Sentences with phrase «pointing than problem»

It's just a fact that in our world today there's more talk about climate than concrete action, more finger - pointing than problem - solving.

Not exact matches

She noted, however, that Project Include is in a different position than Y Combinator when it comes to asserting its relationship with Thiel, adding that YC has made a point of acknowledging problems of discrimination in tech.

When customers are opting to spend twice as much to buy an Apple laptop than an HP, it's time to massively shake up that business or get out of it entirely (by the way, I'm not sure if anybody has pointed out the obvious yet, but it sure seems like Microsoft Windows is at the core of HP's problem in this area).

Instead, it points out the problems with focusing entirely on changing what you eat rather than taking into account other behavioral patterns.

Rather than just talking to them, you'll actually listen to them and try to understand their goals, their needs, their pain points and any problems with similar providers they've had in the past.

The problem at that point is that once the required minimum distribution starts, they end up being forced to take more money than what they necessarily need at that point, and they get thrust into a higher tax rate,» explain Plessl and Houser.

At this point, more than $ 1.5 billion in venture capital has gone to support blockchain startups, and many have business models that would be affected by how the block - size problem is solved.

The problem of tax evasion in Greece has been pointed out many times during the debt crisis: Christine Lagarde, the head of the IMF, got into hot water over the summer with her comments that she felt more sympathy with children in Africa than tax evaders in Greece.

At a time when markets are pointing to the problem over the next generation as being inadequate rather than excessive inflation, central bankers need to spur demand and co-operate with governments.

Last week in London, for example, an analyst from a research company with whose views I am usually in strong sympathy and who herself is very bearish on China's growth prospects, airily dismissed Chinese debt concerns by pointing out that Chinese government debt, even after adding back estimates of losses in the banking system, is lower than that of the Japanese government, and because the government's debt burden has not been a problem in Japan it won't be a problem in China.

The Triffin Dilemma, as this problem is known, points out that if foreign growth is high enough relative to US growth that the need for US dollar reserves grows faster than the US economy, the resulting US current account deficit will require that the US sell assets fast enough, or that US obligations to foreigners grow fast enough, eventually to put the US economy at risk.

Third and finally, the traditional story misses the real function of private banks, which is to solve an information problem in the purest Hayekian senses. That is, banks are or should be specialists in risk assessment and risk taking. They should know their client, understand the local market and have their pulse on the broad economy. Arguably, if properly structured, they can and should do this better than other entities such as governments. In other words, the proper role of banks should be underwriting — lend money, hold the debt, and bear the risk. Which is a long - winded way of getting to the main point of this post.

I simply noted that the finger pointing toward the CC gets a bit ridiculous when there is more of a problem than meets the eye in protestant churches if you do a little research on the net and elsewhere.

While that can be read to provide cover for theological evolutionists (of which I am not one), my point is simply that our problems in the doctrine of creation might be further upstream than we imagine.

And I am concerned that we are now more concerned about who to blame (e.g., political finger pointing) for the problems that we have than we are in solving those problems.

Perhaps the White Rose, in the limited space available in their leaflets, could do no more than raise the basic point that the Nazi policy of extermination of the Jews was of a different kind altogether from the earlier anti-Semitism, which for all its enormities would never have suggested that the solution to the so - called «Jewish problem in Europe» should be mass murder.

No more than you find any problem with an infinite immaterial deity who at some point within an infinite past, initiates the expansion of the universe.

I will further try to show that Whitehead the metaphysician displays interests in important respects not unlike those of Hegel, but that in his solutions to certain metaphysical problems, Whitehead not only evidences a conception of metaphysics quite different, and considerably more modest than that of Hegel, but also (and this will be my main point) develops his position in terms of a logic that is entirely non-dialectical.

Part of the problem, as you pointed out, is that they're not qualified to do anything else... but that goes deeper than the ministry prep that most of us have done.

Cavanaugh's More of Jesus, Less of Me makes a similar point: «Those of us who hunger for more than we need, for more than is good for us, have another hunger: we have emotional problems that we have not exposed to the healing of our Lord Jesus... But there is good news: the Holy Spirit can heal these unnamed hungers.»

