Speaker 1: You can look up and you'll see NATO is basically
the retirement home for Neo konnt YEA, and they were
out there trying to raise one hundred billion dollars to
keep the war going with Russia if Trump is elected.
Speaker 2: You were listening to Carrie Letz's Financial Survival Network, where
you get valuable information. You just can't find anywhere else
to thrive in today's trying times. You need the Financial
Survival Network now more than ever. Go to Financial Survivalnetwork
dot com and get your free newsletter and gift. Financial
Survival Network now more than.
Speaker 3: Ever, And welcome. You are listening to and watching the
Financial Survival Network. I'm your host, Carrie Letz. The election's over,
we're going to have on Martin Armstrong, who had been
basically almost a year ago, been saying Trump was going
to win. The models showed over a sixty percent chance,
record low approval ratings for the current administration, and we
wanted to have Martin on because a lot of things
are going to flow from this. Wanted to get your
opinion Martin on what's going to happen next again. You
find his work over at Armstrong Economics dot com. Sign
up for his daily missives. I never miss him, Martin.
Great to have you on so well. It looks one
prediction you made, neither side would believe that the other
one if they won. There's no denying that Trump won
this election. There's no allegations of widespread vote tampering, although
I'm sure there's plenty because it's as American as apple pie.
But they're still finding other reasons. I mean, the left
is in complete meltdown mode now, isn't it. Yeah, I
mean there they basically are, you know, kind of denying it.
They mainly because I think if you really step back
and look at what the left did, they could not believe,
you know, criminally charging Trump and all these things. They
thought he was unelectable, and you know that was their downfall.
Speaker 1: You know, they just kept this nonsense up and rather
than looking at what the the state of the economy
and economics really is. I mean, our computer's just never
been wrong. And because it doesn't do the polls, it's
not asking people, gee, who are you going to vote
for next week or whatever, it's just looking at the economics.
And uh, even you take go back to the Great Depression,
you know, Herbert Hoover had nothing to do with the
UH with a great crash. She had just been elected,
all right, and then in thirty two he gets only
you know, thirty nine percent. Whoever's there is always blink.
That's pretty much the way it goes. So it's not
necessarily that you know what they did or one way
or the other. But with the the other thing, which
I'll be revealing more at the conference, is that this
was the thirty fourth year after the fall to Berlin Wall.
That's when the socialism in the West should start to collapse,
and that's what we're watching. It will take until probably
about twenty thirty seven to complete the entire cycle. But look,
if you look at China, you look at Russia, Eastern Europe,
nobody wants to go back to this sort of stuff.
But in the West, you know, you have Stammer over there.
You know, in Britain locking up twelve year old kids
because they criticized the government. I mean, this is nonsense.
They think that they can just dictate to people and
you're going to jump and just ask how high. But
the real downside with this whole thing is that this
was a major coup attempt. I would say that I
was told from the beginning of the year that they
would not allow somebody else on the ticket with Biden,
and that he was not going to be the candidate.
He would step down after the Republican Convention. And back
then there were two camps buying for power, which was
Michelle Obama and Hillary. But the neocons really wanted Camillo
because she's just another placeholder and her VP is the same.
I mean, come on, you know, and so they just
you know, smile and say whatever they need to say,
read the que cards, and we'll sign whatever's put in
front of them. And that's what the neocons wanted. Now
they are quite upset because but these people have I
know some of them, I've had dinner with them. You
look them in the eyes and honestly, you don't even
see a warm light. I don't know what it is.
They were psychologically damaged in the fifties when we had
air raids and we had a height underneath their desks
in school or something, you know. But I mean, even
Robert mc namarr, if you look on YouTube, he with
the neukon took us into Vietnam and he did an
apology before he died. He said, we were wrong. We
thought Russia was involved and it was just a civil war.
That's very nice, Will. Fifty eight thousand Americans died because
you were wrong. And they've done the same thing with
every war, you know, it's it. They've never won a
single one yet since World War Two, and they've been
trying to get us into a war with Russia. That Ukraine.
You know, I speak to Ukrainians and I can tell
you that there was a coup against Zelensky on May
seventh and then he fired as his uh head of
the bodyguards, and his bodyguard's really now American squat because
he Ukrainians would basically kill him. But the ones I
talked to, they said if he was on fire, they
wouldn't urinate on him until he was dead. They just
see him as a puppet of the West, you know,
because there was a piece deal and then bars Johnson
hopped on the plane went over there and no, you're
not allowed to sign. So you know they see that
Ukraine is is just it's a it's a proxy, no
different than has Baba is a proxy for Iran. You know.
