Current economic policy starts with spending caps and debt-to-GDP targets before ever asking what society actually needs. This is backwards. Governments are uniquely capable of delivering universal healthcare, mass education, climate transition, and full employment — but austerity and rigid fiscal rules prevent that action. Rachel Reeves and the Labour government remain bound by rules designed to shrink the state, not serve the public.

I set out a different approach rooted in functional finance: start with societal goals, identify the real resources — labour, skills, infrastructure — needed to deliver them, and only then consider the finance required. Taxation exists to manage inflation by withdrawing excess spending power, not to "fund" government spending. Interest rates should steer financial flows towards productive investment in housing, small businesses, and public services — not fixate on an inflation target that monetary policy barely influences.

Forty-five years of market hegemony and neoliberalism have delivered poor outcomes — rising cost of living, crumbling public services, and growing national debt used to justify yet more austerity. The Bank of England needs reform. Fiscal policy and monetary policy must be used pragmatically, judged by outcomes, not by arbitrary rules. Economics is meant to serve society, and it's time UK politics reflected that.

If you believe democratic goals should come before deficit rules, like, subscribe, and join the conversation in the comments.

Banks want to keep you in debt. That's how banks make money, and it's the core truth about how banking works that most people never learn. In this video, I explain the banking system explained simply — the three things banks actually do: bookkeeping, borrowing your money, and lending. But here's the key to understanding money creation — banks create money from nothing when they lend. They don't lend your savings. They tap numbers into a keyboard and charge you extraordinary interest for the privilege, sometimes seven or eight times the Bank of England base rate on credit card debt.

This is how the money supply really works, and why fractional reserve banking means bank profits come at your expense. Whether it's mortgage debt — a term that literally means "the grip of death" — or personal debt UK households are drowning in, borrowing is designed to make you miserable. This isn't financial literacy they teach in schools. It's financial education for beginners that the banking industry would rather you never had. Understanding economics explained this way gives you the tools to protect yourself.

If you want real financial independence and genuine financial freedom, the first step is knowing how banks work and why they will always be trying to fleece you. Never trust a bank. Keep clear of bankers. They really do not care about you.

The UK doesn't have a real democracy. In this video, I explain why first past the post is a broken voting system that produces governments nobody voted for — and why proportional representation is the only serious alternative. In the 2024 general election, Labour won 411 seats in the House of Commons — a massive majority. But Labour received just 33% of the national vote. Only 20% of all registered voters actually voted Labour. That means 80% of the electorate did not choose the party now governing the country with near-absolute power. This is not a new problem. First past the post has always distorted UK elections. Most MPs are elected by a minority of voters in their own constituency. Millions of votes are wasted every election — people who vote for losing candidates get no representation at all. The Liberal Democrats have received millions of votes nationally for decades and received almost no seats. Reform UK has significant national support but a tiny number of MPs. The result is adversarial politics, short-term thinking, dramatic policy swings between governments, and an electorate that increasingly does not trust the system. Voter turnout falls because people know their vote doesn't count. And when people stop believing in democracy, dangerous alternatives start to look attractive. Proportional representation fixes this. Under PR, seats in parliament would broadly reflect votes cast. Fewer votes would be wasted. Coalition governments would be the norm, requiring cooperation and compromise rather than winner-take-all confrontation. Long-term policy would become possible because successive governments would share broad agreement rather than tearing up everything their predecessor did. Electoral reform is not a technical question — it is a democratic necessity. If we believe in representative government, we need a system that actually represents the people who vote. In this video we cover: - Why first past the post produces governments nobody voted for - How Labour won a massive majority with just 20% of registered voters - Why millions of votes are wasted every UK election - How FPTP encourages adversarial politics and short-term thinking - Why proportional representation would transform British politics - The case for electoral reform as a democratic necessity

Russia cannot defeat Ukraine despite overwhelming military power. Iran is standing up to US foreign policy and outlasting the bombardment. Israel's regional dominance faces an uncertain future. These aren't isolated events — they represent a fundamental power shift in international relations. War is becoming an economic process, not a military one. Supply chains, resources, and economic resilience now determine who survives. Sanctions and trade are being weaponised by smaller states fighting back, not just by the aggressors who once controlled them.

Meanwhile, soft power in the West has collapsed. Neoliberalism is failing at home — inequality, instability, and domestic discontent in the USA, UK, France, and Germany mean nobody wants to import our political economy model any more. The credibility of Western diplomacy is in freefall. What replaces it? A politics of care, cooperation, and respect — or more chaos. That's the choice we face. This is geopolitics explained honestly, and it matters to every one of us.

