Sentences with phrase «much a question which»

A decision that a contract fell outside the jurisdiction of the tribunal because it was for services, or for service overseas, was just as much a question which went to the jurisdiction, as the question of whether the Labour party was within the jurisdiction because it was a qualifying body.

Not exact matches

That was during a follow up to a question of former Florida Governor Jeb Bush about why he's more qualified to lead than the real estate billionaire, who garners as much as 41 percent of Republican voter support in some national polls, which is nearly triple the support for Cruz and four times that for Rubio.

The question for Poloz is whether to follow suit, and risk reining growth in too much, or hang back, which could result in downward pressure on the loonie.

You are much better off to give your potential hire actual questions to answer — things you don't expect them to know but which will show if, in fact, there is what you are looking for between the ears of the person you are considering hiring!

There are a handful of half - literate posts from early 2003 in which Frind asks basic questions, like «I am interested in know how much money sites generate off advertising.»

Just keep in mind that every new question makes your online survey that much longer, which ultimately reduces the response rate.»

«Today, the answers to those questions are different - you do not get much which does not come close to justifying the step function increase in the cost to upgrade, and as the below chart show the cost to upgrade changed dramatically with the introduction of the iPhone X.

Over $ 1 million was raised in pursuit of legalization in Maine, much of which was spent gathering the signatures necessary to get Question 1 on the ballot.

He says to avoid asking questions which can be answered online, such as how long the program is, how much it costs, or where the school is located.

How much of that market Uber can take is an interesting question to ponder (which we will), but the fact that 25 % of that market is in the U.S. is a huge advantage for the company.

I have ignored reasons that might justify lower discount rates or higher GDP adjustments for China mainly because the purpose of this essay is to explain why the U.S. multiple is so much higher than China's, and of course these reasons exist, but I think whatever the correct ratio should be, there is no question that advanced economies always justify higher multiples than developing economies because they tend to be economically more diversified and politically more stable, and they usually have institutions, including clearer legal and regulatory frameworks, more sophisticated capital allocation processes, less rigid financial systems, and smaller state sectors (which make smooth adjustment, one of the most valuable and undervalued components of long - term growth, more likely).

I believe my question is relevant to Sam's and your post as the government has a big impact on the economy — the economy has a big impact on interest, dividends and stocks — which have a big impact on how much you can withdraw from your savings.

Tesla fell as much as 8.6 percent Thursday after the chief executive officer rejected analysts» questions on another quarter in which the company burned more than $ 1 billion in cash.

So the question is whether Mr. Kudlow — not so much the individual, but the trade war - averse faction within the administration of which he is perhaps the most visible member — and others are going to be in position to prevent the administration from doing anything economically destructive on trade.

The corporate team is quick to respond to any question or concern I have as an owner, which is always much appreciated.

The operative question was, how much was mortgage credit and stock market credit fueling a financial boom that increased the prices at which assets were being transferred above what it would cost someone to simply create these assets afresh.

It's an era in which millions of trade orders are placed, and then canceled, in a single second, raising the question of whether much of what we call the market is, in fact, an illusion.»

But the important question is about future Chinese gas demand: how much is satisfied by pipeline deals and how much is satisfied by domestic production, which could include shale gas?

It addresses key questions which challenge all entrepreneurs: how much money can and should be raised; when should it be raised and from whom; what is a reasonable valuation of the company; and how funding should be structured.

Which begs the question: How much higher can home prices climb in the area?

 The Harper government's decision last year to write off every penny of the auto aid and thus build it all into last year's deficit calculation (which I questioned at the time as curious and even misleading) has already been proven wrong. Since the money was already «written off» by Ottawa as a loss (on grounds that they had little confidence it would be repaid — contradicting their own assurances at the same time that it was an «investment,» not a bail - out), any repayment will come as a gain that can be recorded in the budget on the revenue side. Jim Flaherty has learned from past Finance Ministers (especially Paul Martin) that it's always politically better to make the budget situation look worse than it is (even when the bottom has fallen out of the balance), thus positioning yourself to triumphantly announce «surprising good news» (due, no doubt, to «careful fiscal management») down the road. The auto package could thus generate as much as $ 10 billion in «surprising good news» for Ottawa in the years to come (depending on the ultimate worth of the public equity share).

In a New York Times blog, Ross Douthat notes that Pew created two nonbeliever categories instead of one: the much publicized atheist / agnostic category (which got 21 out of 32 religious knowledge questions right) and a much larger category of respondents who described their religion as «nothing in particular» (which got only 15 right — a bit below the national average of 16 correct answers).

do I need any approval before I practice my religion, do I have to prove my religion before I practice, my holy book further describe that you must carry a gun in 21st century because there is too much crime in this world, but it doesn't say much about if I migrate to another country these rules will still apply, Or I should modified them according to my comfort, like talking in English which is not my religious language wearing pants or not, having education or not, standing in line or not, I am so confused what should I do can someone help me, should I go back to country where my religion originated or back in time ask my guru questions about western world confusion, or just decide by myself what suites me, or preach other develop country that you guys are wrong be peaceful.

Once you do that, your god has no constraints, which means you can make up pretty much any story you need to answer any question.

to ponder on the question of how much ethics and religion can be comprised in a Weltanschauung which dares to be inconclusive» (Albert Schweitzer, by Oskar Kraus [Adams & Charles Black, Ltd., 1944], p. 43).

