Editor’s Note: The article below by Brandon Smith at Alt-Market discusses topics that will definitely make economists uncomfortable, but they’d be foolish to deny his conclusions. I discussed it today on an episode of The JD Rucker Show (clip above).
One of the most dishonest games being played in economics today is the attempt by various groups (political and financial) to deflect blame for the rise of inflation. The Biden White House and Democrats desperately want to blame Russia and the war in Ukraine, even though inflation was spiking long before the war ever started. The Federal Reserve pretended for years that inflation was not a threat at all despite numerous alternative economists warning what would happen. Now they blame supply chain disruptions instead of their own monetary policies. The GOP wants to blame Biden alone for the crisis while ignoring the dominant role of the Fed in the economy (and their unilateral power) over the course of multiple presidencies.
In the alternative sphere there are some people that try to deny the fact that there is more than one type of inflation. They want to claim it’s all about money creation, but this is simply not true. There is inflation in money supply, but there is also price inflation caused by numerous factors including bottlenecks in production, bottlenecks in resources, bottlenecks in shipping, bottlenecks in energy, etc. Anyone that denies this fact is blinded by bias or just doesn’t understand how inflation really works.
Overall, it’s fair according to the evidence to put MOST of the blame on the central banks and their 14 year program of bailouts and QE policies. If you have read my previous articles on the Fed’s involvement you know that my position has remained the same for years – I predicted a stagflationary crisis based on the position that that the Fed was deliberately creating a monetary disaster to make way for a new digital currency system tied to a global framework, and this is exactly what has happened so far.
That said, too much money chasing too few goods is not the only problem we face as a nation. There is also the issue of global interdependency and our reliance on other countries, some of them hostile, for production and resources. With supply chain disruptions an ever present danger, it’s not enough to focus on money velocity and the central bank alone – We won’t be solving the crisis that way.
Not to mention, the more the federal reserve raises interest rates the more it costs to support US government debt, which is already well beyond US GDP. If doubts rise over the US being unable to pay for its treasury debts, then foreign creditors may dump their T-bond and dollar holding entirely. This could destroy the buying power of the dollar.
In the liberty movement there is always debate about solutions. We all seem to agree on the core problems but can’t ever seem to agree on what to do about them.
There are those that suggest there’s nothing that can be done economically except prepare and wait for collapse so we can rebuild once the dust has settled. I find myself in this camp more often than not. Then there are those that believe a political approach is possible. After nearly half the states in the US blocked the covid mandates and lockdowns, I am starting to think solutions at the state level might be viable. Then there are those that want to build an alternative system, a parallel economy that competes with the mainstream economy.
This is something I have discussed for a long time – It’s the reason I started Alt-Market 12 years ago. It’s the ideal solution because it is proactive. Instead of waiting around for other people to fix the crisis for us, regular people simply establish their own trade and production systems based on necessities, separating from the dying economy so that when it collapses they are mostly unaffected.
This, however, is a short term solution in that large scale domestic production is eventually needed to return a country and economy to greater prosperity. Growing gardens, making trade items and forming local barter markets is only a way to weather the storm; it is not a long term path to fiscal health. What we need is locally based large scale production of necessities as well as our own domestic resource discovery.
In order to fight back against monetary decline the US needs to produce a majority of its own goods again. If the problem is too much money chasing too few goods, then we can make our own goods here at home instead of relying on countries like China and the unstable global supply chain.
But what if there is an answer beyond domestic production alone? What if we built an economy which focuses on QUALITY? It’s a notion that might have been suggested by others, but it is certainly not being promoted by any economist within the mainstream or any political representative.
The Quality Economy As A Means To Fight Inflation?
Consider this for a moment: What if home based producers were given incentives by states (such as a jubilee on taxes) to manufacture high quality long lasting goods? There are multiple reasons why this model is not being used, all of them faulty.
Carbon control initiatives in the west are actually forcing companies to produce lower quality goods with substandard designs in the name of “saving the environment.” But, if products are low quality and are breaking sooner because of carbon control standards, then people have to go out and buy replacement goods sooner. More retail demand means more manufacturing which means more “carbon pollution” over time. The carbon emissions narrative is complete nonsense and there’s no proof whatsoever that man-made carbon causes climate change, but even by the logic of the carbon lobby quality production makes more sense for the environment. At the very least it means less waste.
Remember when a washing machine used to last for many years? Remember when a lawnmower or a chainsaw was made from quality metal parts instead of being loaded with plastic parts? Remember how grandma had the same working vacuum for decades? Quality used to be a thing, but the idea has been erased from modern economic theory.
