I'm less likely to forage.

And I'm doing far, far less.

But they're less likely to stick.

But they're less likely to stick.

Forget it. There's noone less likely.

If the latter, it was less likely.

As the economy improves, failure is less likely.

And you're less likely to make careless mistakes.

They are posh, they're wealthy, they're less likely to have outdoor jobs, they're less likely to do manual labor, they have better social support, they're less likely to smoke so for a whole host of fascinating, interlocking social, political and cultural reasons, they are less likely to have skin wrinkles.

They are posh, they're wealthy, they're less likely to have outdoor jobs, they're less likely to do manual labor, they have better social support, they're less likely to smoke so for a whole host of fascinating, interlocking social, political and cultural reasons, they are less likely to have skin wrinkles.

In addition, people would be far less likely to complain that their money is being wasted or misused if they chose where it went.

The future looks far less rosy.

They are also likely to marry younger and are less likely to use family planning.

They are less likely to start their own businesses.

Reinforcers make it more likely that you'll do something again, while punishers make it less likely.

But the outcome is far less clear.

It's likely they live on less than 1 a day.

That way, it's less likely to tumble down on you.

Price deflation is far more likely in the near term.

As tax evasion becomes more pervasive, whole networks to help hide incomes have appeared, making it far less likely that those who break the law are punished.

Since then, they have looked far less safe.

Historically lax policies have become far less accommodative.

The big mountains far away, they move less.

They are also less likely to be self employed and half as likely as men to be employers.

While people are talking, they are less likely to act precipitately.

Unfortunately, the positive outcome appears to be the less likely one.

The informal, lower magnitude conflicts of the modern era have proved far less likely to generate commentary from courts and political departments than the wars of the past.

So it turns out that optimists are not less likely to divorce, but they are more likely to remarry.

But it is far more likely that they will remain divided.

By contrast, older users (1) are less likely to do stupid things in the first place, and (2) are less likely to do so in range of a camera.

This aspect of preparedness typically receives far less attention.

Labor migration in Europe is, historically, far less extensive.

In the public domain, women are less likely to achieve senior positions.

So they're less likely to be randomly false positives, randomly false negatives.

As countries become less reliant on traditional sources of financing, they are less likely to follow foreign diktats blindly.

And, if you truly understand something, it's far more important to you, it's more likely to be retained, it's far more likely to have some sort of meaning to you.

However, when deterrence becomes indistinguishable from collective punishment barred under international law by Article 33 of the Fourth Geneva Convention it is far less likely to achieve its intended result.

But there were other policies that would have provided far more stimulus at far less cost.

Bad perceptions only complicate future peace efforts, making a breakthrough even less likely.

An educated child was less likely to practice or be subject to discrimination.

You'd have done better than Gen. Grant with far less effort.

My son, to make yourself less great would be far better.

Other venues of information are likely to be less useful to the general public.

Those countries with nonviolent campaigns were 15 less likely to relapse into civil war.

Today s strategy, however, is far more likely to lead to blowup and disorderly restructuring.