Nobody thought much of religions other than Christianity; as was obvious by our public school pledge — which admonished us all to be good Christian citizens... Sure, I had questions too, but our church was pretty low - key so I was safe from some of the more radically - minded (read: brainwashed) of my peers.

It just seems that people like Hawking ignore religion completely when a HUGE part of science is questioning all beliefs including your own which I don't think human beings do as much as they should, or respect other people's opinions.

Anyway, last week, we talked about Chapter 2 — «The Old Testament and Ancient Near Eastern Literature» — in which Enns tackles the difficult question of how to understand the Bible as special and revelatory when Genesis in particular looks so much like other literature from the ancient Near Eastern world.

This is certainly an interesting article which raises a legitimate question for those of faith as well as for those without any specific spiritual belief system: Does God care who wins and if so, why and how much and what influence does He have over the outcome?

The development of a new philosophy of science which radically questions the earlier mechanical - materialistic world - view within which classical modern science worked and also the search for a new philosophy of technological development and struggle for social justice which takes seriously the concern for ecological justice, are very much part of the contemporary situation.

We are allowed this latter statement because, as Bennett says, «the consciousness in question is not the objectifying «awareness of» by means of which we attend to data, but the «awareness with» by which much of our experience is lived» (PS 3:42).

I would be wary of any congregation in which the pastor is revered too much to be questioned (though questions should obviously be posed in the right way, through the right channels, and with the right timing).

Truest: Emerging Mummy with «In Which I Lose My Right Answers» «There is much beauty here, too, in the consuming of the real life, in the living, in the laughing, in the weeping, in the questioning and the wrestling.

For life within the Catholic Church, the stumbling - block as regards change in the Church's doctrine is not so much the question of defined dogmas as other doctrines of the Church in dogmatic and moral theology which are taught authoritatively but which in principle can not count as defined doctrines of faith or as irreformable dogma.

This alone is an element of freedom and democracy in the fundamental essence of the Church which does not, indeed, render the question of democracy in the Church superfluous, but which makes it much less vital, as is also the case in other free associations.

2) name usage statistics do not guarantee the miraculous — but they certainly place an author in that immediate context (or at the very least, with direct access to someone who was from that immediate context), which is a MAJOR contingency that has been much debated in the question of authorship... which IS the topic you raised.

Hartshorne, I think, can not answer such questions and admits as much in a statement, which, though parenthetical to the prior statements I have cited, indicates just how far we are from an analytically clear understanding of divine knowledge: «If this [knowing fear without being afraid] is a paradox so is any idea of adequate knowledge» (CSPM 263).

This work, which has been co-written with Marian F. Sia, deals with the question: what kind of God can we continue to believe in despite the reality of so much suffering?

He explained it thus, «If religions can not go into the question of the welfare of humanity, those great values to which they bear witness will not make much sense to vast millions of people of this world.

With respect to doctrinal questions (as distinct from ethical questions) I think there is far too much emphasis in most churches on what you are required to believe, which results in relationship - ending events over inconsequential stuff.

When I reflect on the infinite pains to which the human mind and heart will go in order to protect itself from the full impact of reality, when I recall the mordant analyses of religious belief which stem from the works of Karl Marx and Sigmund Freud and, furthermore, recognize the truth of so much of what these critics of religion have had to say, when I engage in a philosophical critique of the language of theology and am constrained to admit that it is a continual attempt to say what can not properly be said and am thereby led to wonder whether its claim to cognition can possibly be valid — when I ask these questions of myself and others like them (as I can not help asking and, what is more, feel obliged to ask), is not the conclusion forced upon me that my faith is a delusion?

Those who think that human rights is a «motherhood issue» around which all rational people can unite have not given the question much thought.

Or this: «Why do our evangelical theologies give so much attention to questions relating to only a few obscure biblical texts while completely ignoring the topic of «poorology» to which are devoted hundreds of clear texts?»)

Whether or how Christianity made a «turn from a Jewish to a Hellenistic expression» is a complicated and much controverted question on which numerous books have been written since Adolf Harnack (d. 1930) gave the question its present shape.

A genuine philosophy of history regarding the beginning8 of genuinely human history, and a genuine theology of the experience of man's own existence as a fallen one which can not have been so «in the beginning», would show that where it is a question of the history of the spirit, the pure beginning in reality already possesses in its dawn - like innocence and simplicity, what is to ensue from it, and that consequently the theological picture of man in the beginning as it was traditionally painted and as it in part belongs to the Church's dogma, expresses much more reality and truth than a superficial person might at first admit.

Thus he considers the question of living complexity — which has recently drawn much attention in science and religion discussions — to be important.

The question is not so much whether it is possible, justifiable, or advisable to have a viewpoint or standpoint from which to pass such judgment but rather where the proper place for introducing it ought to be.

The form in which the answers to these questions have come is not so much that of systematic treatises as of concretizations of alternative philosophical models: the open classroom, gay marriages, tire commune, house churches.

But before we come to that discussion, it will be useful for us to turn our attention to the question of «resurrection» — first, the resurrection of Jesus Christ, about which so much of the earliest Christian writing found in the New Testament, and so much of the Christian experience of discipleship, turns; and second, to consider the point of the continuing Christian affirmation that those who have responded to the event of Christ are themselves made «sharers in Christ's resurrection».

After determining that I was not just another moralist who wanted to influence film content, but someone who was genuinely interested in film, Shurlock relaxed and asked me a question that was very much on his mind: «We are trying to determine what to do about a picture in which director Sidney Lumet wants to include a shot of a woman's bare breasts.