They just take orders from a central place, and that's
what's been going on why. You know, Zelenski's supposed to
be defending his territory, well with him, why did he
invade Ukraine and allow Russia to even take more territory
in Ukraine? It was they did that to try and
desperately get putent to attack anything in NATO. So they
can call him the aggressor. It's just esthetic. But my
concern now with the election is that the neocons are
afraid of Trump. I mean, he's basically said that he's
going to stop all of these wars. Uh, that's what
people really want.
Speaker 3: Uh.
Speaker 1: I did speak with the RFK, and you know even
he was anti war, which is why I was kind
of arguing the two of them should get together anyhow.
But I mean, this is it. So what have been
neo cons done. You can look up and you'll see
NATO is basically the retirement home for neo kons, and
they were out there trying to raise one hundred billion
dollars to keep the war going with Russia if Trump
is elected. They couldn't raise all the money. But you
know here you have them also trying to open up
in Asia. You know what's NATO doing over there?
Speaker 2: All?
Speaker 1: Right? What people have to understand is that this is
part of that oh you know, one World government agenda
that that comes from the WEF and everybody else there.
They think that the UN can can become the peacemakers,
solve these bores, uh, and then would be elevated the IMF,
who already has its digital currency on the boards. I've
spoken about that, and to replace the dolar and the
World Bank, and NATO is expecting to be the new
defense department for the world. It's I mean, if even
if you look at the eight points from Schwab and
it's twenty thirty plan in there is that the United
States will lose all its power and the military will
be handed to you win. I mean, these people are
just crazy. But you know, when one thing I learned
a long time ago, it's not what you think, it's
what they think that you have to pay attention to.
Is you might think it, Yeah, I mean it's it's
it's insane. I certainly wouldn't even advocate something like that,
but that doesn't mean that's other people.
Speaker 3: Won't, so so they're stuck with him. Now. He's got
to end the war in Ukraine. Prato. I mean, that's
first on the agenda, and already the Palestinians are saying, hey,
we want we want peace, we want peace just to
you know, let us let us survive Hamas. You know,
they're willing to give the all of a sudden the hostages.
It's kind of like a repeat of Reagan when he
came into once.
Speaker 1: Yeah, when Reagan came in, I ran suddenly gave up
all of the hostages there too. You know, that's a
reflection that they understand the difference between Trump versus Biden
or Camilla and it you know, this is the way
it goes. But it's people also have to understand that
it's not really just the personality that you're voting for.
It's a whole entourage behind it. Can know you're not
voting really for her ideas or anything else. It's it's basically, uh,
you know, a vote for her was I vote for
Lincoln and the rest of them, the still controlled foreign policy,
et cetera.
Speaker 3: Yeah, you know, she.
Speaker 1: I've said, you know, people were like kind of shocked,
But I mean Hillary would have made a better president,
not that I agree with her opinions, but that she
is not somebody that allows others to walk all over
she's more authoritarian. Now, if she agreed with them, that
same thing would happen. But Camilla is like, oh, okay, fine,
you know, no problem. That's the whole issue with her.
And as I said, this thing was set up from
the beginning that the debate with Biden was unprecedented and
if you never have a presidential debate before people were
even nominated, And one well seasoned Democrat that I know
even said to me after that debate, well, now the
rest of the world sees what we've seen for two years.
I mean, it's a shame. But they stuck him up there.
They kept everybody off the ballot so nobody else could
interfere with their agenda. He would step down. And then
because they had already raised over one hundred million bucks,
they just handed it to Camilla. They couldn't hand it
to Hillary or Michelle. So you know she had She
was all over the media everywhere before the Democratic Convention. So,
I mean, this whole thing was was ragged from the beginning.
But their biggest problem was they, you know, with all
these criminal charges and nonsense, you know, calling January sixth
though an insurrection without weapons, you know, ridiculous, It's it's
really absurd and and but unfortunately you have a lot
of Democrats that are still all caught up in this.
Jamie Raskin in particular, even sent a letter to Trump, well,
you didn't file this paper, so maybe you're not legitimate.