Today, it’s all about quantity, because quantity makes a bigger profit (as long as prices remain low and people have the money to buy multiples of an item). If items break constantly it means they need to be replaced constantly, which means companies make more money. In fact, there are many corporations that deliberately design products to break quickly so that consumers must buy another. This method does not work in an inflationary environment; it actually adds to the problem by forcing more money velocity and reducing the number of functional goods in the system.
Let’s say that instead we had numerous manufacturers that operate within the US and they are offered a tax jubilee for as long as they are willing to produce high quality long lasting models of their products. With the tax incentives, they could market such goods at a lower price in order to compete with poor quality goods from places like China. Now, you have given the public access to items that they only need to replace every 5 years, or 10 years, instead of every 12 months.
But what about food, which is a major part of the inflation problem? Well, the federal government actually pays farmers to grow LESS food in order to keep prices higher on commodities markets. Why not simply stop doing that? Or, again, states could offer tax incentives to farmers that produce with the effort to drive down prices, and state governments could offer to buy excess long term foods like wheat as a form of strategic reserve. America used to do this; why don’t we do it anymore?
And how about housing? Simple – Ban foreign purchases of property and only allow American citizens to buy American land. American citizens have a right to private property under the constitution. Foreign investors and governments do not have that right.
The goal of each of these policies would be to free up supply without killing the buying power of the dollar and without deliberately crushing credit markets and triggering mass job losses.
In this environment money velocity slows down and there are more goods on the market because they last longer. Savings go up because people don’t need to spend as often. Prices in general start to go down. Inflation is subdued and eventually defeated, because what is money other than a means to provide necessities and amenities? If those goods last longer then money becomes less relevant to the health of the economy.
What about deflation? Would high quality production lead to far less sales and a big drop in jobs? In America’s current 70% service-based economy, yes, for a time. But, this is going to happen soon anyway as the Fed hikes rates and stifles access to credit. With my plan, service jobs would be exchanged over time for better paying manufacturing and engineering jobs.
To be sure, there is the argument that quality goods and more savings could lead to decadent spending. In other words, there is the theory that the more money people have the more they will spend on frivolity and this might keep inflation alive. The problem is we have not lived in an economy based on quality for several decades, so it’s hard to say how people will react. If people have long lasting items and are secure in their basic necessities, then what is compelling them to spend with wild abandon? Not much.
The establishment would like to keep the public dependent on the system by reducing our buying power and controlling access to goods. I suspect that they will one day offer the same kind of solution – A return to quality. But only at the price of subservience. The World Economic Forum’s “Shared Economy” concept which they clearly plan to introduce after there is a major financial collapse would require quality based production, other wise it would fail miserably. If everyone in the world is going to be sharing everything and private property is outlawed, then the goods that are shared would have to be designed to last.
My suggestion is that we circumvent the establishment entirely and create our own economic model, still based in private property but also adapted to quality production. And, we manufacture all our goods locally within our own states and our own country. I believe this would end inflation, not just today, but for all time.
Will the establishment allow such a system to thrive? They would certainly try to stop it from happening using any means they have available. Decentralization and abundance are the enemies of authoritarianism. My point is, there is indeed a solution. We don’t need Fed intervention. We don’t need sky high interest rates. We don’t need stimulus. We don’t need government oppression or foreign interventions. We don’t need globalist centralization or a Great Reset. We don’t need any of it. They will try to convince you that we do.
Regardless of what happens the public must be made aware that there is a better way.
Article cross-posted from Alt-Market.
Bypass Big Tech Censors
Safeguarding Your American Dream: Discover the Power of America First Healthcare
In today’s economy, healthcare costs remain one of the biggest threats to financial stability and family security. Americans work hard to build a better life, yet rising medical expenses can quickly erode savings, force tough trade-offs, and even push families toward debt or bankruptcy. Medical bills continue to rank as the leading cause of personal bankruptcy in the United States, with millions facing underinsurance or unexpected out-of-pocket burdens that no one plans for. Many turn to government-run marketplace plans under the Affordable Care Act, hoping for relief, only to discover that what appears affordable on paper often delivers higher long-term costs, limited real protection, and coverage that may not align with personal values or family needs.
America First Healthcare stands out as a private insurance agency dedicated to helping conservatives and families secure better coverage and better rates through customized, values-aligned options. By conducting free insurance reviews, the agency uncovers hidden gaps in existing policies and connects clients with private alternatives that emphasize personal responsibility, small-government principles, and genuine affordability—often delivering up to 20% savings while providing stronger protection for the American Dream.
