Example collocations logo

Property in sentence

1809 examples of Property in a sentence

Terrible destruction -- in thousands of lives, and billions of dollars of property in very poor economies -- would be bad enough without another sneaking suspicion: that the rich countries may be inadvertent factors in the severity of recent events.
Trump denounced China for “taking our jobs,” and “[stealing] hundreds of billions of dollars in our intellectual property.”
The US has some legitimate economic grievances against China – for example, over its treatment of American intellectual property and US beef and grain exports.
Indeed, the European project should start from the premise that appropriate institutions, property rights, and competition, together with a growth-friendly tax system and solid fiscal policies, are the basis of economic success.
The expenses and pressure of the dowry system, and the fact that, in most joint families, only sons inherit property and wealth, contribute to this favoritism.
Daughters, who live with their in-laws after they marry, are viewed as amanat – someone else’s property.
Culturally, she feels that she does not have an equal claim on her father’s property.
The property boom in the London area demands tighter monetary conditions.
Top priorities should include establishing the rule of law, particularly the creation of a strong, independent judicial system that can protect property rights adequately.
Advocates of such agreements claim that they are needed to protect property rights.
But countries like South Africa already have strong constitutional guarantees of property rights.
There is no reason that foreign-owned property should be better protected than property owned by a country’s own citizens.
Moreover, if constitutional guarantees are not enough to convince investors of South Africa’s commitment to protecting property rights, foreigners can always avail themselves of expropriation insurance provided by the Multilateral Investment Guarantee Agency (a division of the World Bank) or numerous national organizations providing such insurance.
But those supporting the investment agreements are not really concerned about protecting property rights, anyway.
But if China wants a dynamic innovation system, it should resist pressure by Western governments to adopt the kind of unbalanced intellectual property laws that are being demanded.
Instead, it should pursue a “balanced” intellectual property regime: because knowledge itself is the most important input in the production of knowledge, a badly designed intellectual property regime can stifle innovation – as has been the case in America in some areas.
But it is important to have an innovation system (including an intellectual property regime) that ensures that advances in knowledge are widely used.
That may require innovative approaches, quite different from intellectual property regimes based on privatization and monopolization of knowledge, with the high prices and restricted benefits that follow.
In some cases, funding can be found without raising taxes: governments can create revenue streams by instituting user charges, capturing increases in property value, or selling existing assets and recycling the proceeds.
After firing an opening salvo of steep tariffs on steel and aluminum, the US administration has released a plan for a 25% tariff on 1,333 Chinese imports – worth about $50 billion last year – to punish China for what it views as decades of intellectual property theft.
For starters, systemically important but not sufficiently open countries – beginning with China – should liberalize their economies more rapidly (particularly by reducing non-tariff barriers) and adhere to internationally accepted norms on intellectual property.
In the past, the overriding mission was national development, and the policy instruments were mercantilist: the appropriation of available intellectual property, and the protection and subsidization of select infant industries in order to achieve global competitiveness.
Stripping property and other rights from the state will not necessarily allow the former socialist economies to develop efficiently.
It is important for people to recognize that much of what they tend to blame on markets is due to the fact that the double-edged state is too dull to play its protective role for private economic activity, but too sharp in allowing the old nomenklatura and its cronies to carve up state property, often the law itself, in order to enjoy predatory profits.
Examples of this type of insulated economic decisionmaking are independent central banks or currency boards charged with the duty of keeping inflation low; courts that protect private property; and securities and exchange commissions responsibile for preserving the integrity of financial markets.
In both of the Tanzanian cases, local courts ruled that the property the woman had shared with her husband, including items that had been purchased with proceeds from her labor, should go to her brother-in-law.
“The right of women to own, manage, enjoy, and dispose of property,” the committee ruled, “is central to their financial independence and may be critical to their ability to earn a livelihood and to provide adequate housing and nutrition for themselves and for their children.”
Research shows that women’s rights to own and inherit property, including land, are critical to breaking the cycle of poverty.
The other pathology is "corruption," where political leaders fail to respect property rights and the rule of law.
All emphasized exports; none grossly violated property rights.
Back