Benefits
in sentence
4904 examples of Benefits in a sentence
The
benefits
of this will more than compensate for the economic costs of enlargement.
Administered over a short duration, it can be a powerful antidote; but, used repeatedly over too long a period, the side effects can outstrip the
benefits.
Structural reforms imply the need to pay short-term costs for longer-term
benefits.
It is not that raising poor people’s standard of living above bare subsistence produces Malthusian catastrophe, or that taxes and withdrawal of welfare
benefits
make people work, at the margin, for nothing.
In fact, it would be a tough sell for any candidate to convince Americans who receive government
benefits
that they are dependent rather than empowered; that it is bad for people to vote for politicians who make their lives better; and that good public policy seeks to create human catastrophe rather than to avert it.
Politics complicates matters further, because the exclusively short-term focus on the fiscal impact of spending and revenues clashes with policies whose
benefits
accumulate over time.
While such
benefits
may not appear to be “stimulus,” their mounting effect better serves the objective of raising expectations of future demand and growth.
And, done properly, federally funded infrastructure projects should provide substantial
benefits
to lower-income Americans.
Because the payoffs from infrastructure spending and tax reform do not fit neatly within the five-year or ten-year budget window used by America’s fiscal scorekeepers, measuring more completely the
benefits
from such policies is vital to attracting political support.
For example, future growth in Social Security
benefits
or the home-mortgage-interest tax deduction could be scaled back for more affluent individuals, as progressive indexation, proposed by conservatives in the US, and the adjustment of mortgage-interest tax deductions in the United Kingdom, started during the Thatcher administration, attest.
So who will now counsel Obama that piling on additional deficits and debt to fund a vast expansion of spending is bad economics, that the costs are likely to far outweigh the benefits, and that raising taxes will do permanent long-term damage to the economy?
In addition, though studies suggest that the short-term economic
benefits
of immigration are relatively small, and that unskilled workers may suffer from competition, skilled immigrants can be important to particular sectors – and to long-term growth.
Equally important are immigration’s
benefits
for America’s soft power.
Indeed, we should not forget the infinite spiritual and recreational
benefits
that the natural world provides to people and cultures everywhere.
Committing the political will, and a small fraction of the world’s financial resources, to biodiversity conservation – and the scientific research that underpins it – would bring indispensable long-term benefits, including a healthy planet for our children.
But the cost of preserving the world’s biodiversity needs to be contrasted with the enormous economic and social value of forests in terms of the
benefits
that they provide locally and globally.
Whether to combat climate change or to realize wider environmental benefits, the need for enhanced financing of forests can no longer be ignored.
The 1990s was the era of neoliberalism, an economic worldview that wrongly assumed that the
benefits
of economic growth would trickle down to those at the bottom; government should embrace austerity and do little more than let markets work.
But just when they were supposed to be reaping the
benefits
of their hard work, the East Asian crisis of July 1997 caused commodity prices to collapse, which forced Russia into default in August 1998 and shut down all emerging markets through financial contagion.
And it
benefits
healthy people, too.
According to an older studyby the Canadian economist John Whalley, the disadvantages of agricultural protectionism for developing countries outweigh the
benefits
of development aid.
The central weakness of democratic systems also contributes to the problem: The quest for votes favors the extension of social
benefits
and discourages unpopular measures that would put the economy on a more sustainable footing.
The vendetta against independent groups with foreign ties brings Russia no
benefits
and damages its international reputation.
Despite some legitimate concerns about safety, it is hard to overstate the overwhelming
benefits.
Meanwhile, the fracking bonanza in the US not only delivers a much greater reduction for free, but also creates long-term social
benefits
through lower energy costs.
Poor-quality basic education prevents students from reaping the
benefits
of subsequent education and skills training.
And, away from the din of their ranting politicians, what Russians, as much as Americans or Chinese, probably want most is a peaceful, predictable international order that allows them to provide for their families and enjoy the
benefits
of a golden age of global commerce and technology.
But, when given the opportunity to learn and thrive, girls seize it, eager to pursue their dreams and lift up their communities – and that
benefits
everyone.
They also highlight the knock-on
benefits
that taking quick action on climate change could have, including reduction of local pollution, greater energy and food security, and faster innovation.
Yes, there are costs to free trade that must be better addressed; but the costs are vastly outweighed by the
benefits.
Back
Next
Related words
Would
Economic
Costs
Their
Which
Countries
Social
Other
Could
While
People
Growth
Trade
Should
There
Health
About
Global
World
Unemployment
