Sentences with phrase «what economists»

What you're not able to do because you do something else is what economists call an opportunity cost.

The second argument is that the HECM program generates what economists term «positive externalities,» which are benefits to society that are not enjoyed by the private firms involved in the activity.

When housing prices skyrocketed last year, they entered what economists like to call a housing bubble, in which prices rise based on demand, which is great for home sellers.

Here is what economists and bank executives had to say about which real estate sectors will enjoy a resurgence in the coming year, which mistakes investors should be wary of and how to stay ahead of the market in 2016...

And that is why it is important you attend tonight's webinar — to see the real picture, based on our objective analysis... not what economists and mainstream media feed you.

Also, we lost over 250k in cash during the perfect storm of the depression (I don't care what economists say, we are in depression that is currently experiencing an artificial bubble), my illness and hospitalizations and expensive treatments, combined with devaluation of real estate we had 50 % equity in, and a partner would had no interest in the financial operations of the business had us right on the edge of bankruptcy.

«Housing is what economists call a «normal good,» so when incomes rise, households tend to spend more on housing, which pushes up prices,» writes McLaughlin.

But this thinking ignores just how much these choices are beset by what economists call negative externalities.

This is more than 100,000 shy of what economists had expected.

Legal services, and in fact many professional services, are what economists call «credence goods.»

According to a report by the important - sounding Wold Economic Forum (pdf), the years leading up to 2020 will be marked by disruption to existing business models and what economists euphemistically call «churn.»

We have enough problem in society today because the Keynesians have adopted the same aggregations and therefore nonsense as have natural scientists, and look what these economists have done to our economy by misapplication of principles that any philosopher should be able to discredit.

Climate change is what economists call a global commons problem.

All of this is naturally unsatisfying and not what economists are used to doing, but in rare situations like climate change where DT [Dismal Theorem: price of future consumption, E [M λ] for λ, the lower bound on consumption, large] applies we may be deluding ourselves and others with misplaced concreteness if we think that we are able to deliver anything much more precise than this with even the biggest and most detailed climate - change IAMs as currently constructed and deployed.

The interesting, central finding of the theory paper is that when a «fortune» (available resources) fall below a certain critical level (determined by the cost per unit time of surviving, and the stochastic return investments available to the investor), the optimal policy becomes what economists call a «risk - seeking» one, where the investor should place relatively large bets on relatively high payoff, low probability of payoff gambles.

«It is not as large as some imagine because electricity is what economists call inelastic,» he said.

I only understand a very small part of what the economists are doing, but I fear there is unintentional bias and cherry picking of the impacts that have the highest damages.

The revised statement is more sensible, but I would suggest you critically examine your concept of «distorting markets» particularly as regards what economists term «unowned resources,» such as a breathable atmosphere, fields or forests held in common (as in the original «Tragedy of the Commons»), stocks of fish in the ocean, or drinking water from lakes and rivers.

This new book takes an in - depth look at one pervasive barrier: split incentives — or what economists call «principal - agent» problems — between investors and energy end - users.

What economists recommend (listen up Nancy) is a revenue - neutral carbon tax — one that raises no money for subsidies.

That is what economists (the good ones) do... look at the positive economics («that what is» not «that which ought to be»).

Let's not lose track of the basic point: The «economic contamination» of the temperature record is a crock, no matter what economists and business section editors think.

If readers of this blog can be optimistic of something, it would not necessarily be the fact that the trading of emission rights can bring about what economists dub a «pareto efficient» allocation of emission reductions, a result that rests largely on the theoretical assumption that transaction costs are nil or negligible.

He offered one of the first university courses on The Economics of the Environment, and in 1996 he wrote a scathing critique of benefit — cost analysis that argued that «the foundation of benefit - cost analysis is flawed: the tool can not provide what some economists claim.

I'm going to reach out to historians and others focused on the factors driving environmental cleanups in the past to see if there's any evidence that today's polluting nations can somehow accelerate their journey along what some economists call the «Environmental Kuznets Curve,» a pattern described well in 2003 by David I. Stern, an economist at Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute:

The world as it is in 2008 is simply not sustainable, despite what economists argue.

After the GFC, I doubt anyone cares what economists think.

What's revealed vividly, of course, is that political fights over cutting those programs are not only threatening many worthy — and modest — efforts, but distracting the public completely from what economists of many stripes say is one of the core challenges attending living within our means.

I admit this is NOT what economists would judge to be an efficient solution.

The growth of multiplayer gaming, in which players converge online to compete against one another, makes big games bigger through the benefit of what economists call the network effect, analysts and game executives say.

«We only did what the economists suggested would bring prosperity.

He said this of his results: «Traditionally, economists have had the underlying view that people are hyper - rational and are trying to maximize their happiness (what economists call utility).

U.S. unemployment is below 5 % and approaching what economists would consider «full employment.»

What economists call the «equity premium» — the extra return that investors demand to compensate for the risk of holding stocks — has never since been so high.

It's what economists refer to as opportunity cost.

You shouldn't in individual stocks, sector funds or country funds because they contain idiosyncratic risks that can be easily diversified away and thus are what economists called uncompensated risks.

which examines what economists call «opportunity cost» - in other words, could you get better use or pleasure out of the same cash buying something else?

One thing that might warrant some consideration is the extent to which market participants recognize and properly account for what economists call «externalities».

This is what economists call opportunity cost.

From this perspective, it should be clear that the bounce we've seen in housing is not a sign of economic recovery, but is instead a sign of misallocation of capital due to what economists would generally call a «market failure.»

It's called What Economists Say About Shiller's Nobel Prize.

The U.S. Labor Department said that 131,000 jobs were lost in July, more than double what economists had expected.

That comment is one of the clearest articulations you will ever read of what economists call «moral hazard,» a situation where one party takes part in a risky transaction because he or she knows his or her losses will be covered by someone else.

By focusing on investments that reward you in good times and bad, you can rest easy, regardless of what the economists are saying.

«If we look at what economists are saying, look at what folks who are trying to buy a home are saying, it's really gotten to the point where it is out of control and we need to do something.»

OTTAWA — The Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development forecasts that the Bank of Canada will begin hiking its key interest rate in May 2015 — months ahead of what economists have been predicting.

Canada's economy expanded at a 1.8 per cent annual pace during the last quarter, the same growth seen at the start of the year and slightly better than what economists were expecting.

«The country is entering what economists call full employment,» says Phil Soper, CEO of Royal LePage.

If you listen to what economists are saying these days, then the Unites States is no longer the much - vaunted land of opportunity that Americans boast — and hasn't been for several years now, reports The Huffington Post.

No matter what economists say, we're still grappling with an economic slump and it's not that tasteful to be rolling in a brand - new $ 100k + sedan.