Example collocations logo

Costs in sentence

5705 examples of Costs in a sentence

The Fund’s shareholders would have to agree to incur those costs.
But potentially significant costs offset these small benefits.
Yes, the ESM benefits from low borrowing costs, which are essentially passed on to borrowing countries.
With austerity, imports have crashed everywhere in the periphery, while exports – helped by falling labor costs – are increasing (except in Greece).
Austerity always involves huge social costs; but it is unavoidable when a country has lived beyond its means and lost its foreign creditors’ confidence.
It is also a non-static concept, as estimates of reserves will generally be revised upwards or downwards as additional geologic or engineering data become available, as technology improves, and/or as economic conditions (such as oil prices and production costs) change.
The failure to distinguish clearly between resources and reserves – and to recognize the importance of prices, costs, and technology in transforming resources into reserves – results in bad predictions about an imminent peak in oil production and misinformation that has had a negative impact on policymaking.
But, in the long term, the challenge is how to make the transition to a new and sustainable energy path, and to evaluate the political, economic, social and climate costs associated with this transition.
Since Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher first demanded to have “her money back” in 1979, the budgetary costs of EU membership have completely overshadowed its economic benefits in the public’s view.
Yet they have not simplified the debate on the costs and benefits of Brexit.
While almost half of Africa's 53 countries could profitably produce hydropower, only 7% of this potential is reached because of poor infrastructure and the high costs of initial investments.
Such reforms have the potential of benefiting consumers by lowering costs and improving the reliability and quality of services.
No doubt quite a few of them would have trouble paying the astronomical costs of American health-care bills without government assistance.
An enlightened strategy must encourage China to “grow green,” as opposed to growing rapidly now and facing massive environmental costs later.
Shortly before the current Iraq war, when Bush administration economist Larry Lindsey suggested that the costs might range between $100 and $200 billion, other officials quickly demurred.
Concerned that the Bush administration might be misleading everyone about the Iraq war’s costs, just as it had about Iraq’s weapons of mass destruction and connection with Al Qaida, I teamed up with Linda Bilmes, a budget expert at Harvard, to examine the issue.
Its estimate falls so far short because the reported numbers do not even include the full budgetary costs to the government.
And the budgetary costs are but a fraction of the costs to the economy as a whole.
So it is no surprise that its figure of $500 billion ignores the lifetime disability and healthcare costs that the government will have to pay for years to come.
The result is large re-enlistment bonuses, improved benefits, and higher recruiting costs – up 20% just from 2003 to 2005.
These budgetary costs (exclusive of interest) amount to $652 billion in our conservative estimate and $799 billion in our moderate estimate.
Arguably, since the government has not reined in other expenditures or increased taxes, the expenditures have been debt financed, and the interest costs on this debt add another $98 billion (conservative) to $385 billion (moderate) to the budgetary costs.
Of course, the brunt of the costs of injury and death is borne by soldiers and their families.
But the costs don’t stop there.
There are a number of other costs, some potentially quite large, although quantifying them is problematic.
That Americans are willing to pay this suggests that the option value exceeds the costs.
And our estimate does not include any of the costs implied by the enormous loss of life and property in Iraq itself.
We do not attempt to explain whether the American people were deliberately misled regarding the war’s costs, or whether the Bush administration’s gross underestimate should be attributed to incompetence, as it vehemently argues is true in the case of weapons of mass destruction.
Recent evidence that deaths and injuries would have been greatly reduced had better body armor been provided to troops suggests how short-run frugality can lead to long-run costs.
The Iraq war was an immense “project,” yet it now appears that the analysis of its benefits was greatly flawed and that of its costs virtually absent.
BackNext