Comments on: What Gretchen Morgenson is good for http://blogs.reuters.com/justinfox/2010/10/27/what-gretchen-morgenson-is-good-for/ Wed, 03 Nov 2010 15:52:22 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=4.2.5 By: hsvkitty http://blogs.reuters.com/justinfox/2010/10/27/what-gretchen-morgenson-is-good-for/comment-page-1/#comment-185 Wed, 03 Nov 2010 15:52:22 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/justinfox/?p=41#comment-185 When I said …”In other words, perhaps the chauvenist pigs are only digging for truffles.” in a previous comment, it was not to call Justin a Chauvenist pig.

It was meant to be an amusing way to finesse the Dan Hess remark into sublime humour (which obviously failed, but I was laughing)

It was supposed to convey that sometimes, when you are only looking for the one thing (details/truffles) you miss out on the important stuff. EG: On the not so funny side, the pilots who are focused on the faulty instrument as the plane slams into the side of a mountain.

So I apologize if you felt that i was going there when wasn’t, but not for the sounds like ‘sour grapes.’ That I meant=)

]]>
By: Danny_Black http://blogs.reuters.com/justinfox/2010/10/27/what-gretchen-morgenson-is-good-for/comment-page-1/#comment-167 Sun, 31 Oct 2010 20:29:16 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/justinfox/?p=41#comment-167 Also at least from the beginning of 2008, there has been coverage of the issues of evicting people without the original notes:

http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/2008/0 2/lost-note-affidavits-skeletons-in.html

As a bonus it even comes with an intelligent commentary, just to show what a competent and knowledgeable person can do.

]]>
By: Danny_Black http://blogs.reuters.com/justinfox/2010/10/27/what-gretchen-morgenson-is-good-for/comment-page-1/#comment-165 Sun, 31 Oct 2010 19:05:53 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/justinfox/?p=41#comment-165 Actually, Mr Ritholtz, given you Ms Smith and Ms Morgensen form the unholy trinity of BS not surprising to see you rising to defend one of the core pillars of misinformation out there.

Just like Ms Smith with her article in the NYT, where like Ms Morgensen, she links to research that simply doesn’t say what she says it does:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/31/opinio n/31smith.html

First paragraph:

“For instance, the International Monetary Fund found that the persistently high unemployment in the United States is largely the result of foreclosures and underwater mortgages, rather than widely cited causes like mismatches between job requirements and worker skills.” Except it doesn’t. The kindest thing you can say is that it says that the housing crisis is another contributing factor and so she is misreading what is written there. A less kind view is she is deliberately misrepresenting the statements in the paper.

http://www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/ 2010/cr10248.pdf

Relevent pages are 5-15.

As for you, still waiting for those flood of CDO related SEC cases that you claimed ABACUS case was all about.

]]>
By: Danny_Black http://blogs.reuters.com/justinfox/2010/10/27/what-gretchen-morgenson-is-good-for/comment-page-1/#comment-164 Sun, 31 Oct 2010 14:31:32 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/justinfox/?p=41#comment-164 Yeah, Ritholtz I believe her Pulitzer is right next to Walter Duranty another NYT “journalist” who didn’t believe facts matter when the big picture is right.

]]>
By: hsvkitty http://blogs.reuters.com/justinfox/2010/10/27/what-gretchen-morgenson-is-good-for/comment-page-1/#comment-160 Sat, 30 Oct 2010 19:55:28 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/justinfox/?p=41#comment-160 I agree the article sounds a little like sour grapes. Sometimes people with ethics tend to grasp better, because they choose to allow their conscious to see the underbelly rather then unconsciously agreeing with the loudest, brashest, most lauded or revered that is basically just surface fluff to distract.

In other words, perhaps the chauvenist pigs are only digging for truffles.

Danny Black, you spend more time telling people they are ‘wrong’ and that you are ‘right’ with no evidence to back that up, then adding to the conversation. Are you a lawyer by chance?

]]>
By: Ritholtz http://blogs.reuters.com/justinfox/2010/10/27/what-gretchen-morgenson-is-good-for/comment-page-1/#comment-154 Sat, 30 Oct 2010 12:29:29 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/justinfox/?p=41#comment-154 Shorter version:

“I was not entertained by some the most important timely breaking news by a Pulitzer-prize winning investigative journalist, so I mostly ignored it.”

I give you credit for publicly admitting it, but geez, Justin — that ain’t pretty.

]]>
By: TGGP http://blogs.reuters.com/justinfox/2010/10/27/what-gretchen-morgenson-is-good-for/comment-page-1/#comment-145 Fri, 29 Oct 2010 20:14:45 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/justinfox/?p=41#comment-145 The blogger at Economics of Contempt isn’t too fond of her either:
http://economicsofcontempt.blogspot.com/ search?q=morgenson

]]>
By: Danny_Black http://blogs.reuters.com/justinfox/2010/10/27/what-gretchen-morgenson-is-good-for/comment-page-1/#comment-127 Fri, 29 Oct 2010 03:33:48 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/justinfox/?p=41#comment-127 Citoyen, yeah who cares about whether it is factually correct or not…

]]>
By: tnod http://blogs.reuters.com/justinfox/2010/10/27/what-gretchen-morgenson-is-good-for/comment-page-1/#comment-125 Fri, 29 Oct 2010 01:57:18 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/justinfox/?p=41#comment-125 On Sunday, the very first part of the Sunday Times I read is Gretchen’s article for the week. It is always very well written and carefully researched. She often breaks fresh ground. I certainly don’t read Gretchen for investment advice. It is more about understanding our circus of “performers” on Wall Street. Felix (another favorite of mine) must be somewhat jealous. Gretchen only has to write once a week. Felix has to pontificate 5 times a day. Both do a good job but they are very different jobs. Give Gretchen a break.

]]>
By: Citoyen http://blogs.reuters.com/justinfox/2010/10/27/what-gretchen-morgenson-is-good-for/comment-page-1/#comment-121 Thu, 28 Oct 2010 21:25:25 +0000 http://blogs.reuters.com/justinfox/?p=41#comment-121 Too many financial writers cannot see the forest fires for the trees. Morgenson does. Stop quibbling and start listening.

]]>