This goes back to 2011 but has re-surfaced. Here is the original letter from Ben Eltham dated 28 August 2011:
Dear Steven
As someone who finds myself in consistent disagreement with your opinion writing on economics, I was wondering if you’d be interested in a public debate on some of the issues you’ve advanced in recent times, for instance concerning the effects of Keynesian stimulus.
I think it might be quite a fun event and I’m sure we could ensure a good attendance from interested parties from both the left and right of the political spectrum.
If you’re interested, let me know and I’ll investigate what venues are available. The Wheeler Centre might be interested.
Sincerely,
Ben Eltham
Leaving out the various emails in between, this was my last response dated 12 October 2011.
Dear Ben
When I had not heard back from you before, I just assumed that you had gone cool on the idea so I am pleased that you would still like to have it on. Seems like a potentially very festive occasion.
So please do go ahead and organise something. I am in Melbourne between now and Christmas aside from a week at the end of November. The Wheeler Centre or anything else would be fine. I do not expect either of us will change a lot of minds but for both of us there are serious issues involved in thinking through what needs to be done in the face of the inevitable downturns in the cycle.
I should also apologise for not writing back immediately when you sent your note. I am in what I not-so-whimsically call ‘marking hell’. I gave a test to my 180 students last week, which was the penultimate week of the course, and now I have been buried marking them so that they can have some feedback before they plunge into the final on Hallowe’en. Just finished an hour ago.
But please do organise something. And many thanks again for your willingness to take this on. BTW, we should also meet for a coffee if you are ever around the CBD.
Kind regards
Steve
From that day to this month I had not heard back. But now this dated 15 May 2013:
Hi Steve
We obviously let the idea of the debate get away for a time, but seeing as you seem keen to renew the discussion, perhaps its time to lay down some guidelines and set an appropriate date?
best
Ben
I am unfortunately more busy now than I was then. The claims on my time have reached crisis proportions, but nevertheless, last night I finally replied but only after five days which has been the time I have been doing the mulling:
Dear Ben
I have mulled over your original letter to me and the time just wandered by. I am not particular averse to debating the Keynesian issue. What has stayed my hand in replying is whether you actually understand enough of what I am trying to get at to make it a fair debate. But then again, not many others would either, specially if they have studied Keynes and take aggregate demand as gospel so why should I worry.
We were going to have this debate at the Grattan Institute or somewhere but it was not going to be at RMIT. I will leave that to you. The only stipulation I would make if you are actually interested in this, that this is the resolution we put to the floor:
That Keynesian economics is junk science.
I would then speak to the resolution and you could reply. After that, we could think about what to do next. One-on-one; two-on-two. Anyway, make a concrete proposal and I would be happy to be in it. Might be fun.
Kind regards
Steve
Which is where matters now stand. Will report when there’s more to report.