Quotes from Robert J. Shiller

Yes, horoscopes still persist in popular newspapers, but they are there only for the severely scientifically challenged, or for entertainment; the idea that the stars determine our fate has lost all intellectual currency.

Speculative markets have always been vulnerable to illusion. But seeing the folly in markets provides no clear advantage in forecasting outcomes, because changes in the force of the illusion are difficult to predict.

A moderate tax on robots, even a temporary tax that merely slows the adoption of disruptive technology, seems a natural component of a policy to address rising inequality. Revenue could be targeted toward wage insurance, to help people replaced by new technology make the transition to a different career.

In a perfect world, people don't have to move to another country to get a higher wage. Ultimately, they need only be able to participate in producing output that is sold internationally.

That's the world we live in: when it comes to economics, people have emotions; it's not like chemistry or physics.

When I see the Trump supporters on television explaining themselves, I don't get a feeling of supreme confidence. They've created a revolution, and now maybe they're a little scared by it.

Money management has been a profession involving a lot of fakery - people saying they can beat the market, and they really can't.

Finance is not merely about making money. It's about achieving our deep goals and protecting the fruits of our labor. It's about stewardship and, therefore, about achieving the good society.

The problem is that once we focus on economic policy, much that is not science comes into play. Politics becomes involved, and political posturing is amply rewarded by public attention.

I am worried that the collapse of home prices might turn out to be the most severe since the Great Depression.

The ability to focus attention on important things is a defining characteristic of intelligence.

There is more uncertainty than usual about job futures because computers are replacing more and more human intelligence, and globalization is proceeding at an accelerating pace.

People might just decide, 'Yeah, I'll diversify my portfolio. I'll live in a rental.' That is a very sensible thing for many people to do.

Trump has never been clear and consistent about what he will do as president.

Any time you have change, it costs somebody. Somebody is a loser.

We judge economics by what it can produce. As such, economics is rather more like engineering than physics: more practical than spiritual.

A lot of people aren't saving enough. And incidentally, people are living longer now, and health care is improving. You might end up retired for 30 years - people are not really preparing for that.

Some of the best theorizing comes after collecting data because then you become aware of another reality.

Manufacturers of food try to get the optimal ratio to tap into your impulsivity. They don't care about your health.

Those on the downside of rising economic inequality generally do not want government policies that look like handouts. They typically do not want the government to make the tax system more progressive, to impose punishing taxes on the rich, in order to give the money to them. Redistribution feels demeaning. It feels like being labeled a failure.

The ability to focus attnetion on important things is a defining characteristic of intelligence.---Irrational Exuberance

How errors of human judgment can infect even the smartest people, thanks to overconfidence, lack of attention to details, and excessive trust in the judgments of others, stemming from a failure to understand that others are not making independent judgments but are themselves following still others—the blind leading the blind.

Just what is a speculative bubble? The Oxford English Dictionary defines a bubble as "anything fragile, unsubstantial, empty, or worthless; a deceptive show. From 17th c. onwards often applied to delusive commercial or financial schemes." The problem is that words like show and scheme suggest a deliberate creation, rather than a widespread social phenomenon that is not directed by any central impresario.

If we exaggerate the present and future value of the stock market, then as a society we may invest too much in business start-ups and expansions, and too little in infrastructure, education, and other forms of human capital.