2% of global trade invoicing—suggesting limited (albeit growing) uptake in international trade. The renminbi will not emerge as a credible substitute to the US dollar in the medium term.” Our latest analysis:  New Zealand’s central bank slashed interest rates in October.  Germany’s industrial production slumped in August.  The post How will China’s currency fare in the coming years?  appeared first on FocusEconomics.