Sentences with phrase «rather give our money»

When Tony Anselmo was growing up in the produce business, his father would say he'd rather give his money to someone he knows than a stranger across the country.

Many times parents would rather give money than send in supplies with their students anyway.

I'd rather give my money to Chase than get extorted by UA.

I'd rather give my money to interesting ideas (that may yet fail) than to existing games that will come out soon and might suck.

Actually, if I was a pessimist, I might be inclined to call this option «the life insurance policy would rather give you some money to cancel your policy before you keep it long enough to make a claim».

Not exact matches

Not only will your credit score increase over time, you won't pay as much interest — which, if you think about it, is just giving lenders money you would rather stayed in your pocket.

Rather than give up and return their investors» money, Ou and his three co-founders pitched their VCs one last idea: a destination for stylish guys to find unique products.

The classic view of Bloomberg is that its vast, money - spinning data - terminal business is almost unassailable, thanks to the fact that most brokers and fund managers would rather give up their first - born than go without their Bloomberg machine.

That's because, rather than handing the capital over to any one of 17 government agencies with a finger in the innovation pie, or giving the money to the Business Development Bank of Canada, which deployed just $ 408 million of its $ 18.4 billion balance sheet to the venture capital industry, the Conservatives have decided to invest that money directly in entrepreneurs.

Rather than just giving people money we should develop ways so that you can earn more money if you do certain things that are good for you and maybe good for society.

Rather than diverting money when it became clear NASA's future was elsewhere, it doubled down on the shuttle, then complained when Congress wouldn't give it more money to make up for its poor planning.

Or would I rather make less money doing something that gives me a genuine sense of fulfillment?»

More than 500 contributors who gave more than $ 200 to Republican candidates earlier in this election cycle, are now giving money to Clinton rather than the presumptive Republican presidential nominee, according to political research group, Crowdpac.

Proposal B would divert money from workers» individual accounts and give the cash to current pensioners, rather than building up funding for their own retirement.

Given the tiny amount of revenue that would represent, Valeant apparently deemed it cheaper to give Addyi away for next to nothing rather than spend money on marketing and on the costs of battling the Sprout shareholders in court.

But I would rather pay the taxes now, and yes that means giving more money to the government now, than get taxed on it later in life.

That is the point at which banks demand bailouts — giving them the money, rather than giving the economy the revenue to spend and pull itself out of depression.

Plan B calls for giving this money directly to the banks and leading insurance companies, on terms that let them continue paying high executive salaries and dividends to existing shareholders rather than wiping them out as normally happens when an enterprise has Negative Equity.

Governments generally get a much bigger stimulus bang for their buck when they spend directly on projects, such as roads and bridges, rather than giving cheques or tax breaks to individuals, who may choose to bank the money instead of spending it.

Crowdfunding Investment is similar to other crowdfuning initiatives, like Kickstarter, but rather than just raising money, equity crowdfunding would give investors shares in the small businesses they invest in.

Philippine payroll process is not about the amount of money we give rather it is about how accurate, timely and easy the process is -LSB-...]

The Bank of Japan wants the banks to lend, so rather than give them any interest on money deposited with the Bank of Japan, they are (subject to some specific conditions) actually charging them for leaving money parked.

Crucially, in the migration, assets will not be moving from the 100 underperforming active funds to the remaining active funds who will perform the needed fundamental research on the shares being sold — rather, assets will be moving from the 100 underperforming funds to the cheapskate passive fund, which doesn't spend any money at all on the research process, opting to simply give the money back to its investors instead.

If the investment give you more than 3 % interest rate your net worth will be positively affect if you invest the money rather than paying of your debt.

Rather than just buying an individual stock, investors pool their money by giving it to a mutual fund.

Sponsors refer to the money as «compensation» rather than «wages,» but guinea pigs must pay taxes, and they are given no retirement benefits, disability insurance, workers» compensation, or overtime pay.

Rather than charging exorbitant fees, they offer to lend you the money without any interest and give you a lift to the repair shop.

I have gotten rambling a little here but my question to you your thoughts on this statement: «If money or rather the established institution that is the world market, is the reason that throughout at leastthe past few decades, than it would be right to take from those who have much much more than they need and give to those who are at least the poorest of the world, those in need.»

The intent of the passage is not to blindly give money to whoever asks, but rather inasmuch as it is in your power to do so, help the poor and needy with their needs....

This is a rather important ethical point, because the worst religious charlatans have exploited people's gullibility and desire to believe in miracles and especially miraculous cures in order to take vast sums of money from people who really can't afford to be giving any away, least of all to con - artists like faith healers.

