Example collocations logo

Winners in sentence

441 examples of Winners in a sentence

Winners and losersEconomists are almost unanimous that the main effects of the Fed rate hike will be felt outside the US.
It is a truism among the economically literate that there are no winners in a trade war.
Thatcherism plus globalization had many liberating consequences, but the combination also created new social problems, begetting losers as well as winners.
Fortunately, the government did not attempt the impossible task of trying to separate winners from losers.
Brazil’s experience offers three important lessons for nations implementing renewable energy initiatives: (1) government policies must be consistent, simple, and long-lasting, providing assurance to would-be entrepreneurs that they can invest for the long haul; (2) picking winners, the familiar weakness of overenthusiastic bureaucrats, must be kept to a minimum; and (3) the state must have the discipline to dismantle subsidies when the need for them has passed.
If the parties to CITES embrace the technological capabilities that are available to them, local communities and our planet’s wildlife will be the biggest winners.
Israel’s lightning victory recalls Hegel’s dictum about “the impotence of the winners.”
Enlargement will not be cost-free: there will be losers, as well as winners.
The first decisive consideration will be the operational feasibility of the negotiation process, which means striking a politically acceptable balance between winners and losers throughout the enlarged Union.
A peace process conceived as a means to weaken and isolate the winners of an election – Hamas – is unlikely to gain much traction.
As long as winners with razor-thin majorities, once in office, steer a middle course, they are more likely to remain acceptable to an electorate that is more volatile than divided.
The same may also be true if narrow winners adopt a radical agenda, as some think George W. Bush has done in America and many feared Andrés Manuel Lopéz Obrador would do in Mexico.
There are certainly winners and losers.
In geopolitical terms, if one were to name just two winners this year, the titles would have to go to Russia and France.
These countries, like Norway, were winners in the natural resource lottery.
The Internet is not a game of winners or losers; everyone can win.
Good industrial policy does not rely on governments’ omniscience and ability to pick winners; indeed, failures are an inevitable and necessary part of a well-designed program.
As challenging as applying them may be, they constitute a much less formidable requirement than that of picking winners.
Smart trade creates balanced development, while polarizing trade rewards a small circle of winners at the expense of the many.
That way, we can dump the losers and keep the winners.
And the big winners have been the financiers and skilled professionals who can take advantage of expanded markets.
Darwin argued that more organisms are born than can survive and reproduce; that this leads to a struggle for existence; and that success in this struggle partly reflects the physical and behavioral differences between the winners and the losers.
The winners are those that are well adapted to their environment--that is, they develop features that help them to survive and reproduce.
After all, the global economy is too complex to be viewed as a zero-sum game with clear winners and losers.
In a bleak economic climate, the argument goes, the only winners have been the wealthy, resulting in skyrocketing inequality.
Governments allocate credit (through direct bank ownership or by guiding credit decisions by privately owned banks), provide direct subsidies and/or tax incentives, grant trade protection, or use other regulatory devices in an attempt to “pick winners.”
When government officials rather than markets then try to choose the next winners, they run a great risk of choosing the wrong industries, or channeling too much investment – and thus excess capacity – into existing sectors.
Winners and Losers in the Post-9/11 EraSeptember 11, 2001, is one of those dates that mark a transformation in world politics.
Nobel Prize winners Robert Solow and Paul Krugman famously once questioned whether the proliferation of computers and technology would lead to bottom-line growth.
So, to the extent that the rich are self-made, and have come out winners in a fair, competitive, and transparent market, society may be better off allowing them to own and manage their wealth, while getting a reasonable share as taxes.
BackNext