Speaker 3: Uh, they're not. They're not going to try that, are they.
Speaker 1: No. I don't think so. But what I am hearing
is that they are planning on a very very large
protest in UH in January, and they they wanted to
be significant enough that he would be forced to call
out the UH National Guard so they can call him
a dictator. I mean, you know, it's.
Speaker 3: Not gonna work. It's not gonna work because people are broken.
The left is broken. Now maybe they'll recover in time
for inauguration, but right now they're they're uh, they're just
a big wet mess here, Martin.
Speaker 1: You know, these ideas have been tried so many times
and they have failed. Uh Stammer is just taking control
of Britain and pushing all this stuff in and his
his approval rating is plummeted by more than fifty percent.
People are not interested in this. America was supposed to
be the land of opportunity, and here you come here,
and you know, they keep saying, oh, the rich, the rich,
the rich. Well, people don't even look at it. The
definition of the rich, you know, in the Great Depression
was five million dollars. That was an awful lot of
money back then, when when a Cadillac with six hundred bucks,
you know, and today what is the definition of rich?
They went to two hundred and fifty thousand, But then
they made it householding. Come so, if you and your
wife earned one twenty five apiece, guess what you're it?
Speaker 3: And you're like lower middle class in New York City
if you make in two point fifty.
Speaker 1: Barely stammer his definition of the riches. Anybody has the savings.
I mean, it's just gotten to be so ridiculous that
our computer shows that this was thirty four years from
the fall of the Berlin Wall. This is where finally
socialism Marxist agenda in the West should start to decline.
It will be it should be collapsed completely by twenty
thirty seven. But just look at people that are Eastern Europe,
China and Russia. There's no way they're interested in going
back to communism.
Speaker 3: So what what is next in store for the US?
For the dollar, for gold, especially the stock market inflation.
What can Trump really do? We've got thirty four trillions
worth of debt, We've got hundreds of trillions more in
unfunded mandates. I mean, are we expecting too much here?
Speaker 1: Look, I'm you know, I'm arguing, and you can tell
you your viewers to send letters to Trump. I mean,
the way out of this is actually not that difficult.
What you do is you is your coupons and you
swap the debt like I would do to bail out
a company. You do it debt to equity swap. Here,
you would issue a coupon for your a thirty year
bond year holding. They take that to mer Lynch or
whatever broger are you're using, and then you can buy
either securities shares or corporate debt. They then take the
coupon and then the Treasury redeems it end of the debt. Okay,
we then also have to prohibit any borrowing in the future,
but we can, you know, take thirty four trillion and
inject it into the private sector where it belongs. Interest
rates will come down because it's the government out there
competing with you for money, and they are the biggest
Borrower in the room.
Speaker 3: So your org down effect, right, the crowding out effect. Yeah.
Speaker 1: And I had worked on all of this back in
the nineties with Dick Army and Bill Archer back back then,
and I was asked if to take some security to
redesign it to make it a wealth fund, and I did.
I said, okay, fine, this is how we do it.
People submit their track records. I said, I want a
live track record for ten years. And the Democrats wouldn't
vote for because they said when they got in they
wanted to change the fund managers. I said, I don't
care who they voted for. You're giving this on the
track record. You know, maybe the guy didn't even vote.
I don't care about that. But had we done that,
that down back then was only fifty five hundred, had
we converted that to a wealth fund, so security would
be most people are paying more in so security taxes
than they are an income tax, that wouldn't be there.
I mean, so there are ways to do this, but
you're talking about the bureaucrats. All they're feeding it to trough.
You're paying for their grand children to go to college.
And it look, we can straighten this out if we
you know, really give it a shot. Trump has at
least come out and said he wanted to eliminate the
income tax, but it's putting on towers and replace. I mean,
that would help, but as I said, when you go
down the line, you'll see a lot of people are
paying more in security than they are in income tax.
So we have to deal with the debt problem. If
we can do that, we can really straighten out and
really then do make America grat again.
Speaker 3: So is there the will to do it because the
banks don't really want us to do that. The banks
want to see debt go up and up forever, right,
even though it's eventually going to destroy everything, including them.
But this is how they make their money, right.
Speaker 1: Well, yes, but that's also starting to come to an end.
