Economists have put themselves in a position where what they are doing is supposed to be impossible to understand for outsiders, so they dont even talk - sometimes not even with their girlfriend or boyfriend or friends - about what they are doing.

The principal mechanism for convergence at the international as well as the domestic level is the diffusion of knowledge.

The democratic ideal has always been related to a moderate level of inequality. I think one big reason why electoral democracy flourished in 19th century America better than 19th century Europe is because you had more equal distribution of wealth in America.

We want capitalism and market forces to be the slave of democracy rather than the opposite.

Our modern democratic ideal is based on the hope that inequalities will be based on merit more than inheritance or luck.

Contrary to a tenacious myth, France is not owned by California pension funds or the Bank of China, any more than the United States belongs to Japanese and German investors. The fear of getting into such a predicament is so strong today that fantasy often outstrips reality. The reality is that inequality with respect to capital is a far greater domestic issue than it is an international one.

I don't think there is any serious evidence that we need to be paying people more than 100 times the average wage in order to get high-performing managers.