A Quote by Kenneth Arrow

The trouble is that the risks that are being hedged very well by new financial securities are financial risks. And it appears to me that the real things you want to hedge are real risks, for example, risks in innovation. The fact is that you'd like companies to be able to take bigger chances. Presumably one obstacle to successful R&D, particularly when the costs are large, are the risks involved.
When large companies take on risk, then they impose risks on the rest of the system. And these are systemic risks and these systemic risks we never used to think were really that important, but as soon as we recognize how the financial sector - the risks the financial sector takes on can impact the entire global economy, we realize that those risks needed to be controlled for the social good.
There are some risks we choose to take because the benefits from taking them exceed the possible costs. Optimal behavior takes risks that are worthwhile. This is the central paradigm of finance: we must take risks to achieve rewards, but not all risks are equally rewarded.
While it may be theoretically possible to demonstrate the risks inherent in any treaty... the far greater risk to our security are the risks of unrestricted testing, the risks of a nuclear arms race, the risks of new nuclear powers.
If designers are willing to take risks, I think buyers should take risks, as well with press taking risks.
The trick is to take risks and be paid for taking those risks, but to take a diversified basket of risks in a portfolio.
Luxembourg has a track record of being successful when it takes risks. You need to take on risks to be successful.
Companies have to take risks to get new knowledge, in a manner similar to how jazz musicians take risks when they go after a new approach to a tune or a performance.
Our research indicates that, for example, the physical risks of climate change - both the direct risks to facilities, but also the indirect risks to economic growth and otherwise, are more pronounced and happening more quickly than a traditional perspective would suggest.
The thing I preach constantly is do your research; build your knowledge base. Don't just go into business on a whim or a prayer - and don't think 'I'm an entrepreneur so I have to take risks'. Entrepreneurs don't take risks. They take calculated risks; only the good ones.
I compensate for big risks by always doing my homework and being well-prepared. I can take on larger risks by reducing the overall risk.
Every day, you'll have opportunities to take chances and to work outside your safety net. Sure, it's a lot easier to stay in your comfort zone.. in my case, business suits and real estate.. but sometimes you have to take risks. When the risks pay off, that's when you reap the biggest rewards.
Diversifying sufficiently among uncorrelated risks can reduce portfolio risk toward zero. But financial engineers should know that's not true of a portfolio of correlated risks.
When gene therapy was believed to harbor latent risks, research was largely put on hold until the risks were better understood. Sometimes, the theoretical risks have led to a principle of absolutist precaution that impedes progress.
The risks facing hedge funds are non-linear and more complex than those facing traditional asset classessuch risks are currently not widely appreciated or well-understood
There are risks and costs to action. But they are far less than the long range risks of comfortable inaction.
Rennes wanted me at one point, but in France they have a problem - they don't like taking risks. But if you don't take risks, you don't get anywhere. You pass by the periphery of many things, like life and football.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!