Example collocations logo

Infrastructure in sentence

4036 examples of Infrastructure in a sentence

Cutting them would not only remove perverse incentives; it would also free up money for education, universal health care, and infrastructure in rural areas, where it is needed to create income opportunities.
Soviet resources, in terms both of infrastructure and ideology, are exhausted.
The East had feared that it could not gain from trade with the West, which had superior infrastructure and human capital; now, the West had come to fear that it would lose from trade with the East, which had abundant, cheap labor.
But greater Asian unity may be arising by the backdoor, in the form of new and impressive infrastructure links.
Today’s efforts to expand regional infrastructure projects are all the more remarkable for linking even countries locked in diplomatic, and sometimes open, conflict.
Then there is the Bay of Bengal, where Chinese infrastructure investment is set to transform the backward Myanmar seaside town of Kyaukpyu and the surrounding region by tapping offshore gas fields and constructing a pipeline to Yunnan Province in southern China.
Of course, China is not investing in such infrastructure out of altruism.
Japan, not wishing to be left out of the great infrastructure game in Myanmar, is investing billions in port reconstruction.
These infrastructure investments clearly hold the potential to bind Asia closer together than ever before.
The question is whether Asia’s infrastructure investments, particularly those by China, will be used to create Asian satellites of the Middle Kingdom, or become tools to be used among equals.
It will not matter that the infrastructure may not have been built solely for that purpose if Asia’s leaders keep their eyes on prosperity, rather than only on power.
Given that the German economy’s output gap remains negative, the government should be implementing expansionary fiscal policy that targets the country’s infrastructure weaknesses.
Public infrastructure investment can serve as the engine of that growth, boosting both short-term demand and long-term potential output.
In this manner, increased infrastructure spending would address the issue of long-term growth, too.
The National People’s Congress has discussed using a portion of China’s foreign-exchange reserves to finance infrastructure projects in developing countries.
India, for example, is saving and investing well over 30% of its GDP, devoting a significant share of these resources to infrastructure.
While market-oriented reforms are necessary, government has a key role to play in providing a social safety net for the poor; maintaining high-quality public services; investing in education, training, health care, infrastructure, and innovation; enforcing competition policies that constrain the power of economic and financial oligopolies; and ensuring genuine equality of opportunity for all.
There were some – Frédéric Bastiat and Jean-Baptiste Say come to mind – who believed that government should put the unemployed to work building infrastructure when markets or production were temporarily disrupted.
But only two policies are particularly promising for such a “Pact for America”: federal infrastructure spending and corporate-tax reform.
Federal infrastructure spending and corporate-tax reform should top the list of policies capable of attracting bipartisan agreement, because they promise significant long-term productivity, income, and employment gains, while also supporting short-term growth.
To that end, an infrastructure program should give states and localities a key role in selecting the projects to be funded, and these governmental units should have “skin in the game” by funding part of the costs.
An infrastructure program oriented in this way – as opposed to a grab bag of politically expedient shovel-ready projects – should be able to muster conservative support.
And, done properly, federally funded infrastructure projects should provide substantial benefits to lower-income Americans.
Better transport infrastructure, for example, would not only create jobs, but would also reduce the costs of commuting to work.
Given their policy objectives, conservatives should support a well-crafted federal infrastructure program, and liberals should support corporate-tax reform.
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.
Moreover, any increase in spending on infrastructure or any revenue loss from tax reform should be offset elsewhere.
Instead, many successful initiatives, built upon existing social infrastructure, solve known health problems and even uncover new issues.
Moreover, these new entrants should have access to the costly data and financial infrastructure of traditional health-care systems.
To be sure, the promise of traditional health care will always be compelling as long as technological progress continues to enhance health infrastructure and service delivery.
BackNext