Sentences with phrase «value argument for»

The beauty of the «discount broker» business model is that it not only eliminates much of the need for prospecting (which is the main impetus for it), it also inherently attempts to give the consumer the impression that there is an obvious value argument for selecting the «discount broker»!

As Jake points out, it's hard to make a value argument for this Turbo S.

Not exact matches

Before this starts to sound like the annual lecture from management — perhaps you're one of those corporate employees forced to sleepwalk through an intranet quiz once in a while to prove to your higher - ups that you're familiar with the company's code of conduct — consider DeMars's argument for the value of the ethical office from a personal standpoint: «In order to live happily and at peace with ourselves, we have to live in ways that are congruent with our morals,» she argues.

«Retailers should brace for a backlash... The more people rely on these points and closer they are to value, the more an argument for lots of notice and some rules about convertibility sound sensible.»

Once you understand what the market is paying, you need to build an argument for why you offer create more value for the business than they expect in an entry - level hire, said behavioral scientist Matt Wallaert, co-founder of fair - pay site GetRaised.

In fact, there's an argument to be made — as Dennis Berman does at the Wall Street Journal — that the Verizon bid for AOL says more about Verizon's difficulties than it does about any intrinsic value that its target might have.

For a while now our focus has been on relative value and there is very little argument that, after the first quarter price collapse, a whole lot of risk has been taken out of bitcoin, ether, Ripple and thousands of others.

Admittedly, one could make the same argument about gold, but gold has been widely accepted by humankind as a thing of value for more than two - and - a-half thousand years — compared to less than a decade for bitcoin.

If you restate his argument in an uncharitable way, he is saying that the solution for the problem of excluding non-accredited investors in value appreciation is not to let them participate in private markets, but instead to suffer them to populate an earlier public market for private investors seeking liquidity.

It's a good argument for shareholder value.

Absent additional justification, the cost - savings argument comes across as justification for management empire - building, not value creation.

The argument for keeping it is «it may go up in value and you'll regret that later.»

One argument against this strategy is that value investing is investing, it is not trading over a short period of time, looking for the daily movements that take place in a stock's value.

The NOI approach is based upon the argument that the marketplace values the company as a whole for an offered threat skin.

Another argument for burning cryptocurrencies is that a newly created token actually has value because of it.

In essence, the argument goes, rising rates didn't cause the value rebound, they were merely an effect of a stronger economy and building inflationary pressures, themselves the primary catalysts for value.

We believe equities outside the United States look exceedingly attractive in the current environment relative to US stocks.2 The argument for non-US stocks today in many ways resembles the case for value stocks that we've been making over the past 18 months.

Some, like Yoram Hazony in his» Biblical Case for Limited Government,» have even offered sophisticated (if in the end limited) arguments for why a restricted role for government is itself a Judeo - Christian value.

We are not likely to win this battle for basic human rights using the argument that the bible has no value.

Say for example a patient in a remote location must undergo surgery without anesthesia, but with (for the sake of argument) the assurance that he will prevent his own death by undergoing great pains and also assuming that (for the sake of argument) he values his own life over and above any pain he may experience in this life.

In the language of mathematical logic, at least as it was current in Whitehead's day, a proposition is produced from a propositional function by substituting a name as value for the variable in the argument position of the function, or by quantifying over a range of such values.

The argument of this sermon was open to criticism on the ground that the preacher seemed to take for granted a highly debatable view of the redemptive value of human suffering; yet he was calling attention to something very important, namely, that if we quote Baxter's words as Professor Lampe has done, we must not forget that the scope of Christ's suffering is limited.

«One thing only do I know for certain,» he wrote in Civilization and Its Discontents, «and that is that man's judgments of value follow directly his wishes for happiness — that, accordingly, they are an attempt to support his illusions with argument.»

Responding to this «religion is for private life only» position, Greenawalt argues that in some circumstances citizens of a liberal / modernist state may rely upon their personal religious values in casting votes or framing arguments.

He finds these values as well in the handiwork of «insurrectionists» from Daniel Shays to John Brown to Timothy McVeigh, and in the arguments of neo-republican legal scholars such as Amar, Sanford Levinson and David Williams, who find a mandate for revolutionary resistance to oppressive government in the Second Amendment right to bear arms.

To make the economic case for an active population policy, population planners would ultimately need to center their arguments on estimates of the economic value of human life.

Valuing others for what they can do for us is quite a materialistic argument.

He loved an argument, spoiled for a fight and took disagreements over values as seriously as he would have taken training for the Olympics.

Funny how «conservatives» use the argument that Jesus didn't mean for govt to give charity but still claim that the government was founded on Christian values.

I do appreciate your comments about Christ - esteem vs. self - esteem, and see a lot of value in the argument for Christ - esteem instead of self - esteem.

