Comments on: Steve Keen (UWS) vs. Gerard Henderson (SMH)

By: Trevor Cook

Trevor Cook — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 23:06:44 +0000

Dan, I’m often surprised at how little research Henderson seems to do for his columns or how little that research seems to be reflected in his work. If you were going to do a piece highly critical of someone and their professional work you’d think you would familarise yourself with that work and give your readers a short overview of it as in something like “For twenty years Prof Keen has been pointing to evidence about debt which he has consistently argued will lead to a major economic crash”…Henderson could still go on to legitimately criticise Keen but at least the reader would have a better sense of the person being pilloried, Trevor

By: girtbysea

girtbysea — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 10:41:26 +0000

Normally I would follow-up the links, but this time your writeup of henderson makes me just not bother with the sad old whinger. Life’s too short.

By: Dan Walsh

Dan Walsh — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 03:19:57 +0000

Thanks for drawing attention to Hendersons sly ’suburban university’ remark. Always amusing to see ‘anti elites’ behave thus.
I’d also venture that UWS is more representative of modern Australia then many/all of the sandstone set, as long as Henderson remains dismissive he’ll remain illinformed.

By: Thomas Paine

Thomas Paine — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 03:06:23 +0000

Keen is of course right in his assertions but it requires the first domino to get pushed before the crisis will unfold. And everyone is trying to stop anymore domino’s getting knocked over. Keen’s problem is not talking in possibilities and probabilities.

Henderson on the other hand doesn’t want little Johny Howard’s disappearing reputation to cop another nose breaker.