Last month I gave a talk about the blog at Swinburne University of Technology, at the invitation of one of the blog’s most active members, Dr Matt Mitchell. Swinburne’s video of the talk is below, and it neatly melds my talk and the presentation I gave:
Steve Keen's Debtwatch Podcast with Stuart Cameron
The volume will appear too low when you hear Matt’s introduction, but this is because the audio level was set on my radio mic, which is much louder than the theatre microphone. Turn the sound up to hear Matt’s opening, but be ready to turn it down when I start talking.
I made an audio recording of the talk and the discussion as well. The audio quality in the video recording is quite good, but the audio recording is better for the discussion–at least when it comes to hearing what the questions and comments by audience members were.
Steve Keen's Debtwatch Podcast with Stuart Cameron
Matt’s doctorate is in education, and he was fascinated by Debtwatch as an example of the way in which the internet, and blogging in particular, has transformed people’s capacity to learn. I have also found it a fascinating experience, given that I started it simply as an easier way of distributing my monthly Debtwatch Reports. I had no expectation of it becoming as big as it is now, with almost 4,000 registered users, over 7,000 unique readers per day, and a stimulating and extremely civil discussion between about 100 active participants.
Given the last point in particular, it’s been a learning experience for me as well: many of the ideas that have been discussed on the blog will find their way into the book I am slowly writing on financial instability.
I also gave a quite detailed presentation on my analysis of the financial crisis, which I’ll post when I have time next week.
The Debtwatch Association Meeting
We now have about a dozen takers for this meeting, but the more that can make it the better. So if you are able to join us for dinner at 7pm next Tuesday (March 9) in Sydney, please drop me an email using debunking at gmail dot com.
March 6th, 2010 at 11:29 am
Hi Steve,
If you do use my comments in the book, I only ask one thing. Just spell my name right, ok
?
March 6th, 2010 at 12:08 pm
Will do! You’ll all get a chance to proof read when the thing approaches completion (which at the moment is a lot further away in time than Mt Kosciousko is in distance).
March 6th, 2010 at 2:28 pm
The world’s first book with roughly 100 co-editors? Very cool…
March 6th, 2010 at 3:51 pm
For an extreme version of this, check out the book “Real World Haskell”. People (who’ve logged in/registered) can/have comment on every single paragraph. You can see examples at http://book.realworldhaskell.org/read/profiling-and-optimization.html
This feedback resulted in many changes through the development of the book.
Interestingly, the book is available on line under a creative commons licence as well as for sale through regular channels.
March 7th, 2010 at 10:50 am
I’m watching your new podcast as I write this. Nice stats re: hits and pageviews.
You mentioned that when you started this you sent links out to various journalists. How would you rank a lot of Australian business media people (in their economic knowledge)? Do any of these people come from banks, hedge funds or other firms? Are any journalists/economists like you?
It amazes me at times when some still throw out the line “for the benefit of our audience, what exactly is a derivative”?
March 7th, 2010 at 11:30 am
There are virtually 3 different camps in the MSM soho44:
The straight spruikers who are just writers living off the standard beliefs of finance;
The economic journalists, some of whom blow with the wind while others have a non-orthodox stance of their own but temper how much they publicise it; and
The old-fashioned journalists who sniff that there’s something rotten in the State of Finance.
By far the best of the above are the last group, and fortunately there are plenty of them: Michael West in the SMH, Nick Gardner in the Sunday Telegraph and Chris Zappone in The Age to mention but three. There are some very good people in the second group too–like Stephen Long from the ABC, Tim Colebatch from The Age.
Overall I’ve been very pleased with how I’ve been treated by the Australian media–personal attacks like those from Michael Pascoe are a minor part of the coverage in general.
In terms of really critical coverage–good in-depth analysis on their own right–then there are just a handful. Stephen Long definitely, Ken Davidson, Brian Toohey when he touches the issue. Then there’s David Hirst of Planet Wall Street, who’s the sharpest by far but still effectively an outsider trying to re-establish himself in the media here (and I think he’ll succeed).
March 7th, 2010 at 12:57 pm
Have you ever done any interviews on Lateline? If yes, how have they gone for you?