Here's how it works. Electricity is bought from multiple sources — wind, solar, nuclear, hydro, and gas. The cheapest is purchased first, and gas-fired electricity comes last. But the regulator charges every consumer the price of that most expensive gas-generated electricity, even though less than a third of UK power comes from gas most of the time. The rest comes from renewable energy and nuclear at guaranteed, lower prices. You're paying gas prices for wind and solar power — and that is a rip-off.

This system is based on a flawed microeconomic theory that assumes all electricity producers are identical and that the marginal — most expensive — supplier should set the price for everyone. But there is no competitive market in electricity. The electricity system doesn't resemble the assumptions of the model it's priced on. The whole thing is rigged in favour of energy companies, and it is driving the cost of living crisis for households and businesses across the country.

The fix is straightforward: charge consumers the average cost of generating electricity, not the maximum. That single change could cut energy bills by 20 to 25 percent — with no net cost to the government. Yet no politician will act, because 45 years of neoliberal thinking have convinced them that markets must set the price, even when no real market exists.

Meanwhile, public trust in the energy system is falling. Trust in the green transition is falling. And UK electricity costs continue to punish households while energy companies profit from a pricing model that serves no one but them.

If you want to understand why your energy bills are so high and what could actually be done about it, this is the video. Like, subscribe, and share it with anyone struggling with their electricity bill.

The Iran war is not just a military conflict — it is the biggest economic disaster most of us will ever see. Two weeks in, the closure of the Straits of Hormuz has already triggered a global economic crisis that will hit every country on earth. Twenty percent of the world's oil flows through the Straits of Hormuz. So does one-third of all raw materials for fertiliser production — urea, sulfuric acid, and phosphates. With that trade route now shut, oil prices are heading towards $150 a barrel or more, and the fertiliser needed for April planting simply cannot get through. The result? Potential crop failure and famine by autumn. This is the economic impact of the Iran war that nobody in Washington or Tel Aviv anticipated. Trump and Netanyahu assumed they could impose regime change from the air — but Iran fought back with the one weapon that matters: control of the world's most critical trade chokepoint. The consequences are already cascading. Dubai airport has closed. Insurance markets for shipping and aviation have frozen. Gulf states like Kuwait and Iraq face imminent food and water shortages. Global inflation is accelerating. Industrial supply chains — including for AI chips — are breaking down. Balance of trade is collapsing for oil-dependent economies worldwide. And Iran has named its price: the removal of all US air bases in the Gulf and $500 billion in compensation. Most countries are refusing to join the US, telling Washington to clean up its own mess. There is no good outcome here now. Even if Trump and Netanyahu were removed tomorrow, the damage is done. This is what happens when two men start an illegal war to avoid going to prison. In this video we cover: - Why the Straits of Hormuz closure is an unprecedented global economic crisis - How oil prices could exceed $150 a barrel and what that means for every economy - The fertiliser crisis that could cause worldwide famine by autumn - Why Iran's strategy has outmanoeuvred the US and Israel - The cascading collapse of trade, insurance, and industrial supply chains - Iran's demands and why no country wants to help America

YouTube's algorithm is changing — and it's hitting educational channels hard. In this video, we explain what's happening, why our views are dropping despite two years of daily content, and what we're going to do about it.

This channel has grown to 345,000 subscribers and over 45 million views by doing one thing: making political economy accessible. Explaining ideas that matter. Challenging orthodox economic thinking. Giving people the ammunition to understand how the economy really works.

But YouTube now penalises repetition — even though repetition is fundamental to education. The algorithm demands novelty, and that's a problem when your job is to explain complex ideas clearly, consistently, and in depth.

Last year this channel had over 30 million views. This year, we expect closer to 20 million — not because the quality has dropped, but because the rules have changed.

So we're adapting. We're taking a short break to rethink how we present videos — new styles, new visuals, new thumbnails, more graphics and overlays — without losing the substance that makes this channel what it is.

We also want to hear from you. There's a poll linked below — tell us what you value about this channel, what you'd change, and what you want to see next. Your feedback will shape what comes next.

And save the date: June 27th, Leeds. A live event is coming — more details soon.

In this video we cover: - How YouTube's algorithm change is affecting educational channels - Why views are dropping despite consistent daily content - The problem with YouTube demanding novelty in education - Our plan to adapt without losing substance - How you can help shape what this channel becomes next