(The Epoch Times)—Upon perusing the 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals included in the well-known 2030 Agenda, one may conclude that they are all harmless and entirely reasonable goals. Who could be opposed to reducing poverty and hunger or advancing infrastructure, innovation, and industry? The trick, akin to the tale of the Trojan Horse, is that those goals have been appropriated by the most heinous interventionism, and bureaucrats with a foundation of conceit and stupidity use it to impose governmental control over every aspect of the economy. They are attacking farming, agriculture, and nearly any private activity in a Europe that is beginning to resemble a society suffocated by a predatory state and zombies close to the government, à la Chapter 9 from Ayn Rand’s “Atlas Shrugged.” First, they destroyed the very industry that the 2030 Agenda is purportedly committed to strengthening.
The most interventionist politicians are really attacking the 2030 Agenda because, despite their pretenses to the contrary, their policies invariably have the opposite effect of what they seem to support. The socialists in all parties have taken over the 2030 Agenda, which does not advance industry, growth, equality, or the fight against poverty or hunger.
This exploitation of the 2030 Agenda’s objectives is exactly like the Trojan Horse that conceals people who will destroy the city beneath the guise of an impressive and lovely gift.
The number of farms in the European Union has drastically decreased in recent years. According to Eurostat, there were 9.1 million farms in 2020, a projected 37 percent decrease, or roughly 5.3 million fewer than in 2005. This trend has only worsened since 2020.
According to the European Commission itself, the EU’s agricultural land is predicted to shrink by 1.1 percent between 2015 and 2030, primarily due to the declines of the two main groupings (agricultural land and farming), which are forecast to decline by 4.0 percent and 2.6 percent, respectively. This implies ruining our future and increasing Europe’s dependence and poverty.
It is not acceptable for the industrial fabric to be destroyed. According to the International Energy Agency, businesses are now paying twice as much for electricity and natural gas as they would in China or the United States due to an energy strategy that is incorrect and enforced by activists who lack industry knowledge. And how is it justified by the bureaucracy? “The breakdown analysis reveals that the lower economic growth in the EU in relation to the world had the greatest negative impact on the contribution of its manufacturing sector,” according to a study published by the European Commission. It’s not that they are destroying industry, so don’t worry. It is just that the EU is growing far less than before. Fascinating (note the irony). As if the decline in competitiveness isn’t already a contributing factor in stagnation.
A report from the European Round Table for Industry (Vision Paper 2024–2029) states that the market share of European Union industry in the globe has plummeted from 21 percent in 2001 to a pitiful 14.5 percent. The paper also offers positive remedies. The U.S. proportion, which had a 21 percent share during the same period, decreased less significantly, to 16.5 percent. They reaffirm that “business is the lifeblood of a robust economy.” “The EU’s industrial sector contributes 16 percent of its GDP. It creates millions of jobs indirectly and 25 percent of direct employment. It is essential for advancing innovation and enhancing the capabilities of the labor force in addition to creating income and jobs. Its potential to promote growth and prosperity is enormous, given the correct conditions. These factors make it clear that Europe needs to increase its appeal to foreign investors.” Furthermore, what has been accomplished? Taxes, restrictions, and bureaucracy are increased, destroying the very thing they claim to safeguard.
Why do people accept the 17 goals of the 2030 Agenda which are redundant as free-market capitalism would achieve all of them without the need for propaganda? Interventionism has denigrated capitalism and free markets while positioning itself as the answer to the mistakes brought about by extensive intervention. The only ways that any of those goals will actually be met are through increased capitalism and economic freedom. Socialism not only falls short of all these goals, but it also adds a secret number 18: the cancelation and persecution of complainants.
It is not anti-European to criticize this agenda’s incorrect imposition. It is in favor of Europe.
Many of us were labeled anti-Europeans years ago for supporting nuclear energy. The EU made agreements recently to create new reactors in large quantities. When we criticized the fiscal plunder and bureaucracy placed on farming, agriculture, and industry years ago, we were labeled anti-Europeans. Many governments are realizing now how grave a mistake they made. Similarly, criticizing the digital euro does not mean attacking the euro; rather, it means arguing that it should continue to be a store of value and maintain its purchasing power.
Being pro-European does not mean accepting every interventionist policy put out by a committee of bureaucrats. We must reject socialism and central planning if we are to protect Europe. Despite decades of financial support, East Germany is still struggling to recover from the devastation caused by central planning.
Centralized planning does not work. It was never successful. However, there are always those who believe that if they put it into practice, it will work because they do not have to pay for the repercussions.
What is the ruse behind this latest attack on liberty? The usual “good intentions” to target and penalize those who produce and create jobs, using goals that appear innocent and that we all defend. Thus, if you disagree, some may claim that you are opposed to ending poverty, hunger, and inequality if you publish a piece like this one or warn against the risks of central planning. Can you spot the ruse? In actuality, it employs the same tactic as Leninism, which is to create an oppressive government while hiding behind a cause that everyone supports.
The people who have stocked this Trojan Horse with warriors ready to mercilessly slaughter the city’s populace once they are behind the wall are well aware that their scheme will fail so they must enforce objective number 18, which establishes the only connection between reality and the fallacy of central planning. What does objective number 18 mean? Suppression and annihilation of personal autonomy, impoverishment, and elimination of demand. It’s not even a hidden target. This set of self-proclaimed European saviors is aware that imposing a contraction in demand is the only way to make the equation of corporate destruction and declining supply square, rendering us less free and poorer.
The first thing we should do is give up on socialism and stand up for the promotion of individual freedom if we want to achieve the 17 Sustainable Development Goals without the covert eighteenth of poverty and elimination of individuals’ rights.
The only way to accomplish the goals that the 2030 Agenda purports to support is to take these policies out of the hands of socialist and extortionate interventionism and give Europe greater economic freedom, more robust businesses, and regulations that are straightforward, predictable, and conducive to investment. There should be less poverty redistributors and more manufacturing, farming, and agriculture.
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.