Sentences with phrase «as the argument goes»

As the argument goes, we put guards with guns in banks to stop thieves, so why not use that same strategy to protect our children?

As the argument goes, Android and Apple may have 600,000 apps each to choose from, but do those numbers really mean anything when they respectively count dozens of useless fart apps?

As the argument went, social networks and the internet in general have made it easier for extra-marital dalliances to happen, just as they've made it possible for people with oddball interests to connect and become friends.

Here we find a dialogue of «arguments» — but as arguments go, of the most juvenile kind.

«As the argument went on, the Michigan fan's girlfriend stood up, pulled the hair of the Ohio State's fan's girlfriend... the wife, actually.

As the argument goes, as an observer approaches the horizon, time slows down, since clocks tick slower in a strong gravitational field.

As that argument goes, anything that follows the word «including» must necessarily be a subset of whatever precedes it.

[5] At the end of the day, as the argument goes, the hourly billing model is not congruent with the interests of the client.

As the argument goes, prevailing demand for bitcoins will stay constant, forcing the price higher once fewer bitcoins are being generated on a day - to - day basis.

Not exact matches

As Eddie Nuvakhov, CEO and producer of LNC Productions, a company that specializes in marketing videos explains, «You need to show people how your product is going to change their lives for the better, and not just what the product is, if you want to make a convincing argument for its purchase.

The after - tax income of state residents would, the argument goes, be the same as under the old federal tax law.

The suits are part of a group of at least four other cases with similar arguments in various courts around the country, and they make legal experts wary, particularly as the differences in opinion seem to indicate their destiny to go before the Supreme Court.

«I think it goes without argument that the athletes on the field, it's all skill for them, but is it skill for you and I as armchair quarterbacks to pick who does well?»

However arguments around the «burning question of our time» as Munk Debate moderator Rudyard Griffiths expressed it, was a chance to view champions on both sides of the economic trenches go at it hand to hand.

But, as the argument and the vast amount of research goes, what works for Menlo doesn't work for everyone.

She tells The New York Times that as she prepared to deliver her closing argument, she went back and made additional notes to her original statement after hearing Bliss speak.

The closest Harford gets to bullet points is coining three «Palchinsky principles» that underpin Adapt's argument: «First, seek out new ideas and try new things; second, when trying something new, do it on a scale where failure is survivable; third, seek out feedback and learn from your mistakes as you go along.»

The strongest argument I can think of for why the Fed might wish to sit tight for that long goes as follows.

Demographics are indicating more university spaces becoming avaialble over next 8 years (already started in eastern Canada) as well as labour shortages for younger people (Foote) and generally better things ahead using same arguments by Dent.lt looks like we are headed for BOOM times which will really get going by 2020.

With their large populations and rapid growth, these countries, so the argument goes, will soon become some of the largest economies in the world — and, in the case of China, the largest of all by as early as 2020.

But you're argument is that reducing fees will reduce volatility, when the data shows that volatility went up as soon as the fees were reduced.

I'm going to give you the argument I've always used on NGDPLT, and I'd be curious as to whether you think it's right.

As the Judge would summarize the case and after he listened to all the witnesses and heard arguments from the lawyers, I would think, he is going to find this guy guilty, and then the Judge starts talking another way and then I think ooohh he is going to find this guy not guilty...... then the Judge keeps talking and then I think, I have no idea what his finding is going to be....

According to reports, the digital currency to be created will be based on blockchain technology (hence our argument that the move goes some way to validate cryptocurrency) and it's designed, primarily, as a tool that can facilitate cross-border transactions between the two countries.

The thrust of his argument is that interest rates need to go up as the Fed's been «adding enormous policy accommodation over the past several years» and, even while they've long been missing their inflation target on the downside, there's a risk of getting «significantly behind the curve.»

And all along, investors bought the argument: Even if the number of pay TV subscribers had stalled, the big media companies seemed as though they were going to wring more money out of the customers they did have — and could sell more stuff to Web TV entrants like Netflix and Amazon.