Is the problem here is to be a primary dealer,
you have to sign on and agreed to by so
much debt, then you get to resell it. If you
can't sell it, you're stuck with it. So it's the
banks that would be stuck with it. Our interest expenditures
this year about a trillion dollars. You know, just in
five years they're going to be over three to five trillion.
The banks don't have enough capital themselves because they have
to guarantee to buy this debt in advance. That's not
going to happen. So we're at the point where the
banks themselves are not going to be able to handle it.
Speaker 3: Okay, So it's in everybody's interest, and we need something
innovative here, out of the box thinking, which we haven't had,
you know, in our country in quite a while, have we.
Speaker 1: Look, I'm a trader, and the problem is most of
the academics are all left this. You know. In fact,
once Central Bank it told one of the major companies
and uh this, look, I can't talk to you. You
call Armstrong and it was very interesting. I got on
the phone. Is look, I'm only calling you because they said,
you know, uh, it's I have no respect for academics.
This is great because I'm not an academic, I said,
a trader. You know, I've seen it live, what happens.
You know, I'm non theory.
Speaker 3: So this is basically good for everyone because I think,
correct me if I'm wrong. You got you got better
sources than I do. But Trump understands that we're we're
really coming to the end here. Something major has got
to be done. Yes.
Speaker 1: Look, one thing about Trump is that he understands debt
and uh, he understands bankruptcy et cetera. You know, all right, fine,
you know people always been there. Look you he's sell
me with a least experience and he's at least been
through that, so he knows what it is and you're
just looking at it from a government side. I mean,
what has been interesting. I've been getting more calls probably
from foreign governments about what happens now about Trump. It's
very interesting because they too, particularly in Europe, they were
so sold on this idea that that Camilla was going
to win. Even you know, the the Economist magazine in London,
which is I think couldn't possibly walk a straight line.
Oh we're endorsing you know, Camilla. You know it's look,
you even had, you know, Dick Cheney endorsing Camilla. That's
proof that the neocons were there.
Speaker 3: You know, I knew there are several reasons. I knew
it was over the botched assassination attempts could only build
build support for them. But when I saw the Washington
Post refrain from endorsing Camilla and pledged to never endorse
another presidential candidate. Look, who controls the Washington Post write
a certain three letter agency that begins with C. The Grahams,
Drothy Graham, They were CIA assets, Woodward and Bernstein. I
don't know if they're assets or they're just dupes. I'll
assume they're genuinely good hearted, kind hearted, misguided libs and
they're dupes. But who who did Watergate? And whenever that
agency leaks, who do they leak to The Washington Post
and Jeff Bezos. The rumor is, although now it's been
wiped from the Internet and I can't find it, but
that the CIA's venture capital fund was one of the
early investors in Amazon and the biggest customer of Amazon
Web Services, the most profitable division, or perhaps the only
profitable division of Amazon. So they seem to have capitulated
ahead because they knew what was coming.
Speaker 1: Well, I can tell you that I've known journalists over
the years, and one of the very senior guy that
had one of the top three newspapers in New York,
and he explained how it really works. He says, the
government will call you and say we have a saber.
We want you to spend this story this way, or
kill it or whatever. It is. If you do not,
they come after you personally. Well let's see your taxes, etc.
You know, Snowden was giving his information to a journalist
in California who suddenly drove himself into a tree and died,
all right, giving it to the Guardian in London.
Speaker 3: A lot of bad drivers and those journalists they have
a lot of one car accidents hitting trees and uh yeah,
freet beams. You know.
Speaker 1: Even the movie they did on me, the Forecaster, it
was a German funded by German TV, and the somebody
broke into their offices over there stole what they thought
was the film, but they had a backup. I mean
that was in Germany, they did it. I mean it's
and even if you look at the film and there
there's a guy named Olover Brown who worked for the
Er of Prisons at the time or he had had
done so, and in there he said the FBI showed
up at his house the day before to try and
intimidate him not to be in a movie.
Speaker 3: Unbelievable.
Speaker 1: Well, how did they know when the movie crew was
even going to go there? Unless they were illegally tapping somebody?
Speaker 3: Loving it and I love conspiracy theories because they're not
really theories. The term conspiracy theorist was created by that
certain three letter agency to discredit critics of the Warren
Commission and the investigation of JFK's assassination. Let's get to
something Trump mentioned, which parallels something that you and I.
