Economics never was a dismal science. It should be a realistic science.
Weirdly enough, I'm a macroeconomics enthusiast.
After graduating in engineering I went to the University of Kansas to get an MA in economics as a vehicle for allowing me to decide if I wanted to continue in economics.
The study of economics does not seem to require any specialized gifts of an unusually high order.
My family are quite academic, and I was set to study economics and politics at university.
Economics is a good degree to have but the subject is very theoretical at Cambridge and I found it frustrating that you can't apply a lot of the models to particular circumstances.
I entered economics because of a course I took on 'information economics,' which I found fascinating.
I was 15 years old at university, studying economics and philosophy, and I saw a retrospective of Australian film. They were very raw. 'Picnic at Hanging Rock,' 'Gallipoli;' they were fantastic.
When I came up to Cambridge (in October 1921) to read economics, I did not have much idea of what it was about.
I've been a faithful reader of the great classical documents of economics, or tried to be.
