It's much easier to point out the problem than it is to say just how it should be solved.

Partly, the Russian system succeeds because, in contrast to the Western industrial economies, it makes full use of its manpower.

I am for a close global association in trade and financial matters, rather than the opposite possibility of excessive nationalism, as manifested in the two world wars.

The years of the Great Depression were a superb time for economists because people not knowing what could be done or what should be done would always assume that maybe an economist had the answer. If you were just a lawyer in Washington, you were nobody. But if you were an economist, you might have the answer.

The inborn instability of capitalism has been part of the history of the system for several hundred years.

Meetings are held because men seek companionship or, at a minimum, wish to escape the tedium of solitary duties. They yearn for the prestige which accrues to the man who presides over meetings, and this leads them to convoke assemblages over which they can preside. Finally, there is the meeting which is called not because there is business to be done, but because it is necessary to create the impression that business is being done. Such meetings are more than a substitute for action. They are widely regarded as action.

There's no question that in my lifetime, the contrast between what I called private affluence and public squalor has become very much greater.