David Rischel
@davidrischel.bsky.social
91 followers 230 following 25 posts
PhD in political philosophy, https://warwick.ac.uk/fac/soc/pais/people/rischel/
Posts Media Videos Starter Packs
davidrischel.bsky.social
Excellent piece, this.
willcooling.bsky.social
itcouldbesaid.substack.com/p/it-could-b... Did you know we ran a public sector deficit of 5% of GDP last year, a figure which adds up to £150billion? The public finances are in a far worse state than anyone admits to even before you consider public works backlog, gaps in defence & public services
It Could Be Said #73 Why Britain Needs £250billion In Tax Increases
Will explains why public finances are in far worse shape than people realise
itcouldbesaid.substack.com
Reposted by David Rischel
profserious.bsky.social
Very few people seem to understand university finances and, distressingly, this includes many academics and most policymakers. This is an attempt to condense the key points you need to know. open.substack.com/pub/profseri...
Understanding University Finances
... a very short guide
open.substack.com
davidrischel.bsky.social
what's that, another unworkable internet censorship law with stupid unintended consequences? the mind struggles to comprehend it
clordtc.bsky.social
OSA is gonna make us lose access to fucking wikipedia

write to your MPs.
Reposted by David Rischel
nixonsimon.bsky.social
Flagging my most recent column for @bylinetimes.bsky.social in which I expressed unfashionable sympathy for Rachel Reeves, whose "misfortune is to be the teller of hard truths in a country only interested in easy answers." If only her party listened to what the markets are saying about Britain
Political Economy - Between a Rock and a Hard Place – Byline Times Digital / Print Edition
It’s not a fashionable thing to say, but I have quite a lot of sympathy for Rachel Reeves. The Chancellor has endured a torrid first 11 months in office.
subscribe.bylinetimes.com
Reposted by David Rischel
lastpositivist.bsky.social
I genuinely think this particular aesthetic trend (Good Art Is Didactic And Also Assumes You Are Very Stupid) is a non-trivial source of anti-woke backlash, like unironically. It is really really annoying, and I think it has provided wedges by which anti-wokes can radicalise nerds.
annieknk.bsky.social
Reading a fiction book rn which is *so* obnoxiously didactic bc the author is *so* anxious you might draw the wrong political conclusion that it's making me anti-woke. Catch me on the Tim pool podcast
davidrischel.bsky.social
Fair enough, apologies if I misunderstood!
davidrischel.bsky.social
Should say I'm not convinced it can reason, just not sure I got how we could conclude that from the fact that it couldn't perform the task you asked it to.
davidrischel.bsky.social
Not sure I see why that follows (that it can't reason)? I also can't do the things you asked it to do, but that doesn't mean I can't reason at all. Why couldn't it be the case that it's not a very good reasoner in some domains but quite a decent reasoner in other domains?
Reposted by David Rischel
davidrischel.bsky.social
Jeg mente netop, at det fremmedgørende består i, at et spørgsmål de går meget op i ikke må diskuteres.
davidrischel.bsky.social
Sorry, jeg må have været utydelig - jeg er enig med dig!
davidrischel.bsky.social
Man kan også forestille sig, at det kan virke ret fremmedgørende for de skoleelever, som går meget op i Palæstina-spørgsmålet. Ikke den bedste første introduktion til demokratiet!
Reposted by David Rischel
lastpositivist.bsky.social
Here's a very clever trick that German Romanticism pulled off. At about the time a bunch of people decided they wanted to decolonise the humanities, a bunch of intellectual movements that were successors to German Romanticism had become the popular way of speaking/thinking among lefty humanists....
Reposted by David Rischel
marchvidkjaer.bsky.social
I disagree with most of this thread, and I see that one of the failures of the discipline is the one-sided reading of the evidence and overly confident policy recommendations to european politicians.

Addressing some points:
casmudde.bsky.social
Exceptionally long, but familiarly pompous and uniformed, puff piece on the “good” nativism of Mette Frederiksen in Denmark.

Completely ignores most basic data and, of course, any academic research. Some quick points 🧵
davidrischel.bsky.social
Yeah, that is probably my read of it too. They seem to be risk averse in the extreme. Irrationally so, as they fail to see the potential upside of 'risking' higher taxes now so that public services are better by the next GE. Also, there are risks no matter what you do. So I think they're mistaken.
davidrischel.bsky.social
What I still don't understand is *why* they are making this strategic error. I struggle believing that they are ideologically motivated to cut welfare spending rather than raise taxes, but maybe I'm being naive? Are they risk averse? If so, don't they see the risk of their current strategy
Reposted by David Rischel
sjwrenlewis.bsky.social
Y'days post: Labour’s strategic error on tax mainlymacro.blogspot.com/2025/03/labo...
The failure to raise taxes further reflects the absence of any serious analysis of what will be required to allow a noticeable (to voters) improvement in public services before the next election.
Labour’s strategic error on tax
Two things have become clear to many people since Labour came to government. The first is that the party had done less preparation work fo...
mainlymacro.blogspot.com
davidrischel.bsky.social
Inevitably, they're gonna go through parliament insisting they won't have to raise taxes, won't make anything better as a result, and then finally be forced to raise personal taxes late in the parliament dooming them for the next election.
davidrischel.bsky.social
That is absurd. What is going on? Why haven't they realised that they'll have to raise taxes?
Reposted by David Rischel
stephenkb.bsky.social
*slaps roof of Downing Street* This bad boy can fit SO much magical thinking about how you can avoid broadbased tax rises.
spinninghugo.bsky.social
Lads, I am sorry, but you really are going to have to put taxes up.
Reposted by David Rischel
rosscarroll.bsky.social
When I worked in UK academia I recall hearing of a Japanese man who was baffled at how Britain had decided to run its universities like firms. “Why? Your universities are excellent and your firms are terrible.”
chrisbrooke.bsky.social
To repeat: "A country so stupid it actively trashes one of things it's good at and famous for."
gsoh31.bsky.social
Today's university slashing and burning is Edinburgh, where about 10% of the budget will be cut. There'll be another case every single day until UK govts actually do something. A country so stupid it actively trashes one of things it's good at and famous for.
www.bbc.com/news/article...
davidrischel.bsky.social
It's also obvs morally bankrupt to take the money from the aid budget
davidrischel.bsky.social
Such a mystery to me why they won't just raise taxes. It's constraining everything they want to do, defence spending seems like the perfect excuse, and they can't possibly believe that they'll be able to win the next election hobbling along like this.
stephenkb.bsky.social
I slightly disagree in that basically, I look at those numbers and go 'wow, the opposition is royally fucked if the government does things half-right', then I turn on the TV or sit in the Commons chamber and see government saying 'persistent inflation, public realm fraying, no tax rises needed'.
dsquareddigest.bsky.social
for all that Badenoch appears to be a complete fiasco as leader of the opposition, she is actually only a couple of percentage points behind Labour. I'm not saying the tactical voting assumptions are wrong, but they are becoming very load bearing