Funding the Future

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.

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:

Everyone is told that economic growth is the key to prosperity.

But what if a significant part of GDP, the number politicians obsess about, is based on a transaction that never actually happens?

Around 10% of UK GDP is made up of something called “imputed rent.” This is the imaginary rent homeowners are assumed to pay themselves for living in their own homes.

No money changes hands.

No market transaction takes place.

But the figure still appears in national income statistics.

In this video, I explain:

If GDP counts invented transactions but ignores real work that keeps society functioning, we need to ask a serious question:

Why do we treat GDP growth as the ultimate measure of economic success?

Let me know your thoughts in the comments.

Most people in the UK still believe in the power of royalty — and the power of the honours system. We accept that a knighthood is created from nothing with a tap of the King’s sword. Yet many refuse to accept that the government creates money in exactly the same way: by tapping a few keys on a keyboard. In this video, I explain why knighthoods and money share the same foundations: state authority, public trust, and responsible stewardship. Money is not limited. Knighthoods are not limited. Both can be over-issued. Both can be under-issued. And both are destroyed when they’re no longer needed. If you believe in the power to create honours, you already believe in the power to create money — even if you’ve been told otherwise.

Arthur Laffer’s “curve” is one of the most destructive ideas in modern economics. Sketched on a napkin in the 1970s, it claimed that cutting tax rates could increase government revenue. It became gospel for Reagan, Thatcher and every neoliberal government since. But it was wrong. In this video, I explain why Laffer misunderstood tax, ignored inequality, and helped unleash tax competition that undermined democracy. I debated Laffer in person — and I’ll show you why his logic collapses when tested against modern money and real economies and the idea that fair taxation builds strong societies, whilst low taxation builds fragile ones.

Every time stock markets drop, headlines say that billions have been lost. But where does that money actually go? If you want to understand crashes, confidence, and the baked bean market (trust me), this one’s for you.

War does not just test armed services. It tests economies.

Right now, the UK is discovering how fragile its economic model has become. Decades of de-industrialisation, reliance on imports, financialisation and extreme inequality have left the country dangerously exposed to global shocks.

When supply chains break, when energy prices rise, or when geopolitical tensions escalate, the consequences hit the UK economy very quickly.

In this video, I explain why Britain’s economic fragility is not an accident. It is the result of policy choices made over the last forty years.

I also explain why a sovereign government has far more capacity to respond to crises than politicians often admit, and what Britain could do to rebuild economic resilience.

Because the real question now is simple: will we redesign the economy for resilience, or continue with a model that collapses when shocks arrive?

War dominates the headlines again, but behind the geopolitics lies something much simpler: human exhaustion.

People are tired of conflict, tired of anger, tired of lives lost and hope destroyed. The cost of war is not just measured in military terms. It is measured in grief, fear, forced migration and the destruction of human well-being.

In this short reflection, I ask a simple question: why do we keep accepting war as inevitable?

And why is hope so often the first casualty?

This video is about the duty of care we owe to every human being, regardless of nationality, religion, race or politics.

Because if hope disappears, everything else follows.

War in the Middle East is already pushing oil prices higher, and that means inflation pressure in the UK will rise again.

But this is not normal inflation. It is not caused by excessive demand in the UK economy. It is an external supply shock.

So the real question is simple: will the government protect households, or leave them to absorb the shock?

In this video, I explain why raising interest rates will not solve an oil shock, and why the government should instead:

If ministers talk about economic defence in wartime, then protecting society must come first.