Sentences with phrase «real arguments about»

http://ca.ign.com/articles/... http://www.cnet.com/news/ha... Now Plz knock yourself out by hitting disagree while stating some random insults or how I'm a ignorant Xbot troll (would already be nice If I had a Xone) Or try to put some real arguments about why the 2008 PC debate argument vs Console should suddenly matter now to console gamers.

A bigger problem is that cynical pols like Romney (and Michelle Bachmann on this issue) end up feeding into this self - defeating narrative because it seems easier than making a real argument about health care or taxes or what have you.

That was a real argument about a certain legacy of figurative painting as an antagonistic force.

Not exact matches

The solution then is inflation, in our arguments over the last week Nick and I disagreed about the various transmission mechanisms from monetary policy to the real economy (we also argued over the basic causes of the trap, the last sentance was my version).

That being said, while I understand your argument about creating a product that would produce $ 20k a year in passive income, I don't think it is the fairest comparison with real estate the way it is described.

An example of the argument for volatility - based caution about Bitcoin, chosen at random, appears in Professor David Yermack's December 2013 NBER working paper, «Is Bitcoin a Real Currency?

So arguing about something means it exists??? Crap so all those Santa, Easter Bunny, Tooth Fairy, and He - man arguments I had as a kid made them real!!!!

It is also a considered judgment made real through longstanding argument and handed down assumptions about the way the world works and ought to work.

I especially like the parts about the rather abstract sense of victimhood, which blinds us to real suffering, and the assumption that modern thinkers aren't «rational agents» who give arguments that need to be engaged, because they're characteristically neither wholly true nor wholly false.

but thats not what i'm talking about... i am discussing the god you claim to worship... even if you believe jesus was god on earth it doesn't matter for if you take what he had to say as law then you should take with equal fervor words and commands given from god itself... it stands as logical to do this and i am confused since most only do what jesus said... the dude was only here for 30 years and god has been here for the whole time — he has added, taken away, and revised everything he has set previous to jesus and after his death... thru the prophets — i base my argument on the book itself, so if you have a counter argument i believe you haven't a full understanding of the book — and that would be my overall point... belief without full understanding of or consideration to real life or consequences for the hereafter is equal to a childs belief in santa which is why we atheists feel it is an equal comparision... and santa is clearly a bs story... based on real events from a real historical person but not a magical being by any means!

The problem with such an argument is that while it offers a very helpful insight into the question of why we suffer and endure hardship, it says nothing about real evil.

If you are at all dubious about slippery slope arguments in this area, Smith's catalogue of real - life examples will cure your doubts once and for all.

In the academy, where argument can so easily turn into a competitive sport, we momentarily bucked that trend with real conversations about real people.

This intellectual formation works against the metaphysical foundations of natural law reasoning, and therefore most people find the arguments remote and unconvincing — «academic» in the bad sense of being about something other than the real world we live in.

Smith says that my principle of «modal coincidence» (to be possible is to be possible for God, to be actual is to be actual for God) is addressed to the problem of the factual side, but that my ontological argument must appeal to modal logic as expressive of real possibility and necessity, and that logicians express doubts about these.

I think this is really an argument about the experiments, with only tangential relation to the real - world phenomenon nominally being tested.

Your argument can still be used for the defending case, i.e. «this is Real we are talking about, with Ronaldo, Asensio, Vasquez, up front, supported by Kroos and Kovacic».

Warner at The New York Times understands the real argument here is about women who feel put - upon by all the expectations associated with modern motherhood.

The real argument isn't so much about whether babies can hear music in the womb - they can - and they begin hearing fully at 20 weeks gestation.

When they're teens, siblings can get into some real down and dirty arguments (those of you who are reading this and having siblings, you know what I'm talking about.)

The answer is for the left to win arguments with real people and stop is time honoured Fabian strategy of, manipulating the system to vastly exaggerate the power held by a small minority whilst simultaneously complaining about their inability to concentrate even more power with Left Liberal courtiers via PR What the left hate and what they can not admit is that their leaders despise the views of many of their voters, perhaps a majority.

«This should be the challenge for the Labour leadership election: not an argument about which policies of the Labour government the contenders did or did not support, or even which policies they support now, but a real attempt to identify the basis for a contemporary centre - left political project.

But his columns and features about the real thing are no less entertaining, even now, and the arguments Klein and Cuomo had back in the «80s and «90s about the nature of liberal government and personal responsibility reverberate, unsettled, in today's Democratic politics.

Set aside for a moment the ludicrous hypocrisy of a Tory Brexiteer government running a facsimile of the Remain campaign's economic arguments about leaving a union, the threat that will be articulated is not only real but potentially greater than in 2014.

The arguments thrown about (fiber grains chelate, or bind, to iron, causing its loss... true, but all fiber does this... high grain diets cause malnutrition, yes, in populations not give other foods, etc.) are rarely backed by any real research or empirical data.

After a very weird, aggressive argument about why Tinder is rubbish, and why we should all be meeting partners out in the real world (wouldn't that be great!)

They read a novel about life in urban America, they write letters to city council members and state representatives, the compile statistics to support their arguments in their letters; in short, they use their discipline - based skills of scientific inquiry, math, literacy, social studies and health to do what people in the real world do — synthesize the skills and knowledge in a meaningful way.