I would like to see ministries and non-profit organizations rise up where the call is no longer, «Send us your money so we can give it to the poor» but rather, «Come with us to develop long - term relationship with the poor (or whoever), so that over time you can meet their needs personally.»

Personally, I'd rather give to the transparent NGOs doing the good works and keep money out of the hands parishes / churches that don't manage it responsibly.

While it maybe be true that large pools of institutional money are better at buying political favors, influencing scientific research, and swaying foreign governments, it has always been known and is frequently demonstrated that individuals always do better at loving and caring for other individuals, tend to be wiser stewards of money, and view their giving and service toward others as a means of actually helping them, rather than a means to gain political power or popular prestige.

That is, we may believe that the best possible person is a soft - hearted nun who cares for orphaned pigeons, but in Singer's eyes, the rather disagreeable cur who cheats at checkers, ignores his children, and is rude to waitresses may be the more ethical person if by giving away lots of money he saves lives.

Rather than each ministry vying for the same donor monies, the campaign established a percentage giving plan.

Most charities operate by shady dealings and most of the money given does not go to support the charity's pet cause, but rather to line the pockets of those running the charities, such as the presidents and CEOs who get unreal amounts of money from their positions and then there's the really stupid amount of money given for mass mailings and other advertisements.

Rather than looking at the money, when our Father is richer than we can imagine anyway, we should be looking at what we're doing with the facilities God has given us.

1) Charities spend their income on necessities, such as food and utilities, which ever - so - slightly re-orients our economy toward recession - resistant products, rather than luxuries 2) Charities spend their money quickly, but on independent schedules, making for a smoother stimulus effect on the economy 3) Charities make purchases tax - free, meaning that $ 1 spent by a charity generates a full $ 1 of private economic activity; furthermore, much of those tax revenues are recovered as income tax on the grocery stores, utility companies, etc. that might not have received that income otherwise 4) Charitable giving is by far the most democratic way to improve society; from birth control to bombers, government assuredly spends money on something you don't like, and charitable giving restores your say - so 5) Charitable donations are tax deductible, meaning you keep those tax dollars in your local community 6) Charitable donations provide the funds necessary for volunteers to serve the needy, thus giving «the average citizen» a chance to meet and interact with the needy, breaking down stereotypes

It is probable that, by giving him money, I had blocked rather than opened the way to real counseling.

The church continued to teach the people that the principle of the tithe still stood, but that now, rather than send this money to the church through the government tax collectors, the people could give it directly to the church itself.

id rather you die of alcohol poisoning then to give that money against gay marriage or abortion.

Maybe it's because there's a five - year - old at my hip who declared it «the dressing that makes me into a lover of salad things» or perhaps it is because that five - year - old's babysitter asked to be paid in jars of dressing rather than real money, but there is something about this dressing that has given me the strange inertia to make it over and over and over again.

we gave mediocre players stupid contracts, such good ones infact they would rather be a bench player and earn crazy coin, then play first team elsewhere for less money

I'd rather see Campbell or Akpom be given a chance, then waste huge money on Morata.

I like to see owners spend their own money; i love owners who give a s & % t. Rather than chastise Chelsea and City, save that venom for our disgusting owner who only spends on ranches and Rams.

I think in my own mind the real creime he's committed against the fans in particular is to keep blowing the boards trumpet for them without acctually saying he is if he genuinely wanted to win trophies rather than just turn a profit then he should have told the board,» give me the money to make this team what it could be or else Im leaving» the board would have sh!t thier pants at that point and given him the means to produce a team worthy of the past glories he has amassed.

Ok then Muff let's hope Coqhelin has the next 2 games and after the City one which will still be in the window of new players make your judgement then His last 2half games shows he is now better and deserves his place even before Arteta or Flamini both are passed it so let's give Coqhelen a fair go, he has really not put a foot wrong I would rather money be spent on a left sided player Left back and Center back for The BFG CB

Even if the gig with ESPN fails, he still probably made more money going there and then going back to HBO rather than just taking whatever HBO would give him.

As a Fan I know that a fraction of the money I spend as a supporter goes to buy players, unfortunately it seems a very small fraction, so I will continue with my own little contribution, as I know the owner will rather see us in the relegation battle than dig into his pockets to reinforce the squad, but also would like to see a gesture from WENGER, whom we all know is going nowhere, as a Man of principles that he claims to be and that he will HONOR his Contract till the end, as the ARSENAL lover he claims to be cut your wages give back some of that money that you did not earn and contribute to the future glory of the Team, like each one of us Fans do when we spend our well and hard earned money, do this buy players.

I also think that an early move could help us persuade the Saints to sell, as it gives them more time to use the money to sign a replacement or two, rather than leaving it to the last minute and making them determined not to lose one of their main men.