Besides, is inaction a real alternative?

So there is no excuse for continued inaction.

The Price of Inaction

The cost of inaction would be considerably higher than the required investment.

Turning its back in the face of such challenges is no longer a viable American option.

But we have to understand the consequences of wringing our hands instead of putting them to work.

There is nothing we can do now to compensate for failures to manage risks in the past.

Misusing the Inaction Argument

Nor is the global financial crisis a justification for the world s leaders failing to keep their word.

The scale of the violence in Syria underscores the risk implied by inaction.

Inaction in other areas will be bad news for many.

In this crisis, intention takes a back seat to action (or lack thereof).

Failure to make that effort could expose all of our countries and populations to this disease.

But the long term nature of this challenge must not lull us into inaction.

Failure to do so contributed to the toll.

We know that in many cases the non inclusion of gender aspects is a result of inadequate capacity rather than reluctance.

The body with the responsibility for carrying out the investigation may need the cooperation of those forces that are being investigated, and this prejudices the independence of the investigation.Inadequate investigation

But even the most reluctant policymakers recognize that the cost of inaction is too great.

The risk of inaction or inappropriate action has reached enormous proportions.

This lack of action reflects the increased complexity and linkages of the global financial system, and the absence of an effective anchor for financial stability.

He therefore regretted to say that, in the case of Gibraltar, the Committee's inactivity was self imposed.

4. Notes that the failure to abide by that provision also connotes failure to abide by the six week rule for the availability of documents as well as General Assembly resolution 50 11 on multilingualism, in which the Assembly recalled the need to ensure the simultaneous distribution of documents in the six official languages of the United Nations

Where appropriate, adjustments have been made to account for the loss that is attributable to the failure to mitigate.

Passive tolerance to evil through inaction or indifference.

The dangers of both action and inaction are very high.

The failed rescue of Lehman Brothers was a game changing event financial markets actually ceased to function.

But failure to act now will only raise the price of delayed action at some moment in the future.

The better question is how can we afford not to?

In fact, he forecasted that the price of doing nothing could even approach 20 of GDP.

But the costs and risks of its alternatives never get the attention they deserve.

The costs of inaction are morally and economically untenable.

Germany s Angela Merkel says it makes economic sense to cut CO2, because the the economic consequences of inaction will be dramatic for us all.

Twenty years later, with the stakes even higher, we can no longer afford inaction.

But not acting, in effect accepting Iran s nuclear might, risks bringing about a more dangerous and possibly costlier future.

The failure to hold these regimes accountable for this destructive behaviour jeopardizes innocent lives of civilians, the peace process and regional stability.

Bernanke regularly warns of the dire consequences of not facing the country s fiscal problems head on.

It is based on comparing the cost of action with the cost of inaction, and almost every major politician in the world uses it.

Such a system is relatively expensive to manage, but it is cheaper than the costs of not having it.

The United States ill considered bio fuels subsidy program demonstrates how not to react.

Authorities asked them about their work and their relationship with Privacy International.

The inaction argument is really terribly negligent, because it causes us to recommend aspirin and lose sight of smarter actions that might actually save the leg.

The Republic of Armenia should compensate the damage caused by illegal activities (inactivity) of state bodies or their officials.

But Barroso s punchline was that the cost is low compared to the high price of inaction.

Failure to pursue further dialogue and reconciliation would involve a higher price for the parties concerned than would the compromises necessary for reaching national consensus through peaceful means.

Those responsible for this element of the investigation displayed gross negligence.