Included in the PowerPoint: Macroeconomic Objectives (AS Level) a) Aggregate Demand (AD) and Aggregate Supply (AS) analysis - the shape and determinants of AD and AS curves; AD = C+I+G + (X-M)- the distinction between a movement along and a shift in AD and AS - the interaction of AD and AS and the determination of the level of output, prices and employment b) Inflation - the definition of inflation; degrees of inflation and the measurement of inflation; deflation and disinflation - the distinction between money values and real data - the cause of inflation (cost - push and demand - pull inflation)- the consequences of inflation c) Balance of payments - the components of the balance of payments accounts (using the IMF / OECD definition): current account; capital and financial account; balancing item - meaning of balance of payments equilibrium and disequilibrium - causes of balance of payments disequilibrium in each component of the accounts - consequences of balance of payments disequilibrium on domestic and external economy d) Exchange rates - definitions and measurement of exchange rates - nominal, real, trade - weighted exchange rates - the determination of exchange rates - floating, fixed, managed float - the factors underlying changes in exchange rates - the effects of changing exchange rates on the domestic and external economy using AD, Marshall - Lerner and J curve analysis - depreciation / appreciation - devaluation / revaluation e) The Terms of Trade - the measurement of the terms of trade - causes of the changes in the terms of trade - the impact of changes in the terms of trade f) Principles of Absolute and comparative advantage - the distinction between absolute and comparative advantage - free trade area, customs union, monetary union, full economic union - trade creation and trade diversion - the benefits of free trade, including the trading possibility curve g) Protectionism - the meaning of protectionism in the context of international trade - different methods of protection and their impact, for example, tariffs, import duties and quotas, export subsidies, embargoes, voluntary export restraints (VERs) and excessive administrative burdens («red tape»)- the arguments in favor of protectionism This PowerPoint is best used when using worksheets and activities to help reinforce the ideas talked about.

Through intentional instructional design we can guide students to think critically about arguments, concepts, and ideas and to create solutions to real - world problems.

The real argument surrounding NCLB is not about whether those longstanding funding channels should be preserved; of course they will be.

They want real audiences, even if they're uncertain about their beliefs and have not yet learned to construct an effective argument.

Well, I think Newark needs good schools, period... This idea of «we have to build charters at the expense of public school» is a ridiculous notion... That's an argument that people are having about real estate, about space, about money and finances, when on the ground, the thing that improves education is what happens in the classroom — is teacher development, staff development, and extended days and, you know, curriculum...

And those of us who teach classes about education policy and are constantly looking for interesting, flawed books on education policy are the real winners, as Reign of Error combines a great deal of clear explication of issues with provocative arguments that its readers (such as my future students) can poke holes through.

Snowflakes United decided to go for the emotional argument instead of addressing the real and rational dispute, which is about wholesale pricing.

I'm talking about real TV & real media that's good enough for people to spend good money on and you're argument seems to consist of conveniently mixed up figures between YouTube (where you can watch 100,000 different cats next door falling of a skateboard) and fledgeling real content streaming services (that don't even need Flash) for their minority of TV viewers.

It occurs in the middle of an argument between Scout, who is now mainly referred to by real name Jean Louise, and her father Atticus Finch about his views on a changing society.

While there are valid arguments at this time as to whether one should rent or own their primary residence given the absurd amount of debt most are carrying on their principal residence along with artificially cheap money and the boomer influx about to hit the real estate markets across Canada over the next few years it would seem you are okay in that area.

But the practicality is that most retail real estate investors will be hard pressed to reach a 7.6 % cap rate whereas a 7 % nominal return may be realistic on the stock market (there's also an argument about opportunity costs to achieve 7 % cap rate in real estate).

There's a decent public policy argument for delisting penny stocks with no real business behind them; things that are worth nothing are the easiest things to spin tales about.

One can make the argument that Steve's real motive is to sensationalize a story about a company or an individual in hopes of ranking well for that company's or persons name in Google.

JOKE: Iwata is maybe rolling in his grave thinking, «Games are about having fun, great Adventures, not angry arguments about games values» or as he Said for Real:

So please from all of us here at GamesNosh, don't use the deaths of real people in your Twitter argument about video games.

It's the long time argument about what is better: Playing on real hardware using real cartridges and discs on a real TV, or playing via emulated ROM images on a modern PC.

I think Hansen was very clear about whom he considered to be «deniers» and what he considered were the very real dangers of their arguments.

We blogged something last year about how simple arguments can spiral into infinity and end up distracting us from the real issues:

Point being, that I believe her generalized arguments about uncertainty have a real potential to become part of the denial infrastructure, due to her past reputation.

I guess that is then what we disagree about, since the figure on page 109 pretty much eliminates all possible renewable sources without real arguments or thorough analysis, leaving the reader with the impression that renewables are only capable of generating 15 kWh / d of the necessary 125 kWh.

The two most common arguments against warming theories seem to be (1) local temperature variations (or mutually - inconclusive data) disprove global warming itself; and (2) models aren't real science, anyway, so we don't need to worry about them.

Their argument is essentially «We don't like what your instruments tell us, therefore they must be wrong, or at least we can make enough noise shouting about it to drown out the real issues.»

We should stay focused on like cases and make the argument about real tradeoffs.