Economic chasm between people is something that is of interest to me. And something that I used to write about even as a child. It's something I've revisited a few times in my writings.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
I gravitated to economics because I'm interested in how people coordinate and collaborate with each other. Economics studies all the ways people get along with each other.
Our society is intertwined with the economy that we've built, which is a fantastically complex system. I hope that my writing about it might do some good, but that's not why I do it.
While I am interested both in economics and in philosophy, the union of my interests in the two fields far exceeds their intersection.
Economics is a strange science. Our subject deals with some of the most important as well as mundane issues that impinge on the human condition.
A lot of my colleagues have been people with broad interests in economics, not just narrowly focused interests.
The economic sense of possibility was so great when I was growing up that my parents had no question that I could do anything I wanted to do, even as a girl. I've always believed that the economics of a story intersects with the women's story - that stuff often happens at the time it happens because of the economy.
Growing up, I had a sense of the importance of commerce and trade to everyday life. Our family lived in several countries, and I was fascinated by the free exchange of goods and services between individuals and companies - the way both parties could benefit.
I had become interested in economics, an interest that was transformed into a lifetime dedication when I met with the mathematical theory of general economic equilibrium.
Usually my ideas for work have revolved around my interest in people, especially people that live on the edges of society.
My politics are: I'm a trustbuster. Very focused. And yeah, I'm pro-efficiency. I want the most economic activity at the lowest price possible. It's good for everybody; it's not red or blue.
No opposing quotes found.