Example collocations logo

Argument in sentence

1858 examples of Argument in a sentence

The argument against a second referendum is that it would be deeply divisive, especially if it leads to a reversal of the first referendum.
If the Fed ran out of basis points, the argument went, it would still have plenty of tools at its disposal for supporting and guiding the real economy.
But I have never understood why many economists believe this implies we should skew our argument about trade in one particular direction.
The problem with this argument (if one can call it that) is that “the people” do not speak with one voice, nor do their pronouncements fall fully formed from the sky.
The new Greek government's argument that this is an unreasonable target fails to withstand scrutiny.
Their main argument was that the shortcomings of EU-level democratic practices required the German Bundestag to retain a substantial number of policy competences.
Chinarejects India’s argument that per-capita emission levels and historic contributions of greenhouse gases should form the objective criteria for carbon mitigation.
And asimilar argument can be heard from the Polish poet Czeslaw Milosz: “What ispoetry which does not save nations or peoples?
But this argument fails to address the relevant issue: poverty, social marginalization, and political disenfranchisement are the fertilizers extremist groups need to take root and grow.
The argument is simple: All economies have both borrowers and savers, and changes in the cost of borrowing (or the return to saving) affect them differently.
In fact, when one actually looks at the data, the holes in their argument quickly become apparent.
This, too, is a flawed argument, for it conflates Islam and Islamist terrorism.
Even more damning for the populists’ argument is that individuals who were born and raised in the EU, not immigrants, have been largely responsible for recent terrorist attacks in Europe.
The final common argument against immigration to the EU is economic.
The chief argument of those opposed to the bill is that marriage has always meant a lifelong union aimed at procreation and child-rearing.
A stronger argument, though not by much, is that the fiscal stimulus is boosting employment and production, but at too great a long-run cost because it has produced too large a boost in America's national debt.
If interest rates on US Treasury securities were high and rising rapidly as the debt grew, I would agree with this argument.
Every single Treasury auction, at which the market gobbles up huge new tranches of US Treasury debt at high prices, belies the argument that the economy has too much debt.
But the core of the argument comes in the first 400 pages, which is not an insurmountable challenge for the intellectually curious – particularly given that Parfit, in the best tradition of English-language philosophy, always strives for lucidity, never using obscure words where simple ones will do.
Each sentence is straightforward, the argument is clear, and Parfit often uses vivid examples to make his points.
One major argument against objectivism in ethics is that people disagree deeply about right and wrong, and this disagreement extends to philosophers who cannot be accused of being ignorant or confused.
Parfit’s response to this line of argument leads him to make a claim that is perhaps even bolder than his defense of objectivism in ethics.
This is the financial leg of the familiar “crowding out” argument.
But this argument – or set of arguments (there are different strands) – for fiscal austerity is invalid.
The other leg of the argument for reducing the national debt has to do with the “burden on future generations.”
Although governments have endlessly repeated this argument since the 2008 crash as a justification for fiscal tightening, the economist A. P. Lerner pointed out its fallacy years ago.
High pay in the banking sector, so the argument goes, rewards success but does not penalize failure.
The problem with this argument is that there is no evidence supporting the first crucial link in its logic.
Fourth, China should moderate its position that no foreign ship or aircraft may engage in surveillance or intelligence collection not only within its territorial waters, about which international law is clear, but within its entire EEZ, about which China’s argument is not at all strong.
Indeed, an energy tax would not only effectively counter the argument that Europeans are “free riders” when it comes to defense; it would be tantamount to defense leadership.
BackNext