The allure of marketplace plans is easy to understand: open enrollment periods, premium tax credits for many households, and the promise of “comprehensive” benefits mandated by law. Yet recent data reveals a different reality, especially after the expiration of enhanced premium subsidies at the end of 2025. Enrollment for 2026 dropped by more than one million people compared to the prior year, with many shifting to lower-tier bronze plans to keep monthly premiums manageable.
These plans feature significantly higher deductibles—averaging around $7,500 nationally—and greater cost-sharing requirements. Families who once paid modest amounts after subsidies now face average premium increases of $65 or more per month, even as they accept plans that leave them responsible for thousands in upfront costs before meaningful coverage kicks in.
High deductibles create a dangerous barrier to care. Studies show that people in such plans are less likely to seek timely treatment for chronic conditions, attend preventive screenings, or fill necessary prescriptions. A seemingly minor illness or injury can balloon into major expenses when patients delay care until problems worsen. For a family of four, a single hospitalization, cancer diagnosis, or unexpected surgery can easily exceed the deductible, triggering coinsurance and out-of-pocket maximums that still leave substantial bills. One recent analysis noted that some proposed changes could push family deductibles toward $31,000 in future years, further exposing households to financial risk.
Beyond the numbers, marketplace plans often carry structural limitations. Coverage for certain critical services may include waiting periods or narrower networks that restrict access to preferred doctors and specialists. Preventive care is required to be covered without cost-sharing, but everything else—lab work, imaging, specialist visits, or ongoing treatment—typically waits until the deductible is met. This reactive model contrasts sharply with the proactive, holistic approach many families prefer, especially those focused on wellness, early intervention, and maintaining health to enjoy life rather than merely reacting to illness.
Values alignment represents another growing concern. Government-influenced plans operate within a framework shaped by federal mandates and political priorities that may not reflect conservative principles of limited government, personal freedom, and ethical stewardship. Families who want to direct their healthcare dollars toward providers and benefits that honor traditional values sometimes find marketplace options feel misaligned, forcing a compromise between affordability and conviction.
Private alternatives, by contrast, offer year-round flexibility without the restrictions of open enrollment windows. Independent agents can shop across a wider range of carriers to design plans tailored to specific family needs—whether that means lower deductibles for frequent medical users, broader provider networks, or add-ons that support wellness and preventive services from day one. Clients frequently report more stable premiums that do not automatically escalate each year, along with genuine cost savings once the full picture of deductibles, copays, and coverage depth is considered.
Take the experience of real families who made the switch. Amanda C. shared that her new plan felt “way better” than what she had through the marketplace. Johnny Y. noted his previous coverage kept increasing annually until he found a more stable private option. Sofia S. expressed delight with her plan and began recommending it to others. These stories echo a common theme: when families move beyond one-size-fits-all government marketplaces, they often discover customized protection that better safeguards both health and finances.
Founder Jordan Sarmiento’s own journey underscores the stakes. In 2021, a six-day hospitalization generated a $95,000 bill. Under a well-structured private “Conservative Care Coverage” plan, his out-of-pocket responsibility would have been just $500. That stark difference illustrates how thoughtful planning and private options can prevent a medical event from becoming a financial catastrophe.
Practical steps exist for anyone questioning their current coverage. Start with a no-obligation review of your existing policy to identify gaps—high deductibles, limited critical-care benefits, or escalating premiums. Compare total projected costs (premiums plus potential out-of-pocket expenses) rather than monthly premiums alone. Consider family health history, anticipated needs, and lifestyle priorities. Private agencies can present side-by-side options that include stronger wellness incentives, broader access, and plans built on shared values of self-reliance and freedom.
In an era when healthcare inflation continues to outpace general cost-of-living increases, relying solely on marketplace solutions carries growing risk. Families who proactively explore private alternatives frequently achieve meaningful savings while gaining peace of mind that their coverage truly works when needed most.
America First Healthcare makes this exploration straightforward through its free review process. Families and individuals receive personalized guidance to close coverage holes, reduce unnecessary expenses, and secure plans that align with conservative principles—protecting wallets, health, and the American Dream without government overreach. Many who complete a review discover they can enjoy better benefits for less, often saving up to 20% while gaining the customization and stability that marketplace plans struggle to deliver.
Ultimately, protecting your family’s future requires looking beyond the marketing of “affordable” government options. By understanding the long-term costs hidden in high deductibles, shifting coverage tiers, and values mismatches, Americans can make empowered choices. Private, values-driven insurance offers a smarter path—one that rewards diligence, supports wellness, and delivers real security. For those ready to move beyond the limitations of traditional marketplace plans, a simple review can reveal options designed to serve families, not bureaucracies. The American Dream thrives when individuals and families retain control over their healthcare decisions, and thoughtful private coverage plays a vital role in making that possible.