March 7th, 2010 at 3:46 pm
Re: Matters Debt-Deflationary
“Fannie, Freddie Holders Shouldn’t Assume Guarantee (Update4)”
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aqV2oVx5hc8A
Via Karl Denninger’s Market Ticker
For the time deprived a few extracts.
“March 5 (Bloomberg) — Fannie Mae and Freddie Macbondholders shouldn’t assume the government will make them whole on their investments as Congress disbands the companies, House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank”
“Please don’t think this is federally guaranteed, I don’t think it is, I don’t think it should be, I don’t feel any obligation to bail you out,” Frank said. Congress will “certainly not” extend any new protections to bond and mortgage-security investors beyond what exists, Frank said.”
“A “whole range” of options is being considered for investors in the two government-seized companies, “from paying nothing to a haircut to whatever,” said Frank, whose committee oversees Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.”
“Frank’s Second Clarification”
“Frank, in an interview with CNBC television, said investors in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac debt issued before the companies were seized don’t have as much protection from losses as those who purchased obligations issued since.”
“It depends on when they bought that paper,” Frank told CNBC. “I just wanted to restate what I thought was fairly obvious, that if you bought from Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, particularly before the 2008 conservatorship, you were not buying Treasuries, you were not buying 100 percent obligations.”
“People who bought from the conservatorship on, that’s a different story,” he said. “What’s happened since the conservatorship, yes that’s in a different category because there were some explicit pledges made by the federal government.”
“Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are the biggest U.S. borrowers after the federal government. In addition to $1.7 trillion in unsecured corporate debt, the companies have $5.4 trillion in mortgage bonds, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.”
March 7th, 2010 at 4:37 pm
Steve and Debtwatchers,
You might be interested in this analysis of the interplay between the shadow banking system and the zombie, ponzi, fictionally reserved, “real” banking sytem. Professor Gorton’s graphs suggest he may be a “stocks and flows” guy.
http://www.zerohedge.com/article/gary-gorton-shadow-banking-system-run-and-interplay-shadow-and-traditional-banking
“There are few people as qualified to discuss the stresses of (and on) the financial system over the past several years as Yale and Wharton Professor Gary Gorton, who just incidentally has held positions at the Bank Of England, the Federal Reserve and the FDIC.”
“In a submission to Zero Hedge, Professor Gorton provides some unique perspectives into what we have long claimed was the immediate catalyst for the near collapse of the banking system: the bank run, not so much on depository institutions, but on the much more critical shadow banking system.”
March 7th, 2010 at 8:45 pm
you know steve,
the united nations is usually the forum for the expression hatred and dissunity, and blogs are sometimes like that, in that the participants generally express views based on their predjudicial views of the world.
this blog has this character trait,but in a sense this is its great strength , in that once these views see the light of day they are expossed to the ever prying eyes and minds of other bloggers, and the debate begins as well our collective enlightenment with a little help from the professionals.
infact i would go so far as to say , that the solutions to the economic dilemas we face lie in these blogs, since its better to have thousands of minds chewing over the problem than a handfull of minds, great they may be, cloistered in the hallways of academia .
in many ways people such as yourself ask the questions, but with this blog its not just you that responds with an answer, a very powerfull tool for change and understanding indeed.
i suppose elitists would see such blogs as a trouble makers letterbox, but any mention of the unfamiliar and off we bloggers go scouring the internet for an explaination or greater understanding.
the more informed we all are of the issues that confront us the greater the good in my opinion, and this blog has done that in spades.
and that we have conducted ourselves with great civility, is in part due to the gracious way the moderater has carried himself in this forum,
March 8th, 2010 at 6:24 am
Hi Steve,
I’ll agree with Mahaish re: the “civility” of this blog. On many other sites, it’s just everybody having a go at everyone else. And the “moderator” who posts very tough sounding Terms of Use seems to be on permenant holiday.
I really agree with this idea of consistent quality content does work. You may not have the “rock star” factor like Obama does (in the sense of his building his social network/donor list). On the other hand, when the “standard” rules don’t seem to apply, we all know people will go elsewhere. And it’s nice to not be bombarded with the “Bernanke is evil, buy gold now” rubbish.
March 9th, 2010 at 9:28 am
Slightly off topic? Here’s a new Anonymous Australia clip that the MSM seems to have missed:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HoG8gL8qfC8