America's role in the global economy inevitably was going to diminish; we're smaller relative to - as China, India, other emerging markets grow.
The U.S. basically wrote the rules and created the institutions of globalisation.
Trump sees the world in terms of a zero-sum game. In reality, globalisation, if well managed, is a positive-sum force: America gains if its friends and allies - whether Australia, the E.U., or Mexico - are stronger. But Trump's approach threatens to turn it into a negative-sum game: America will lose, too.
We share a common planet, and the world has learned the hard way that we have to get along and work together. We have learned, too, that cooperation can benefit all.
One can only hope that America, and other countries, will not need more natural persuasion before taking to heart the lessons of Hurricane Harvey.
An economy in which most citizens are doing worse year after year - an economy like America's - is not likely to do well over the long haul.
Hedge funds are not noted for their long-term thinking - for them, a quarter is an eternity.
America and the world are paying a high price for devotion to the extreme anti-government ideology embraced by Donald Trump and his Republican party.
Trump can bring jobs back, but they will be minimal-wage jobs, not the high-paying jobs of the 1950s.
In addition to offering benefits to those who invest, carry out research, and create jobs, higher taxes on land and real-estate speculation would redirect capital toward productivity-enhancing spending - the key to long-term improvement in living standards.
The IP standards advanced countries favour typically are designed not to maximise innovation and scientific progress, but to maximise the profits of big pharmaceutical companies and others able to sway trade negotiations.
I'm enough of a political junkie to know if you have large numbers of people much worse off, you're going to have consequences.
International lending banks need to focus on areas where private investment doesn't go, such as infrastructure projects, education and poverty relief.
There's a long list of investments that governments could and should be making. There is strengthening infrastructure, such as transport and communications; there is investment in education; there is investment in families, particularly putting measures in place that free women from having to make the choice between raising a family and work.
If manufacturing jobs do come back to the U.S., they will be done by robots in hi-tech parts of the country rather than the Rust Belt states.
Globally, manufacturing jobs are on the decline, simply because productivity growth has outpaced growth in demand.
I recognized that information was, in many respects, like a public good, and it was this insight that made it clear to me that it was unlikely that the private market would provide efficient resource allocations whenever information was endogenous.
As I noted in my Nobel lecture, an early insight in my work on the economics of information concerned the problem of appropriability - the difficulty that those who pay for information have in getting returns.
Having excessive power in the hands of one country meant the fate of the world was too dependent on what happened in that one country.
Under the rule of law, if the government wants to prevent firms from outsourcing and offshoring, it enacts legislation and adopts regulations to create the appropriate incentives and discourage undesirable behaviour. It does not bully or threaten particular firms or portray traumatised refugees as a security threat.
