Mr. Navarro's writings don't
offer economic arguments for exempting Canada from those measures.
Not exact matches
«I think the reason that the
economic arguments Christ
offered are not promoted is because they are deeply at odds with the way we live,» he explains.
A society based on unsustainable greed and financial «fairy gold» is simply not a good idea, and the fact that the
economic arguments behind it are shaky
offers an opportunity to move on from this.
(He's joined in this
argument by James Hansen, who lacks Nordhaus's
economic expertise but
offers considerable scientific gravitas.)
While Hellblade's general quality is its own
argument to be made for immediate purchase (and if you're into character action / adventure games I'd argue it's a sufficient one at that) I think there's a larger point that can and should be made for its place within the
economic structure of the industry as an unabashedly pro-consumer
offering.
For the past year, Vikram has eloquently and intelligently voiced
arguments about — among other topics — institutionalized racism, representations of marginalized identities, and
economic inequality, all the while
offering nuanced critiques of the artworks that take up these subjects.
The following quotes come from a press release sent out this morning from the fossil fuel industry - funded «Heartland Institute,» which pretends to
offer science - based
arguments in support of their «mission... to discover, develop, and promote free - market solutions to social and
economic problems.»
In doing so, the best he can
offer from moral philosophy is a reduction of complicated scientific, political, and
economic arguments to facile comparisons of «business as usual» to «standing around, watching a child drown».
In 1981, my Harvard colleague, political scientist Steven Kelman surveyed Congressional staff members, and found that support and opposition to market - based environmental policy instruments was based largely on ideological grounds: Republicans, who supported the concept of
economic - incentive approaches,
offered as a reason the assertion that «the free market works,» or «less government intervention» is desirable, without any real awareness or understanding of the
economic arguments for market - based programs.
As the interpretation of infinity in
economic climate models is essentially a debate about how to deal with the threat of extinction, Mr Weitzman's
argument depends heavily on a judgement about the value of life... A lack of reliable data exacerbates the profound methodological and philosophical difficulties faced by climate change economists... The United Nations conference in Paris this December
offers a chance to take appropriate steps to protect future generations from this risk... http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2015/07/climate-change (MOST COMMENTING ARE NOT AT ALL IMPRESSED)
Furthermore, even if foreign litigants chose to use a platform
offered by, for
argument's sake, the Canadian government, it would be difficult to justify such an expense to Canadian taxpayers, especially in these difficult
economic times.
My
argument is that the Bar is not
offering students value for money from the vocational year, but if it did, the socio -
economic diversity of the profession would improve.
The
arguments for the proponents are said to be that (i) access to outside capital permits economies of scale, infrastructure and specialization, (ii) non-lawyer ownership is an avenue not just to
economic capital but also to «high - value employee with different skills sets», (iii) outside investment allows consumers better information and quality of service by the development of brands which provide consumer information and an incentive to ensure quality and (iv) a business
offering multiple types of services can provide services with greater convenience and efficiency.