Sentences with phrase «how dangerous the policy»

But they were all agreed on just how dangerous the policy is.

Not exact matches

«I am not sure if policy - makers understand how potentially dangerous this situation is.

But if this case sets a precedent for how Trump's economic policies are going to work, it heralds a dangerous shift from an economic system based on rules toward an economic system based on deals.

To do better we must revive the old underconsumption debate and learn again how policy distortions can force up the savings rate to dangerous levels, and we may have temporarily to reverse the course of globalization.

Depending on how financially savvy you are, selecting your own portfolio can be an acceptable aspect of this type of policy or a very dangerous one.

Learn what policies and programs provide the foundation for this program, how it reduces intake and creates lifesaving outcomes, how to measure the success of a program not based on citations and stray impounds as well as strategies for keeping communities safe from dangerous animals and pets safe from neglect and cruelty that don't compromise lifesaving.

In The Point, Catherine Wilson contemplates the United Kingdom's recently instituted immigration policy for artists, which is damaging the country's reputation as a haven for free expression, and essayist Fatima Bhutto, from Karachi, examines how the art practices of three of her peers comment on the dangerous act of simply being a woman artist in Pakistan today.

It's a dangerous path for a government agency to take no matter how much you agree with their policies or not.

In the absence of being able to make that policy call at this time on dangerous interference, what we're doing as an interim measure is working bottom up to see how aggressive can we be in finding a pathway to low - carbon power generation from coal, because that accounts for more than 50 percent of emissions; how aggressive can we be in transitioning to a much greater diversity of fuel supply than petroleum, and vehicle technology, and that's 20 percent of emissions; and then what can we do much more rapidly to halt deforestation, which is 20 percent of emissions.

I was wondering for some time now, how much the findings of the work of scientists, be it the IPCC, be it the PIK in Potsdam or what have you, can be taken for granted in order for policy makers to make valuable decisions (e.g. cutting carbon emissions by half by 2050) and if the uncertainties in the models might outweigh certain decisions to reduce carbon emissions so that in the end it might happen that these uncertainties make these decisions obsolete, because they do not suffice to avoid «dangerous climate change»?

I think we have to be realistic about how this is going to be exploited by the right to push us further down this very, very dangerous road of greater and greater injustice, inequality, predatory economic policies and predatory social policies.

In climate policy debates, there is broad agreement on the need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to avoid dangerous climate change impacts — but not on how fast or how soon.

A strong ethical case can be made that if nations have duties to limit their ghg emissions to their fair share of safe global emissions, a conclusion that follows both as a matter of ethics and justice and several international legal principles including, among others, the «no harm principle,» and promises nations made in the 1992 UNFCCC to adopt policies and measures required to prevent dangerous anthropocentric interference with the climate system in accordance with equity and common but differentiated responsibilities, nations have a duty to clearly explain how their national ghg emissions reductions commitments arguably satisfy their ethical obligations to limit their ghg emissions to the nation's fair share of safe global emissions.

Throughout the NSC's new video series, the Senior Director of Transportation Initiatives at the NSC, David Teater, addresses a dozen popular questions regarding the dangerous habit, including just how severe distractions can be, why cell phones prove to be such a dangerous distraction and how employers can create an effective and beneficial cell phone policy for all employees.

In fact, participating in what could be considered a dangerous hobby could very well be a reason for some life insurance companies to decide not to offer you a life insurance policy regardless of how healthy your are!

Depending on how financially savvy you are, selecting your own portfolio can be an acceptable aspect of this type of policy or a very dangerous one.