As I'm putting together our book, my conversations, my decade
long conversations with the Master Forecaster, I came across it
where you said there shouldn't even be an income tax,
and lo and behold. Two three weeks ago, Trump says,
let's get rid of the income tax. You had a column,
you know, one of your eblasts about that very topic.
How would that work? Could we just do it on
a tariff's and a consumption tax? And is there any
possible way Martin to get this done? Because the worst
days of just about everybody's life out there generally start
in April first, and they end around April sixteenth, when
you have to like try to put all this stuff together,
unless you're like me and I do extensions periodically. But
that's the worst time of the year.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean, look, it's I actually debated Steve Forbes,
and back then it was Governor Florio of New Jersey
at Princeton University. And Florio was known that, you know,
if it moved, tax it, and if it died, take
it would take whatever's left you out. And so I
was taking the middle ground between Steve he wanted the
flat tax, and Florio, which really like I said, tax everything.
And I turned to him and I said, you know,
you're borrowing from the poor and you don't even have
the dignity to pay him interest. What were you talking about,
I said, because everybody waits for the refund check. So
you're taking their money from the from the lower echelon,
from the poor, and you don't even paying him interest.
And he had no way to come back.
Speaker 3: If there is none, there is no there is argument.
Speaker 1: Look, Dick Army was for the flat tax, Bill Archer
was for the retail sales tax. I was the one
shuffling back and forth between the two. I finally gave up.
You know, I was sitting in Dick Army's office and
he said, more, do you know cycles I said yes,
And he said if we don't we you know, I
can't agree to the retail sales tax because we won't
be able to repeal the sixteenth Amendment, and when the
Democrats get back in, you'll know what, you know, what
will happen.
Speaker 3: We'll have boats.
Speaker 1: And I said, Dick, you're right, and I just kind
of gave up at that point. So we're not going
to get the sixteenth Amendment, you know, repeat, because the state,
the states, you're all going to have that. So what
we can do is basically just eliminate the income taxes.
We don't need it, stop the borrowing, all right, get
rid of the debt, as I said with the cube
on issue, all right. And then when you do that,
you then have to take security and turn it into
wealth bund because it's all stuffed in there with the debt.
And we don't need taxes when taxes were only necessary
historically because money was gold and silver coin, so the
king had to get some backed in order to spend. Yes, okay,
now it's just paper, all right. There's no reason for
us to be borrowing our own paper or to even be,
you know, imposing taxes to get some of the paper back.
It's not necessary.
Speaker 3: Are we just prompt? Do we just print? The difference
is that.
Speaker 1: It yes, it is far less over seventy percent of
the national debt at times has been a cumulative interest.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: I mean, if we had just printed the money we needed,
we wouldn't be anywhere close to a thirty four trillion
dollar deficit and you wouldn't have the inflation. We have
this idea that printing is inflationary versus borrowing is nonsense.
That was back during the Brenton Woods days. If you
had a need bond, you went to the bank and
you say can I borrow? And it was illegal. You
couldn't bar against government debt. So after nineteen seventy one
you went trade futures. You can buy T bills, Fannie
May's whatever, Postmas collateral with the broker, all right, so
you can borrow. It's money that pays interest. That's it.
There's no difference between printing it and borrowing it, other
than if you borrow what you pay injuries, whereas your
printed you don't. So it would be less inflationary today
to print than to borrow. And let's just look at
this realistically. Get rid of the debt, stop the borrowing.
We won't have the interest expenditures. And look over fifty
percent of the interest that we spend goes out of
the country and China owns ten percent of the national debt,
so two hundred billion of the interesting this year goes
to China.
Speaker 3: And also you're looking at, you know, the banking system
becoming unsustainable as a result of this.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean it's like I said, a primary dealer
has to it gets that license, but it must guarantee
to buy a certain amount of the debt. And you're
this level of debt is exceeding the cap fertalization of
the primary dealers. They're not going to be able to
keep this system going. And look at the federal budget.
Speaker 3: What we're paying out money for half of it's wasted, right,
I mean, I think any normal person could agree. We
got I did a chat GPT search, give me the
top one hundred agencies I could get rid of and
nobody would even notice it. And half those names, Martin,
I didn't even know they existed. I had no idea
they were an entity, and you could replicate the same
exact thing on the state level. This is to require
like a revolution at paradigm shift in thinking, isn't it.