The pessimists however point out that the problems of the new era are often far advanced before we become aware of them, and that they frequently turn out to be worse than at first thought.

Tommy God has already forgiven you for your sin the moment you asked Jesus into your life and confessed him as Lord.From that point he paid for your sin in full past present future.It is not sin that stops us from being with the Lord so you are saved.The problem you are experiencing is the battle for your life in the here and now satan is out to destroy you and he knows our weaknesses.If you are honest there were already issues in your life that you struggled with and never got the victory over.So where do you go from here as i found myself in the same situation i was a christian but walking according to the flesh.God does nt change his mind he always loves us but because of our choices we distance ourselves from God.The issue is that we like sin thats our wicked hearts and to be fair we cant change our nature only Christ can do that our old nature must be crucified with Christ.The stumbling block is our pride we have to admit that we cant do it For me that was terribly difficult i was so independent thinking i could do anything but the truth was a made a real mess of things.I sense you are at a crossroads and are feeling desperate and confused.So as a brother in the Lord you need to confess your sin to God and tell him that you are weak -LCB- we all are -RCB- and that you cant do it in your strength -LCB- None of us can -RCB- but ask him to send the holy spirit to help you deal with the temptations and the sin that you struggle with and he will help you to change your life he will empower you as he did me.Rather than look at who you are look to Christ and walk in him and he will make you a new man and sin will not have dominion over you.Jesus came to set us free from bondage.Having once been a slave to sin i know what it is like to have been set free by the power of God and that is what Christ is offering you today.All it takes is a desire to change or repent and admit we cant do it and trust him to give you the strength to walk in him regards brentnz

2) every religion would have to placed against known facts of the universe, it would be a class strictly pointing out the failings of religion and end up raising more problems than answers.

The point is that this is more than a risk: it is the methodological problem with Fr Purnell's approach.

But the point is that in addition to the obvious pressures of population growth, strategies of development that ignore existing injustice in patterns of wealth distribution enlarge the problems of severe poverty rather than mitigating them.

Each of them, however, addresses the same problem: What should the individual do, and society permit, when the phenomenal advances in the medical profession's ability to sustain life reach the point where efforts to prolong it become, in Dr. Nuland's words, «well - meant exercises in futility» and cause continued suffering rather than relief and cure?

The problem is that you don't know and there is nothing that points to a singular prime mover other than you and your brethren.

It is conventional to say at this point that we have greater technological capabilities than we have social wisdom to deal with the complexities of the human factors involved in the problems of war, race, and the decay of the cities.

But in the faith journey, perhaps such severe swings point to a systemic problem more than a personal one.

The study echoed this point as some GPs reported feeling frustrated by having little to offer patients with complex problems driven by social and emotional difficulties anything other than pills.

Nothing is simpler than to point to deficiencies in the way our huge, increasingly heterogeneous nation grapples with the problem of delivering basic services to its needy members or to persons who, like so many of the Kauai children, are at serious risk.

Those whose interest in the religions of Asia has been aroused to the point that they want to consider some of the comparative problems raised by the study of religions other than one's own will find thoughtful and searching discussions in two books recently published: World Religions and World Community, by Robert Lawson Slater, and The Meaning and End of Religion, by Wilfred Cantwell Smith.

Floods show up on the geological record, no problem to date it, if there was a worldwide flood, it'd be shown EVERYWHERE, and the fossil record would have a bit of a massive die - off, and the maternal DNA would show that there was a later point than the African «Eve» where all of our DNA converged, etc. — there'd probably be some good 50 different ways of showing it to be true.

At no point is the later Bonhoeffer of greater importance to the death of God theology than in helping us work out a truly theological understanding of the problem of religionlessness.

I shall approach this position by entering more explicitly into the problem of theodicy than I have done up to this point.

The point at hand is that the Spirit's presence as Counselor (Paraclete) solves the problem to faith of the vacancy left by the departure of the Jesus who had led in discipleship, and shifts the life of faith into another mode than «following.»

