Example collocations logo

Argument in sentence

1858 examples of Argument in a sentence

In fact, with Remainers accepting the argument that Britain should keep Europeans out, the UK – or at least England and Wales, if pro-EU Scotland and Northern Ireland leave – is headed for a “hard” Brexit, not just from the Union, but from Europe’s single market.
But his argument that China plays by different economic rules than everyone else is not far from the truth.
This argument clearly is no longer tenable.
And in a case brought by fourteen foreign nationals, the court cast aside the government's argument that because the U.S. Naval Base at Guantanamo Bay is nominally under Cuban sovereignty, American courts lack jurisdiction to entertain legal claims brought by persons who had no say in where the U.S. military chose to detain them.
It was also the argument William Jennings Bryan made during his 1896 presidential campaign, when he promised easier money to his core constituency: Midwestern farmers who had been hit hard by high interest rates and declining commodity prices.
And it was the argument made by supply-siders who opposed US Federal Reserve Chair Paul Volcker’s high-interest-rate policy in the early 1980s – an argument that spurred President Ronald Reagan to appoint two Fed governors to challenge Volcker in 1985.
What makes Piketty’s argument so special is his insistence on a fundamental trend stemming from the very nature of capitalist growth.
It is an argument much in the tradition of the great economists of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.
A second argument is that “we do not know enough about the effects and side effects.”
Since some of the groups opposing GM organisms destroy the field trials that could give us more knowledge, a more pertinent argument might be that many opponents do not want us to know more.
It is difficult to deny the appealing simplicity of this argument.
First, most references to Friedman’s argument overlook his recognition of constraints on business behavior.
The argument here is that if you increase the quantity of labor, its price (wages) falls.
A recent study by Cambridge University economist Robert Rowthorn, however, has shown that this argument is full of holes.
A second economic argument is that immigration will rejuvenate the labor force and stabilize public finances, because young, imported workers will generate the taxes required to support a rising number of pensioners.
Rowthorn dismisses this argument.
For starters, although much has been made of the argument that the EU is too far removed from its citizens, opinion polls have shown consistently that public trust in the major European institutions remains higher than trust in national institutions.
It is difficult, however, to see how this argument applies to the US, whose universities remain world leaders, attracting graduate students in science and engineering from around the world – many of whom remain in the country.
As a permanent member of the Security Council, Russia thus has an obligation to act; it (and China) can no longer hide behind the argument that the UN should not be engaged in Syria’s internal affairs.
There is little evidence to support the anti-Europeans' argument that EU regulations hobble British trade outside of Europe; on the contrary, substantial extra-EU trade and investment opportunities would be lost were Britain to leave.
Though economic statistics must be part of the argument for Europe, such data will not convince those who fear that Britain is becoming a foreign country.
Even though some, such as the British, wished to give the Union as little power as possible, the force of the argument was with those who pressed for political integration alongside economic integration.
The argument for a measured deficit-reduction program is to buy time for the structural shifts that will expand accessible external demand and fill in the gap in aggregate demand.
Economists are fond of observing that the argument for counter-measures against protectionism abroad is like saying: “If you shoot yourself in the foot, I will do the same.”
Of course, all seducers of the masses, potential tyrants or fanatics, have used this argument to make their case; the communists did the same when they declared themselves the most enlightened sector of the population and, by virtue of this alleged enlightenment, arrogated to themselves the right to rule arbitrarily.
Nowadays, some economists seem to believe that pointing out a single factual error (out of more than 20 statements of fact) invalidates an entire argument.
This brings me back to the argument that the US must put its house in order – economically, physically, socially, and politically – if it is to have the resources needed to promote order in the world.
The Debate About Debating IslamPARIS – The argument began when the Algerian novelist and journalist Kamel Daoud wrote an article for the Italian newspaper La Repubblica about a spate of sexual assaults in Cologne, Germany, on New Year’s Eve, 2015.
To be sure, it is understandable that academics might question Daoud’s approach; his argument was based on a strain of “essentialism,” in which individual actions are reduced to cultural and religious forces, with no attention to the social, political, and economic conditions that might be at work.
Even at first sight, the argument, often made by anti-immigrant politicians, that refugees and migrants are coming to European countries to exploit their social-welfare programs, seems odd.
BackNext