Nouriel Roubini Quotes

Globalization, as defined by rich people like us, is a very nice thing... you are talking about the Internet, you are talking about cell phones, you are talking about computers. This doesn't affect two-thirds of the people of the world.

Economic growth is very important, but it is not the only thing, and it must be accompanied by sharing with those who are left behind, through effective social services and provision.

The past few decades of widening inequality can be summed up as significant income and wealth gains for those at the very top and stagnant living standards for the majority.

I don't care where you are in the world, people are aware of what technology is available to others. If you're in Nairobi, you're certainly aware of the iPhone.

I think greed is a critical problem - the gap between the poor and the rich. The gap between the top 10 percent and the bottom 10 percent.

We're building what I call 'software apartheid.' We're in the process of creating a divided society: those who can use technology on one side, and those who can't on the other. And it happens to divide neatly along economic lines.

I believe economic growth should translate into the happiness and progress of all. Along with it, there should be development of art and culture, literature and education, science and technology. We have to see how to harness the many resources of India for achieving common good and for inclusive growth.

I am not a Luddite. I am suspicious of technology. I am perfectly aware of its benefits, but I also try to pay attention to some of the negative effects.

Economic growth doesn't mean anything if it leaves people out.

India's prosperity is sectioned by geography, such as in Bangalore, where the information technology industry is prominent. Because they have a conduit out of India, competing in the world by the Internet, it's not regulated in corrupt ways, and it is very prosperous.

Technology tools such as laptops are the kind of help that we need. A program that provides laptops for all youngsters would close a gap that most of us are not aware of, or will not admit to, which is a tremendous gap in the poor communities.

As we develop and get quicker with technology in America, it's like we're downgrading if you look at the investment in education... that's the thing that worries me.

Segregation by race has declined gradually since 1970, but separation by income has grown steadily in the same period.

Technology produces a new division of haves and have nots.

The central issue of our time remains the fact that the rich are getting richer and the poor, poorer.

The distribution of wealth is just as important as its creation.

We are facing the rise of a Japanese-American technological condominium. Those who are unable to use the new technologies in order to achieve productivity gains will be forced into backwardness and decadence. If we become dependent on foreigners our democracy will be in danger! The Republic will be a mere word.

Distributed technology does not necessarily lead to distributed economics.

In 1980, the top 10 percent earned 2.7 times as much as the bottom 10 percent.; in 2013, the top 10 percent took home 3.7 times as much. This is because for decades, the median wage growth has lagged behind the average wage growth.

The march of science and technology does not imply growing intellectual complexity in the lives of most people. It often means the opposite.

There's not a lot of wealth throughout all the country shared equally.

Given the relativity concept, poverty cannot be eliminated. Indeed, an economic upturn with a broad improvement in household income does not guarantee a decrease in the size of the poor population, especially when the income growth of households below the poverty line is less promising than the overall.

You have to be able to bring technology to the forefront and allow economic opportunity to be more equally spread.

As the world has changed through globalisation and technology, it has left many feeling left behind.

I would say I'm a fiscal conservative and a social liberal, if that contradiction can make sense, because in Bolivia, we have a great problem, which is the inequity of income distribution. The rich aren't that rich, but the poor are very poor.