Speaker 1: Look when I lived in New Jersey, every little hamlet
had a chief of police and a police force because
they used it to raise money. Here in Florida, we
have the police forces for the county and so you know,
I was driving down the you know, park boulevard. I
wasn't paying attention because nobody was on the road. He is, all,
you're doing fifteen or third. I'm sorry, I wasn't very
paying attention and it took my licensees. You never had
a ticket, I said, no, Well, here, I don't want
to be the first one to give you one. I mean,
that would never take place in New Jersey. New Jersey.
They would have called out the swat team, figured it
out how to be a fake name. I mean Jersey.
They would give you a parking ticket in a private
parking lot if you were slightly over the line, and
it was just ridiculous. They used it to raise money.
And that's the big difference I see, you know, from
Florida versus New Jersey. I mean, New Jersey was horrible.
Speaker 3: But no income tax in Florida, so automatically of the
budget is less than half of the budget of New
York State with three or four million more people, which
is a pretty mean feat.
Speaker 1: Yeah. Look, you have a lot of retire people down here,
so that's good because they keep that check against government.
They can't raise the taxes on them too much. And look,
this is why you know Florida is the number one
stay everybody's moving to. Yeah, California is the number one
state people were leaving.
Speaker 3: Funny, And the weather in California is actually better than
the weather in Florida. The beaches are better in Florida,
for sure, but the actual year round weather, a dryness,
all that, it's better generally in California. So don't tell
me it's the weather why people come here in stead
in California.
Speaker 1: Well, you know, people are leaving there, So what does
Newsom do. Oh, let's put an exit a tax to
punish them.
Speaker 3: For leaving, like New Jersey. New Jersey's had one. Yeah,
it's got to be unconstitutional. No one's ever challenged it. Well,
it's going to be interesting to see what happens here.
Will things really change or will they just go on
the way they did? Kind of Trump's first term, I
think he knew who all the players are. The other
thing is he's going to hit the ground running, you know,
all those executive orders, immigration and everything else he plans
to do. He's going to walk into the White House
with them. It's not like he's going to have to
try to figure out, well, what should I do first?
Who should I appoint to this? Who should I appoint
to that? You know, it might be the best thing
that ever happened for the country that the suspicious way
in which the twenty twenty election you know, took place
and proclaimed the winner, making him have two unconsecutive terms,
might make him way more effective than if he had
just continued on a second term. Yes.
Speaker 1: Well, also, I can tell you because you know, I
used to be part of the wedding process for picking
presidents and I would send me in, I would meet them, Okay,
and I know because I've been there. You take Bush Junior.
He did not pick Dick Cheney. But you know the
deep state that picked the cabinet, they did the same
thing that Trump. They said, oh, you know, you're not
a politician. We have to give confidence to the world,
and we need people with experience in here. They put
in John Bolton. You know, even Trump said, you know,
fired him. He says he wanted to start World War
three because they shot down an unmanned drone.
Speaker 3: Drunes are one hundred dollars a piece now less than
one hundred dollars, so that's really worth going to war for.
Speaker 1: Yeah, I mean it's it's uh, look, I've known these people.
I knew Bill Crystal even spoke at our conferences. His
father started the old Neocon movement, and you know his
his stick was to uh he wanted to remove Saddam
Husane uh Kadaffi and Asade out of Syria and get
rid of these dictators who will bring democracy to the
Middle East and create pieces that you're out of your
mind I dream.
Speaker 3: Yeah.
Speaker 1: I mean, look, it's the same thing with Russia. It's
regime change all the time that they're interested in and
sticking in their puppets to run something.
Speaker 3: Well, they got their regime change this time. Martin. Hey,
going to see you tomorrow Friday, on November eighth, at
your conference in Orlando. I'll have the link in the
show notes. Sign up for the conference if you haven't
done it already. If any of you out there are
going to be there, send me an email kl Carrie
at Carrie LUTs dot com. I'll buy you a drink. Martin.
Will see you tomorrow. Be well.
Speaker 1: Oh, thanks a lot, It's always good to see you.
Take care of yourself there.
Speaker 2: Thanks for listening to Carrie Letz's Financial Survival Network, your
solution to today's trying times. For the latest, go to
Financial Survivalnetwork dot com. Financial Survival Network now more than ever,