I did not and do not think of the solidity-liquidity conundrum as a dichotomy; I view those two conditions as a couple locked, inseparably, in a dialectical bond.

I suspect that one of capitalism's crucial assets derives from the fact that the imagination of economists, including its critics, lags well behind its own inventiveness, the arbitrariness of its undertaking and the ruthlessness of the way in which it proceeds.

I suspect that the peer-review system carries a good part of blame for the fact that something like sixty percent or more of journal articles are never quoted (which means leaving no trace on our joint scholarly pursuits), and (in my reception at any rate) the "learned journals" (with a few miraculous exceptions that entail, prominently, TCS) ooze monumental boredom.

The value of other people is that they have something unique to offer.

Every interpretation is but an introduction to another interpretation, and that is how Talmud pages are printed.

It is easy now to break the vows. It is even easier to part your ways if vows haven't been taken.

Everybody is in trouble, including the up-and-coming economic miracles of China, Brazil or India.