Example collocations logo

Households in sentence

1591 examples of Households in a sentence

Looking ahead, advanced countries will continue to struggle with the fallout of the 2008 crisis, especially with the deleveraging of indebted households and dire public finances.
As a result, the exchange-rate risk was passed on to those least able to manage it: households.
Even though 10% of US households with mortgages had already lost their homes, the pace of foreclosures appeared to be increasing – or would have, were it not for legal snafus that raised doubts about America’s vaunted “rule of law.”
Rural populations are growing because poor farm households choose to have many children, who work as farmhands and serve as social security for their parents.
Food yields per acre (or hectare) are inadequate because impoverished farm households lack some or all of the four inputs needed for modern and productive agriculture: soil-nutrient replenishment (through organic and chemical fertilizers), irrigation or other water-management techniques, improved seed varieties, and sound agricultural advice.
First, rural households would be encouraged to have fewer children, and to invest more in each child’s health and education.
This redistribution, channeling net public resources toward lower-income households, is a sensible correction to the market economy, a kind of insurance against life’s vicissitudes and the rigors of scarcity pricing that characterize the market economy and have little to do with equitableness.
It includes developing the services sector, funding the social safety net, liberalizing an antiquated residential-permit system (hukou), reforming state-owned enterprises, and ending financial repression on households by lifting artificially low interest rates on savings.
Several other countries in Central and Eastern Europe, such as Hungary, Ukraine, and the Baltic states, were also living dangerously, with large current-account deficits and firms and households running up huge debts in foreign currency.
As a result, the net worth of American households rose by $10 trillion in 2013, leading to increases in consumer spending and business investment.
On the contrary, financial and economic insecurity has gripped Chinese households since the “iron rice bowl” – the cradle-to-grave support that the socialist state offered workers and their families – was discarded in the late 1990’s.
Fearing for the future, households have hoarded incremental income, rather than spending it on consumer goods.
The rewards of such initiatives could be substantial – for households, financial-services providers, economies, and the environment.
First, falling labor income implies falling consumption for households, which have already been hard hit by a massive loss of wealth (as the value of equities and homes has fallen) and a sharp rise in their debt ratios.
A recent study by Michael Lokshin and Ruslan Yemtsov from the World Bank, “Who Bears the Cost of the Russian Military Draft,” indicates that the burden of conscription falls disproportionately on poor, low-educated, and rural households.
Among the richest households, the probability of being drafted is only 3%; among the poorest, it is 20%.
In other words, conscription operates as a large in-kind tax on the poorest households, thereby sustaining and increasing Russia’s already high inequality.
Meanwhile, Chinese young people and low-income households worry about high and rising home prices, job insecurity, and the fast-growing market power of a few tech giants squeezing small and medium-size enterprises.
Asset prices fell, households began a lengthy process of deleveraging, savings rose, and government – faced with falling revenues and rising expenditures on unemployment insurance – could not make up the difference.
Households, corporations, financial institutions, and governments are all facing balance-sheet constraints, which it seems plausible to assume, are holding back expenditure and investment, elevating savings, and contributing to a broadly deflationary environment.
Because this tax cut will take the form of lower withholding from weekly or monthly wages, it may seem more permanent than it really is, and therefore have a greater impact on spending than households’ very feeble response to the previous temporary tax changes.
In addition, the Fed hopes that lower long-term interest rates will push up asset prices, giving households more wealth and greater incentive to spend.
And US households seem wary of splurging again as they did in the past, no matter how wealthy they feel.
These countries, in turn, could argue that even very poor US households are much better off than the average emerging-market household.
New research for Copenhagen Consensus reveals that the full cost of piping water to a household is as high as $80 per month – more than most households in rich countries pay and far beyond the means of most families in developing countries.
National savings amounted to roughly 50% of GDP in 2005, which apparently means that households are so afraid of hospital bills, school fees, and the down-payment on the new apartment they dream of that they save every penny they earn.
Chinese households do save a lot, about one quarter of their income.
But as Louis Kuijs of the World Bank has pointed out, what sets China apart from many other developing countries is not that households save uniquely high levels of their income, but that enterprises do.
This means that getting Chinese households to spend more is not a hopeless mission.
According to a recent survey by the People’s Bank (the central bank), households in the ten largest cities spend about 35% of their monthly income on average on mortgage repayments, which is comparable to other countries.
BackNext