Funding the Future

Is MMT already in use?

People ask whether modern monetary theory is “just theory”. I think that’s the wrong question. The real test is practical: does the UK actually operate as a modern money economy?
In this video, I walk through the plumbing: Parliament authorises spending, the Treasury instructs the Bank of England, payments are settled through reserves, and only later do taxes and gilts come into play. That sequence matters because it tells us something uncomfortable but vital: austerity is a political choice, not an economic necessity.
I also set out the real constraints: not “running out of money”, but real resources:
- labour,
- energy,
- materials,
- skills, and
- technology 
and that inflation and climate limits should guide policy.
If we get the ordering right, we can finally have the debate we should have had all along: what do we need, do we have the capacity, and how do we manage inflation fairly?

What's the biggest secret about money?

People keep asking me how money is created, and the answer matters because misunderstanding money leads directly to bad economics and bad politics.
In this video, I explain:
Why money is always a promise to pay
How commercial banks create money when they lend
How the Bank of England creates money for government spending
Why tax does not fund spending, and instead controls inflation and inequality
If we misunderstand money, we accept false limits on spending on
the NHS,
social security,
housing
education,
investment, and more.
Once we understand money properly, we can build a politics of care instead of a politics of austerity.

What's the economic truth the BBC's hiding?

In 2023, the BBC admitted that comparing government finances to a household budget is “dangerous territory” that can mislead audiences. And yet we still hear that myth every day.
Its own impartiality review said household budget analogies are wrong. So why do they keep talking about them?
Why? Because the myth is politically useful. It limits debate, justifies cuts to public services and social security, and presents ideology as arithmetic.
In this video, I unpack what the BBC admitted, why the myth survives, and how we challenge it.
Fiscal policy is about choices, as the BBC knows. It's time the BBC started making better ones when talking about that fact.

Is capitalism still fit for purpose?

Can capitalism still organise society for the common good? That was the question I put to John Christensen. What we discovered is that the answer lies not in abstract theory but in practical experience. Mutuals, co-operatives and democratic institutions already shape our lives. The Nationwide building society, the Co-op, mutual insurers, some energy suppliers, pension funds and some phone providers prove that another way of organising the economy exists.
In this video, we discuss why shareholder capitalism has produced monopolies, failing utilities and democratic erosion, and why cooperation may be the basis of a politics of care.
If capitalism is failing, the question is not whether change will come, but how.

Why have we got a monarchy?

We are being asked whether Andrew Mountbatten-Windsor should be eighth in line to the throne. That is the wrong question.
The real issue is simple: why do we have a monarchy at all in a modern democracy?
No one should be born to rule. No one should inherit political authority. And public services belong to us, and not to a king.
In this video, I explain why monarchy contradicts equality, distorts politics, and blocks constitutional reform, and why a politics of care demands an elected head of state, a written constitution, and real democratic accountability.
This is not about individuals. It is about institutions.

Governments aren't like households

Politicians keep telling us the government must “live within its means” like a household. That idea is wrong. It is also dangerous.
In this video, I explain why a currency-issuing government is fundamentally different from a household, how money is actually created, why deficits create private surpluses, and how the household budget myth has justified austerity, weakened public services, and cut social security in the UK since 2010.
We need honest economics, not myths that limit democratic ambition. Real limits are resources, skills, energy, and environmental capacity, not money.
Understanding this is essential if we want an economy based on care, not the politics of destruction.

Is the NHS captured?

Medicine sits where fear meets trust, and Big Pharma - the companies that make up the Medical Industrial Complex - know that.
In this video, I explain how the 1910 Flexner Report, written in the USA at the peak of an era of toxic capitalism, reshaped medicine, why big pharmaceutical companies gained power as a result, and how the NHS is now at risk of becoming a profit gernation machine rather than a care system.
This is not about denying science. It is about asking who benefits from today’s model of healthcare and why prevention, public health and social care are being sidelined.
We need a politics of care, not a politics of profit.

Why are people angry?

People in the UK are angry, and they have good reasons. Stagnant wages, housing costs, collapsing public services and growing inequality are real. But the far-right exploits that anger instead of solving it.
In this video, I explain:
- The real economic causes of anger
- How neoliberal austerity created insecurity
- Why migrants are scapegoated
- Why a politics of care is the real solution
This is Funding the Future in practice – an economics of hope, not hate.

What would expelling 2 million people cost?

What would actually happen if the UK deported two million people in three years, as Rupert Lowe's Restore Britain political party proposes?
In this video, I look at the real economics and not the slogans.
- NHS staffing and social care would collapse
- Construction and food supply would face massive disruption
- We'd have falling GDP and tax revenues
- And there would be rising inflation, and austerity
This is not immigration policy. It is economic self-harm driven by a politics of hate.
A politics of care offers a real alternative: investment in social care, strengthening social security, training workers, taxing wealth fairly, and rebuilding the capacity Britain actually needs.

Does limited liability protect the rich?

Limited liability is treated as harmless legal plumbing, but it is one of the most powerful privileges granted to wealth in the UK and around the world. In this Funding the Future conversation with Professor Dan Plesch, we explore how corporate law shields shareholders from responsibility, fuels secrecy and tax abuse, and distorts democracy.
We explain where limited liability came from, why it now protects inequality, and what reforms could restore balance between corporations and society.
This matters for tax justice, corporate accountability and the politics of care.