Example collocations logo

Technological in sentence

2092 examples of Technological in a sentence

Yet in the US, Donald Trump has become the hero of angry workers threatened by trade, migration, and technological change.
In fact, even the “losers” benefit from the lower prices of goods and services brought about by globalization and technological innovation.
But, rather than recognize the likely drivers of these developments – namely, a seemingly chronic shortfall of global aggregate demand amid a supply glut and a deflationary profusion of technological innovations and new supply chains – the Fed continues to minimize the deflationary impact of global forces.
At a time of rapid social change and relentless technological advancement, efforts to improve governance – at the local, national, or international level – will require careful thought and experimentation, in order to determine how to balance inclusive decision-making with the ever-evolving needs of markets.
For that, Cuba will need to pursue and deepen the economic reforms that it has started, address its technological obsolescence, and upgrade its public infrastructure.
Thus, given the pervasiveness of mobile telephony and recent technological advances in mobile networks, rolling out mobile broadband seems a cost-effective solution.
Indeed, that approach would ultimately hurt the consumer, both by impeding technological progress and eliminating price competition – like that from Samsung’s Android devices, which forced Apple to lower iPhone prices.
A growing body of research concludes that labor-saving technological change and outsourcing to foreign contract manufacturers were important factors behind the significant cyclically-adjusted decline in US manufacturing employment by both multinationals and other US companies in the 2000’s.
Others, such as Dani Rodrik, have always been more cautious, arguing that much of the past rapid growth in major EMDEVs was due to a period of technological “catch-up” growth in manufacturing, which was reaching its limits, and could not be easily extended to the large service sector or other parts of developing economies.
Asia will grow faster because it is accumulating physical and human capital more rapidly, which not only increases output directly, but also facilitates technological progress and diversification of the type that Ricardo Hausmann and Cesar Hidalgo identify as the key to sustained growth.
Long-term growth is determined by the ability to accumulate technological and institutional capacities and the quality of national policies.
Although many of the panels focused on the technological marvels of the near future, others highlighted the world's inability to address one of humanity’s oldest problems: how to feed, house, and succor large populations driven by conflict from their homes and countries.
While President Bush argues that technological advances in hydrogen fuels and fuel cells will curb oil imports in the long run, such measures require major changes in transportation infrastructure that will require decades to complete.
Sixth, the impact of technological change on inequality demands special attention.
Recent technological advances have displaced labor, increasing capital’s share in income and, thus, the level of inequality.
These trends reflect a combination of technological and global market forces that have been operating over the last two decades.
And yet the income distributions across advanced economies, presumably subject to similar technological and global market forces, are, in fact, startlingly different, suggesting that a combination of social policies and differing social norms does have a distributional impact.
Gordon’s thesis is more about a kind of “satiation” in rapid technological progress, which depresses expected returns and thus helps to explain the chronic lack of sufficient investment.
First, I do not share Gordon’s assessment of prospects for longer-term technological progress.
We know that powerful technological and global market forces have reduced dramatically the number of routine professional and blue-collar jobs, shifted employment options for the middle class toward the non-tradable side of the economy, and channeled growth in national income toward capital and high-end employment, with stagnating income elsewhere.
They arise mainly from an increasingly integrated global economy’s shifting technological landscape; but they have been exacerbated by a systematic pattern of public-sector underinvestment.
The most successful public policies and fiscal choices are those that are not only guided by the enduring values embedded in the social contract, but that are also adapted to changing demographic, technological, and global circumstances.
Moreover, because much of the recent technological progress seen in the US largely remains to be exploited, the acceleration of productivity is not a temporary phenomenon, but a lasting one.
It would not be surprising if these institutions also retard efficient exploitation of the new technological advances in the workplace.
It is absurd to think that Europe’s historic nation-states are an answer to the globalized political, economic, and technological realities of the twenty-first century.
Income gaps are growing for many reasons, ranging from “skill-biased” technological progress to corruption.
It is often said, for good reason, that the widening income gap largely reflects technological change, which has drained many economies of blue- and even white-collar jobs, while channeling the fruits of improved productivity to high-skilled elites.
Away from the diplomatic circuit, however, technological advances make it certain that we can build low-carbon economies at minimal cost and great benefit to human welfare.
Total gas and coal reserves could support current demand for more than a hundred years, and technological progress – for example, hydraulic fracturing, which has unlocked shale energy – makes an ever growing share of these reserves economically attractive.
The biggest threat to a prosperous low-carbon future is not a lack of technological options, but the waste that low fossil-fuel prices encourage.
BackNext