The world is hugely unequal.

Inequality is partly a marker of success.

I both love inequality and am terrified of it.

I'm not a left-wing nut pushing for single-payer!

I don't think Brexit is going to help people in Britain.

The people who hate immigrants are people who have never met them!

Success breeds inequality, and you don't want to choke off success.

Inequality is an enormously complicated thing that is both good and bad.

It's a murky world out there, and it's hard to figure things out sometimes.

I don't think that globalisation is anywhere near the threat that robots are.

I've written about how mortality is a wonderful indicator of societal progress.

I think there are a lot of policies that have been unfriendly to workers' wages.

European countries give much larger shares of aid for poverty relief than the U.S.

Putting, say, an 85 per cent income tax rate is unlikely to bring in much revenue.

A lot of people, including me, are worried that inequality will lead to bad things.

In the high-income English-speaking world, the elderly get treated very well indeed.

High quality, open, transparent, and uncensored data are needed to support democracy.

Growth does not bring any 'automatic' improvement in the health component of wellbeing.

I believe, as do most people, that we have an obligation to assist the truly destitute.

I don't think income solely determines health. I think lots of other things determine health.

There is much that remains mysterious about why some countries grow rapidly and some grow slowly.

Businesses have moved from doing business to doing lobbying, and I think that's a very bad thing.

Aid can only reach the victims of war by paying off the warlords and, sometimes, extending the war.

A lot of people in America and Europe feel that their governments are not representing them very much.

In Scotland, I was brought up to think of policemen as allies and to ask one for help when I needed it.

International cooperation is vital to keeping our globe safe, commerce flowing, and our planet habitable.

I think putting numbers together into a coherent framework always seemed to me to be what really matters.

Foreign aid, especially when there is a lot of it, affects how institutions function and how they change.

The Nobel thing is like dying and going to heaven for a while. It's like being transported to a fairyland.

International development aid is based on the Robin Hood principle: take from the rich and give to the poor.

After a day's fishing, I'll know the solution to something or have good ideas that were not accessible before.

I have the great good fortune that one of my collaborators in work, Anne Case, is also my collaborator in life.

Policies aimed at reversing globalization will lead only to a decrease in real income as goods become more expensive.

We are trying to say that low income and low job opportunities, after a long period of time, tears at the social fabric.

I think inequality has gone past the point where it's helping us all get rich, and it's really becoming a serious threat.

You can certainly draw a picture of 2016 which makes it look like the 1930s, which, of course, is what everyone is doing.

The World Bank adjusts its poverty estimates for differences in prices across countries, but it ignores differences in needs.

My work on happiness is the only thing I've ever done where I've heard people in the supermarket talking about it, for instance.

Political and legal institutions play a central role in setting the environment that can nurture prosperity and economic growth.

I really don't think we've become a plutocracy, but I worry about the enormous influence that money has in a democracy such as ours.

Without properly functioning civil courts, there is no guarantee that innovative entrepreneurs can claim the rewards of their ideas.

China and India are the success stories; rapid growth in large countries is an engine that can make a colossal dent in world poverty.

I'm very keen that we have this debate about the good parts of inequality and the bad parts of inequality. It's not a one-sided thing.

Those of us who were lucky enough to be born in the right countries have a moral obligation to reduce poverty and ill health in the world.

It's hard to know what's going to be replaced by technology tomorrow. It feels like we're all at risk. I feel only safe as an emeritus professor!

Without effective states working with active and involved citizens, there is little chance for the growth that is needed to abolish global poverty.

Inequality is not the same thing as unfairness; and, to my mind, it is the latter that has incited so much political turmoil in the rich world today.

It's hard to think that Mark Zuckerberg is actually impoverishing anyone by getting rich with Facebook. But driverless cars are another matter entirely.

You accumulate emotional wisdom as you get older. You know, when you're 25, you go on blind dates with people that, when you're 50, you know to stay away from.

The globalization that has rescued so many in poor countries has harmed some people in rich countries, as factories and jobs migrated to where labor is cheaper.

Share This Page