Just as the arguments for higher cost structures in other industries have been washed away by the internet tsunami (go ask retailers or content providers), so too will the arguments for premium pricing for institutional trades succumb to the inevitable erosion.

Nevertheless, there were numerous critics expressing worries about the growth of margin lending, but the financial press tended to play their arguments down, even going as far as charging the critics with trying to undermine confidence for ulterior reasons (Barron's and the Wall Street Journal both published editorials to that effect).

If they win that case, and the court upholds that argument, it's hard to see how the SEC could continue to let them go on deceiving investors by holding themselves out as advisers.

Okay, here goes: You are engaging in a perceptual bias, a fallacious bit of reasoning, and you have no reasonable argument as to thinking some other species» mental idiocy to be significant in any way whatsoever beyond the mere biological curiosity of their neurological problems specific to them.

Bootyfunk, as no one really knows all of the facts of history, I usually limit my arguments to what is going on TODAY.

For a minute there I was wondering if Chad was going to trot out the old «they are better off as slaves» argument

You said, «It's like you change things or make things up as you go along to suit the argument you're making at the time.»

It's like you change things or make things up as you go along to suit the argument you're making at the time.

For a minute there I was wondering if Chad was going to trot out the «they are better off as slaves» argument.

Hippypoet science will admit the Bible as evidence so let go the legal arguments and start the experiments.

He was unsatisfied with the reception to Paul VI's Humanae Vitae of 1968, and unsatisfied, too, with the state of the argument in the Church, thinking that it did not go as far as it could in answering certain basic puzzlements that humans have about themselves.

In the name of a higher morality, their argument went, birth control could be defended as the lesser of two evils (a position argued by the dissenter Charles Curran, among others).

Therefore, to be fair, as far as logic goes both camps (aetheists and theists) have equally unsupportable arguments.

Tenderness separated from the source of tenderness thus supports a «popular piety» that goes unexamined, a piety in which liberalism in its decline establishes dogmatic rights, rights that in an extreme» as presently in the arguments for abortion in the political sphere and for «popular culture» in the academic» become absolute dogma to be accepted and not examined.

The biggest argument is which one is going to go off birth control first, as each wants one child and two children sounds perfect to me.

If We are to «Go G - dless» as the graphic suggests just because a few Fools abuse religion, then by the same logic We should also abstain from alcohol just because a few Fools drive drunk, abstain from communicating just because a few Fools put forth unsound argument, and abstain from eating just because a few Fools eat too much.

Although I can not agree with the details of Kreitzer's argument, in general terms such a position is plausible, as far as it goes, but it does not go very far.

You called me out as being disingenuous when I said «that as time goes on however, I'm finding things that are helping to disprove things previously held as fact among Christians», so I have provided you an example that not only wasn't it a disingenuous statement, but that I've done my homework, on both sides of the argument, and came up with something that no one has been able to give me a response with even either the slightest chance of being possible, or falling back to the old status qua of «mysterious ways» and «having faith».

As atheist writer Douglas Murray recently noted, after sitting alongside Dawkins in a debate: «The more I listened to Dawkins and his colleagues, the more the nature of what has gone wrong with their argument seemed clear.

There were a lot of arguments as to which books would go into the bible, the Catholic Bible.

Classic atheist argument — raise Leviticus as the true standard, face the truth that it doesn't apply to Christians, then raise another, unrelated argument (go ahead, try and deny it).

I use many of the same arguments as you, but went with «week» for sabbatwn.

Obviously, so the argument goes, if we want to cut teenage pregnancies and abortions we must have access to sexual health services — in other words, teenagers are less likely to get pregnant if they are using contraception; failing contraception, then we should give them access to the morning - after pill, which may be seen as preferable to a twelve - year - old getting pregnant.

And you claim to fall on Tony's side of the argument, that as long as your theology is correct you're going to be fine.