This last thought may make my hero J. Gresham Machen spin in his grave, but: In spite of the theological problems in the mainline, those traditions do at least have some sense of what it means to be the church within a culture, rather than seeking in vain for some extra-cultural Archimedean Point.

The problem with Arsenal is how we play, or adapt our play in matches, we've had good players up to the point where our squad looks better than the opposition, but we then loose dismally.

I can not see him spending # 50 million... And besides tactical skill wins far more points than throwing money at a problem — and we know how tactically inept he is..

I get your point mate.But in truth Ramsey is the CM and Xhaka is the DM according to our formation anf tactic.It's even debatable if Xhaka is capable of playing DM.I think Ramsey's tactical awareness is poor but he has every right to take risks and move into the opposition box.He's a box to box player.The only problem is Ramsey overdoes it.If we had a proper CDM the team would be more balanced.Now it's like we have two CM's playing in midfield and due to their poor tactical awareness we're always left exposed.I conclude by reminding people that Wilshere is better footballer and is more intelligent than Xhaka.It'll be better playing Wilshere and pairing him with a CDM than having Xhaka play there.He just gets to play over him becausr we signed him for # 35.

Scoring goals has never been a problem for Klopp's men with the likes of Mohamed Salah, Sadio Mane and Roberto Firmino firing them towards their objectives, but until they find a balance with the defensive side of their game, perhaps Barton makes a valid point but rather than regressing they could end up stagnating and failing to take that next step needed to win a major trophy.

So next week we could have Bellerin, Gibbs and Coquelin back and the week after that could see the return of Mertesacker, Debuchy and Walcott but for this weekend the Gunners need to take all three points off Swansea in Wales and even with our injury problems there is more than enough quality in the side to do that, isn't there?

People have no problem pointing the finger at Mesut or Santi when they don't run as hard as Jack and Aaron do — despite the fact they're being played out of position — yet the moment that I state the obvious that Mesut and Santi are better than Jack and Aaron as ACMs it's an uproar.

cause even the goal difference isnt such a problem, if we want to go top the would have to lose 2 games and if they lose 2 games the difference in gd would sink atleast to just 3 between us and then if we win the games it would sink to atleast 1 so if we score 2 goals more than them in the other 6 games of us we would be top, well as long as spurs give up 4 points and i strongly believe that they will lose points, cause they are beatable cause they wont play like leicester only on the break but would also want to dominate some games and against liverpool / southampton that will be dangerous

And just for good measure the Frenchman pointed out, as reported by Metro, that Arsenal are in a better position having a player like Alexis desperate to play than some other clubs having the opposite sort of problem with the likes of Diego Costa and Dimitri Payet.

No point in risking Ozil for Lincoln at home, if we can't win at home without Ozil (who is totally off form right now) then the problem is bigger than we thought...

We finished 3rd last season and while I think that injuries were a problem many of our dropped points stemmed from tactical flaws than a lack of personnel.

When your team scores only 2 fewer goals than the champions, but finish 15 points behind them, the problem isn't with the strikers, or your attack.

The season before last 14 15 we did better with the points than last season even though we came second from last season we know we conceded many goals from set pieces and were very short on goal scoring the logic of this season was to fix the defensive department and the offensive department by introducing a defender to reduce the amount of goals conceded unless holding is to be the man we havent us of yet fixed the problem on the offensive department we all know the only offensive player is chuba apkom well else we have not addressed the problem so in reality I do not except Arsenal to finish the season with more than 70 points and personally think minimum point required to win the premier league is 85 points have we got that in our squad it will remain to be seen if chuba and holding are enough for a key to unlock the season we will soon find out but I think MR wenger is gambling with the introduction of new manageress which lives us with Liverpool and Leicester and who will take the points off united chelsea and city the next 6 games should give us the indication to what may happen to the long run for the new year

Only problem is to win the league that way would be an assault to the senses of our dear gaffer, to the point he would rather not lift the title than lift it that way.