Example collocations logo

Economists in sentence

2720 examples of Economists in a sentence

But most knowledgeable economists would attribute the dollar’s appreciation to rising interest rates.
Politicians and economists have been stoking fears among German citizens about the massive costs of the influx of refugees, which has intensified the struggle over high and rising levels of inequality in wealth and wages.
Economists have long known that trade liberalization causes income redistribution and absolute losses for some groups, even as it enlarges a country’s overall economic pie.
The politics of compensation is always subject to a problem that economists call “time inconsistency.”
The European Union and American economists in the Clinton administration argued for passage of the Kyoto Treaty only by creating models for something that wasn’t the Kyoto Treaty.
Overdosing on Heterodoxy Can Kill YouCAMBRIDGE – Ever since the 2008 financial crisis, it has been common to chastise economists for not having predicted the disaster, for having offered the wrong prescriptions to prevent it, or for having failed to fix it after it happened.
The economists Ken Rogoff and Carmen Reinhart estimate that public debt/GDP ratios of 90% are associated with sharply diminished growth prospects.
Instead, it pulled together a diverse staff of smart young management consultants, activists living with HIV and AIDS, committed outreach workers with extensive public-health experience, and economists and lawyers who had helped to force the prices of medicines down in drug-company lawsuits.
Although these positive effects might be substantial, few professional economists see them as sufficient to motivate the abolition of today’s exchange rate system.
Most economists point out that Europe is not an optimal currency area.
Furthermore, economists now understand inflation as a rise in consumer prices, not as a decline in the value of money resulting from an excessive increase in the money supply.
An apparent paradox emerged from the discussion: the boom in popular economics comes at a time when the general public seems to have lost faith in professional economists, because almost all of us failed to predict, or even warn of, the current economic crisis, the biggest since the Great Depression.
So, why is the public buying more books by professional economists?
The panelists all said, in one way or another, that popular economics facilitates an exchange between specialized economists and the broader public – a dialogue that has never been more important.
After all, most economists did not see this crisis coming in part because they had removed themselves from what real-world people were doing and thinking.
That, of course, means that economists must be willing to include new and original theories that are not yet received doctrine among professional specialists.
Until recently, many professional economists would be reluctant to write a popular book.
In the decades prior to the current financial crisis, economists gradually came to view themselves and their profession in the same way, encouraged by research trends.
The relatively few professional economists who warned of the current crisis were people, it seems, who not only read the scholarly economics literature, but also brought into play more personal judgment: intuitive comparisons with past historical episodes; conclusions about speculative trading, price bubbles, and the stability of confidence; evaluations of the moral purposes of economic actors; and impressions that complacency had set in, lulling watchdogs to sleep.
These were judgments made by economists who were familiar with our business leadership – their inspirations, beliefs, subterfuges, and rationalizations.
Economists’ estimates range from $1.23 billion a year (to save trees in Latin America’s biodiversity “hot spots”) to $5.8 billion a year (to save 2% of the continent’s land area) to $500 billion (making a one-off payment to save all of Latin America’s forests).
Economists who blithely assume that pre-2008 automobile sales are “normal,” because Americans “need” their cars, misunderstand the nature of the automobile market.
Its University of Chicago-trained economists argue that attracting private investment into primary lithium production is all that matters, and that fostering local industries that rely on lithium as an input is not a public-policy goal.
At the height of the eurozone crisis, the IMF, the EC, and the ECB (not to mention financial markets) warmly welcomed the economists Mario Monti and Lucas Papademos as highly respected “technocratic” prime ministers for Italy and Greece, respectively.
The differences in the two countries’ growth patterns are striking, and raise significant questions for development economists.
Some may be surprised that a central bank governor is interested in technological innovation, and even more that economists at the Fed are studying the impact of computers on economic growth (their research on this subject, indeed, may be found on the Fed's internet site: www.bog.frb.fed.us).
The research conducted so far by Fed economists shows that a long time has also been needed for the impact of computers to be felt in measurable improvements in productivity for the entire American economy.
Indeed, so long was this lag that some economists and business leaders came to have doubts about whether information technology would have any effect on productivity.
Some economists argue that there is little power in relationships where buyers and sellers consent to a price that clears a market.
What is disturbing is the way in which some trade economists in Geneva and in Washington have capitulated to such propaganda, and regard capitulation by the WTO as a way to “salvage” and reshape the organization.
BackNext