Example collocations logo

Economists in sentence

2720 examples of Economists in a sentence

Because, any future planning, if 2048 is when we want to get there, unless the arts are put with the scientists, with the economists, with all those who prepare for the future, badly, we're not going to get there.
I mean, it sometimes feels, listening to behavioral economists that they are kind of putting into place academically, what great marketers have sort of intuitively known for a long time.
You may have heard, this last fall Nicolas Sarkozy in France announcing the results of an 18-month study by two Nobel economists, focusing on happiness and wellness in France.
I learned that economists measure everything in tangible units of production and consumption as if each of those tangible units is exactly the same.
The more surprising thing was that when we collaborated with economists to actually look at the monkeys' data using economic tools, they basically matched, not just qualitatively, but quantitatively with what we saw humans doing in a real market.
And this leads to the second bias, which economists have called loss aversion.
Second, what economists call "opportunity costs."
This is what economists call a "Pareto-improving move."
The research that my laboratory has been doing, that economists and psychologists around the country have been doing, has revealed something really quite startling to us, something we call the "impact bias," which is the tendency for the simulator to work badly, for the simulator to make you believe that different outcomes are more different than, in fact, they really are.
First of all, economists aren't supposed to be inspiring, so you may need to work on the tone a little.
You know, these economists, they love money, they want more and more of it, they want it to grow.
Economists call these effects complementarities, but really that's just a fancy word to capture the different way that technological progress helps human beings.
Well, these are all tasks that until very recently, leading economists thought couldn't readily be automated.
Now, this wasn't simply a case of bad luck on the part of economists.
When these economists were trying to figure out what tasks machines could not do, they imagined the only way to automate a task was to sit down with a human being, get them to explain to you how it was they performed a task, and then try and capture that explanation in a set of instructions for a machine to follow.
He published it in the form of two floppy disks, at a time where floppy disks genuinely were floppy, and his approach was the same as the economists': sit down with a lawyer, get her to explain to you how it was she solved a legal problem, and then try and capture that explanation in a set of rules for a machine to follow.
As other economists have noted, solving this problem won't be easy.
Behavioral economists call this hyperbolic discounting.
Then it used a wide range of new policy tools --- international trade agreements, innovations in constitutional law and structural adjustment programs --- to hand control of those power centres to supposedly impartial experts, economists and officials from the IMF, the World Bank, the GATT and the National Party --- anyone except the liberation fighters from the ANC."
It includes comments by eminent economists only to mock them.
All are ignorant amateurs who reject the scientific consensus (in this case, of professional economists regardless of political leanings) because it conflicts with their ideologically created world view.
And even as the Fund opposed them, prominent economists – among them Paul Krugman – endorsed their use.
But, even today, economists can provide no clear explanation of why the private sector could not find ways to employ the long-term unemployed in the near-decade from the winter of 1933 to full war mobilization.
Whereas staff economists from the Federal Reserve System brought differing perspectives to the monetary-policy debate, their Canadian counterparts seemed to subscribe to a single “Bank of Canada view.”
The results of the Washington Consensus reforms were at best controversial, and some economists have even described the 1980’s and 1990’s as “lost decades” in many developing countries.
Some economists argue that, unlike past recoveries, when workers who were temporarily laid off were rehired, job losses starting in 1991 were more permanent.
In the last few months, enthusiasm about these countries’ post-2008 economic resilience and growth potential has given way to bleak forecasts, with economists like Ricardo Hausmann declaring that “the emerging-market party” is coming to an end.
In 1972, two economists, William Nordhaus and James Tobin, introduced a measure that they called “Net Economic Welfare,” obtained by deducting from GNP “bad” outputs, like pollution, and adding non-market activities, like leisure.
How one combines quantity and quality in some index of “life satisfaction” is a matter of morals rather than economics, so it is not surprising that most economists stick to their quantitative measures of “welfare.”
That lesson has been lost on most economists today, but not on the king of Bhutan – or on the many people who have come to recognize the limits of quantifiable wealth.
BackNext