The deepest convictions of men in favor of future hope, therefore, have come not so much from those who have framed arguments for it as from those who have heightened life's spiritual value, given it new meaning, made it wealthy with fresh significance and purpose until it has seemed as though it ought to go on.

Polkinghorne's discussion of the resurrection focuses, in contrast, on general philosophical arguments to the effect that «in order to confirm... the claim that the integrity of personal experience itself, based as it is in the significance and value of individual men and women and the ultimate and total intelligibility of the universe, requires that there be an eternal ground of hope who is the giver and preserver of human individuality and the eternally faithful Carer for creation.»

Their pragmatic arguments for the long - term value of species will be weighted against pragmatic arguments for the immediate needs of some human beings.

Fundamental to this task is the search for an objective ground for value claims — a well - reasoned argument for external standards which resists the ever - present tendency to reduce ethics to the subjective whims and passions of personal self - interest.

However, when conservationists try to oppose polluters and developers solely with pragmatic arguments about the value to human welfare of, for example, gene pools in rain forests, they have been maneuvered into fighting on the same ground as their opponents.

What is needed is a Catholic theological interpretation of modern pluralistic democracy, one that insists on real space for the ideas and active contributions of religious traditions, while underscoring the value of respectful argument and even friendship among those who hold competing views.

Systems of belief and their supporting arguments are not taken at face value, but instead analysed as rationalisations for oppression and existing power structures, or as manifestations of psychological impulses.

In a statement quoted by Hasker in his discussion of what he calls a «more subtle form» of the above argument (although it simply is my argument), I said that according to traditional free will theism it would have been possible for God to create «creatures who could enjoy all the same values which we human beings enjoy, except that they would not really be free» (Process 74).

And since Stapp has provided no further arguments for the meaningfulness of the joint class A, B, C, and D or for the propriety of treating the four equations relating the four sets of spin - value products as simultaneous equations, one can only conclude that both of these matters stand in need of considerable clarification and that any philosophical claims which depend upon the conclusion reached in Stapp's proof are in jeopardy.

The form of argument in this presentation has emphasized several specific points: first, that the Asian values argument, as a challenge to the implementation of constitutional democracy, is exaggerated and fails to account for the richness of values discourse in the East Asian region - local values do not provide a justification for harsh authoritarian practices; second, that the cultural prerequisites arguments fail because they ignore the discursive processes for value development and they are tautological, excessively deterministic and ignore the importance of human agency it, therefore, makes little sense to take an entry test for constitutional democracy; third, the difficulties of importing Western communitarian ideas into an East Asian authoritarian environment without adequate liberal constitutional safeguards; fourth, the positive role of constitutionalism in constructing empowering conversations in modern democratic development and as a venue for values discourse; fifth, the importance, especially in a cross-cultural context, of indigenization of constitutionalism through local institutional embodiment; and sixth, the value of extending research focused on the positive engendering or enabling function of constitutionalism to the developmental context in general and East Asia in particular.

It was the basis of his argument for eloquent sermons as a counter-force to the malevolent uses of rhetoric: «While the faculty of eloquence, which is of great value in urging either evil or justice, is in itself indifferent, why should it not be obtained for the uses of the good in the service of truth if the evil usurp it for the winning of the perverse and vain causes in defense in iniquity and error?»

And there is certainly an argument to be made that, with as much as the students they're grading are paying in tuition, TAs produce way more value than they're paid for either way.

It's tough to make a compelling argument for a quarterback when his team finishes with the third - worst record in the league, but Rivers is still a talented quarterback with tremendous value to the spread.

It's the latter that's the most difficult to account for, to me... given scoring is round by round, cumulative effects would be the main argument for non-tiebreaker value to «generalship», but how do you pick a round to apply that value?

The argument about the value of a top 10 wide receiver can be made, but the need for a target for Mitchell Trubisky can not be.

If i recall exactly we had a whole argument over the valuation of Sterling, you refuted on numerous ocassions when i stated that Sterling would cost more than 35 million the point i made over 2 months ago and still make now and im sure most fans would agree is not that gnabry is better its just he is promising talent, and for the value City paid for Raheem (which is almost criminal considering Di Maria, cost PSG less) it would have been better to see Gnabry given a run out or sign someone actually worth 50 million

There is, however, a powerful economic argument for investing in families given the role they play in creating social and economic value.

There are a number of important arguments for why Scotland should remain part of the United Kingdom: the need to avoid further economic turbulence in already troubled times; the benefits of being a relatively large country with far - reaching international influence; and the long history and common values that we share with the Scots.

The values and institutions of mutualism have the potential to act as a vehicle for a new politics of the public interest after the financial crisis, or so the argument goes.

The same argument goes for aesthetic value too.