Do politicians like GDP too much

Not just GDP, unemployment figures, average earnings, these stats can hide so much that sometimes politicians hide behind these stats to get praise.

Politicians are under a lot of pressure to decrease unemployment but not under enough pressure when it is low to get people into better work 

If living standards are falling politicians are under pressure to increase average earnings but not under enough pressure to try and increase earnings for all. 

When the stats are in the politicians favour they don't work as hard to improve working conditions as it's harder to show that in stats or even increase the average persons wage as it's not a popular statistic like GDP, unemployment or average earnings when total wages are divide between the population. 

A higher minimum wage may lead to higher unemployment an important stat for politicians unlike the higher skills gap shortage what is harder to define, but if people are unemployed because they can't earn a high enough wage there is a higher skills gap shortage and now it's been redefined in terms of unemployment, a pressure stat for politicians.
It maybe possible that politicians would work harder to bridge the higher skills gap when they can see it's leader to higher unemployment than when unemployment is low and workers have low pay.       

The evolution of memetics ideas Ideas don't just replicate from person to person or person to stored medium to person but also evolve and just like evolution ideas can get into a evolutionary dead end.

One policy strategy can seem more successful at first to tackling a problem than an alternative (E.G. public heath care vs private healthcare)

Those the strategy you've taken could have limitations where it's difficult to improve on it, working yourself into a dead end.
Even those the other idea at first was not as successful it doesn't have the same limitations on improvements.

Forcing competition in safe seats

Having no real competition for a business leads to apathy from the business, less motivation to improve, meaning people who need the product of service they are offering are getting a worse result than if there was real competition.

This can be seen in wider elections when parties in power become less innovative and can become aloof to public feeling after wining multiple elections, even if you dislike the opposition, having other parties win leads to competition.
This is also true for safe seats for location constituencies, MPs of safe seats are less motivated to turn up to the house of commons, care about public opinions, etc. 

Voting commission
What can be done to tackle this problem on a constituency level? 
A possible solution could be tackled by the voting commission who decide on constituency boundaries, the voting commission could change boundaries in safe seats to try and add more competition if a parties wins multiple elections in a constituency.  

Getting the public out/in of government

Having no public voice influencing government can lead to corruption and leading politicians to feel aloof from public feelings. Also listening to everything the public says can also be bad when the public are uninformed and make emotive decisions.  
Locations like China and the west have took different strategies ether getting pubic opinion in or out of decision making. 

China do public surveys to work out how the general population like certain aspects of government and with that information try to work out how to elevate those problems within government constraints.  

The west has taken decisions out of the hands of the politicians directly such as having the Fed/Bank of England, NICE, Ofsted/FCC, allowing informed professionals to take a longer term view at tackling problems. It also allows these non-departmental public bodies to take unpopular views when it can be best overall.

Optimal pricing and taxing

To maximise profits you need to work out an optimal pricing strategy for your products, too much and you will not sell enough, too little and you will loose out on profit you could have made. 

There is a better opinion if it can be done and work out an optimal pricing for individuals rather than a group, so you can sell as many as you like, as long as you still make a profit and make maximum profits off each individual. 
Problems with this strategy is it's difficult to work out how to charge people differently without them feeling cheated and also find loopholes such as getting someone else to buy a item to get it at a discounted rate.

Tax
If you want to increase tax revenue without scaring away companies who can easily move operations abroad and not taxing so little to lose out on tax revenue, you can have a complex tax system were companies who have the money to move operations abroad can also use that money to decrease tax. Companies who don't really care about reducing tax revenue will not spend a lot of time, money and effort doing so but companies who do care and could move abroad will also be able to reduce their taxes and find no reason to move in the end.
Big companies who can't just move operations abroad and will unlikely move you should try harder to close tax loopholes for them.

You don't want to tax companies too much reducing competition and possible long term tax revenue and governments should try to reduce their spending by being more efficient.  

Will technology prevent loneliness?

Loneliness can cause many mental and physical health problems, government can take action but can technology also potentially prevent this problem?
Technology has done a lot to match singletons with dating websites and apps over the past decade, matching people up who might have never met but can technology do this for a more tech savvy older generation? 
With a more tech savvy nation and wider use of tables and smart phones, this can result in lonely older people more likely to find people to spend time with. 

Reform not just aid

Giving money to poor countries can often fails to result in long term benefits as we would hope, could giving advance on how to improve their economy help more than just aid itself? 

• If we give a country money to build schools they may not know how to organize a school building project and waste money and when we leave they wouldn't have the money to build new schools.

• We could build schools for them but then when we leave they would not have people with skills to organize how to build a school or a company that can build schools for them. 

• What if we train people to know how to manage building a school? this is a better opinion.

Giving people money and advice when the government have policies that is hurting the free market can prevent the economy from improving and helping citizens. People and government need advice just as much as aid.

• Welfare reformThe same advice is also true to help the worse off in western countries, just giving them money is not the answer giving people skills is the best way off of poverty for the worse off. Government need to put more effort to helping these people have the skills for better jobs so they can be better off.

Haiti school podcast on how helping doesn't always work the way we would like.