Funding the Future

People keep asking me what they can do to help change the conversation about economics, politics, and power. The answer is simpler, and more important, than most people expect.
Social media now decides what people see, hear, and believe. If our ideas are not present there, they effectively do not exist. Silence is not neutral; it cedes the space to those who already dominate it.
In this video, I explain why liking, sharing, commenting, and eventually creating your own posts are now forms of civic action. I also explain how algorithms really work, why perfection is not required, how AI can help without replacing judgement, and why consistency matters more than scale.
This is a practical guide to becoming part of the conversation and shaping it.

The world is being shaped by three power blocs: the USA, Russia and China. Their politics look very different, but I  argue in this video that they have something profound in common. They are all built on division.
America’s founding constitutional promise of equality was never universal. Marxism defines justice through conflict between classes. Neoliberalism claims wealth is merit and poverty is failure. All these systems end up privileging some people, excluding others, and turning difference into justification for domination.
That is not sustainable. If we want a stable world, we need a politics of inclusion, not exclusion. We need a politics of care. And we need the world’s “middle states” to embrace it, because good ideas are the only real counterweight to imperial power.

Are we living through the end of the neoliberal era?
I think we are, and I think the moment it became undeniable was Mark Carney’s speech at Davos.
Neoliberalism wasn’t an accident. It was a deliberate ideological project built around the myth that “freedom through markets” would deliver freedom for everyone. Instead, it delivered:
rent extraction
precarity
instability
a hollowed-out state
rising inequality and insecurity
In this video, I explain how neoliberalism was constructed, why it relied on weakening democracy, why it evolved into rentier capitalism, and why it is now collapsing in plain sight, economically, socially, and politically.
And then I ask the real question: what replaces it? Is that a politics of care — or authoritarianism?

This week, the world exploded, but what really shocked me wasn’t Trump.
Trump was predictable. The chaos was published in advance. Project 2025 made the method and the objective plain: disruption as strategy, empire as the goal.
What has truly appalled me is this: despite vast defence budgets and vast intelligence capabilities, Western leaders have appeared totally unprepared. They clung to the “rules-based order” as if rules might still have meaning to a man who rejects legality.
So, in this video, I argue something many will find uncomfortable:
Defence isn’t fundamentally about armaments. It’s about legitimacy.
If people do not believe a society is worth defending, then no quantity of weapons will save it. And neoliberalism, which is designed to reward the few, cannot now demand sacrifice from the many.
That is why I think the only credible defence policy now is a politics of care: a society that values everyone, delivers for everyone, and earns loyalty by legitimacy.
This demands pragmatism, compromise, and coalition. The world we must create will be messy, but that will be its strength, and not its weakness.
There’s a poll below. What do you think?

Donald Trump has declared a trade war on Europe, and he might still be threatening physical conflict over Greenland and Canada. That forces a question most politicians will dodge: how do we pay for a war economy, even if no shots are fired?
John Maynard Keynes tackled exactly this issue in 1940. He argued that the real constraint is not money. The real constraints are resources, inflation, and fairness.
In this video, I explain why Keynes believed wartime sacrifice is unavoidable, why inflation is a political danger, and why the burden must fall most heavily on those best able to carry it, who are the wealthy, through taxation, organised saving, and controlled interest rates.
We are entering an era in which resilience matters more than market efficiency. The neoliberal model cannot survive this transition.

Andrew Bailey has warned MPs that substantial risks are building in global markets — and for once, I agree with him.
Trump’s attacks on the Fed, the escalating threats around Greenland, and the weaponisation of tariffs are turning political instability into financial instability. That’s already showing up in equity sell-offs — and it won’t stop there.
In this video, I explain:
- Why political risk is now systemic financial risk
- Why equities fall first, and bond markets follow
- How Keynes’s “animal spirits” and the paradox of thrift can trigger recession
- Why AI is not protected from a downturn; it’s exposed
- Why the UK is not insulated from risk
- Why austerity would be catastrophic now, and why we need a politics of care instead
 

We are living through fascism. That is the first message of this video.
We are therefore living through unprecedented chaos. That is the second message.
And the US is no longer our ally — which means NATO is over. That is the third message.
Trump’s incoherence is not simply personal. It is being weaponised as policy, backed by the machinery of the American state. The result is a dangerous collapse in the world order, where coercion replaces diplomacy, and conquest is normalised.
In this video, I explain what this means, why Europe must face strategic independence, and why we need clarity, naming, and countermeasures — now.

Trump's threat to Greenland is an emergency, and it must be treated as one.
This is not just a territorial dispute. It is a deliberately chosen test of whether coercion can be normalised and then repeated to spread an empire in a way and for an aim that can only be described as evil.
This video sets out:
Why Greenland is symbolically massive.
Why diplomatic understatement now is denial of the political reality of this moment
Why propaganda and intimidation are central tools of authoritarian expansion.
Why democracies must regain moral clarity and plan countermeasures now.
The question is not “can we negotiate?” The question is: will we resist, and in time?

People keep asking: “When are we going to do MMT?”
That question is built on a misunderstanding.
Modern monetary theory is not a manifesto, and it’s not a magic “print money” promise. It is an explanation of how the monetary system already works, in the UK and elsewhere. It describes what government spending really is, why taxation does not fund spending, and what “borrowing” really means in a sovereign currency system.
In this video, I explain:
- That the UK government creates the pound.
- Why government spending must come before tax.
- What tax is actually for (inflation control, demand management, and resource shifting).
- Why government bonds are a savings product, not borrowing.
- Why deficits create private sector net financial assets.
- What the real constraints on the economy are.
- Why austerity is always a political choice
MMT doesn’t tell you what to do; it tells you what’s true. And once we understand that truth, we can finally have an honest debate about policy, democracy, and the society we want.

We’re constantly told that people in rich countries live longer and that GDP growth is therefore the route to health, well-being, and social progress.
But the evidence is far less simple than the slogans.
In this video, I use 2022 data to show four versions of the same relationship between GDP per person and life expectancy, and explain how the way economists present that data can create a misleading story.
The key point is this: the link between income and life expectancy is non-linear. Once basic needs are met, the curve flattens. Beyond that point, what matters most is not GDP but inequality, housing, healthcare access, stability, and social care, or, in other words, the politics of care.
This is why GDP fetishism is not only intellectually empty. It becomes politically dangerous.