$0.05m + $50>55
0.05 per minute plus $50 per month for the plan less than $55
Answer:
Option B.
No, a binding price ceiling benefits only some buyers because not all are able to obtain the goods in the legal market.
Explanation:
A binding price ceiling occurs when the government sets a required price on a good or goods at a price below equilibrium. Since the government requires that prices not rise above the price, that price binds the market for that good. Because the government keeps the price artificially low, businesses will not produce enough of those goods to satisfy the market.
This results in an insufficient supply of those goods, creating a shortage in those goods, and with a shortage of goods, only some of the buyers will be able to obtain the goods in the legal market.
Therefore, the option that best suits the question is option, B. Not all buyers benefit from a binding price ceiling. A BINDING PRICE CEILING BENEFITS ONLY SOME BUYERS BECAUSE NOT ALL ARE ABLE TO OBTAIN THE GOOD IN THE LEGAL MARKET.
Answer:
$775.61
Explanation:
To calculate the monthly payments, you can use the following formula:
P= (r*PV/(1-((1+r)^-n))
P= Payment
PV= Present value: $17,500
r=interest rate: 6%/12= 0.5%
n= number of periods: 24
P= (0.005*$17,500)/(1-((1+0.005)^-24))
P= 87.5/0.112814
P= $775.61
The amount of the monthly payments is $775.61.
Answer:
Shortages of building materials and a slower recovery from the storm
Explanation:
From the question we are informed about an instance, whereby a hurricane hits Alabama, causing widespread damage to houses and businesses. The governor of Alabama places price ceilings on all building materials to keep the prices reasonable. In this case,what most likely result is Shortages of building materials and a slower recovery from the storm.
From law of demand, which expressed that provided other factors remain equal, when price of a good goes higher, then there would be less demand of that good from
people and vice versa. higher price brings lower the quantity demanded, and lower price brings higher the quantity demanded, therefore in the case, above as the price of ceilings on all building materials so that price becomes reasonable people demand more and it leads to Shortages of building materials
Answer:
1.Parties [Identify the plaintiff and the defendant] - The plaintiff is Henry Keller of H.K.Enterprises and the defendant is Bank of Nigeria and Nigerian individuals Central Bank of Nigeria, Paul Ogwuma, ?Alhaji Rasheed, Alhaji M.A. Sadiq.
2.Facts [Summarize only those facts critical to the outcome of the case] - The case was filed by Keller against the defendants in United States. The case was filed under Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (“RICO”) as the plaintiff found himself a victim of fraud and financial scam.The scam occured when one of the defendants approached the plaintiff who was the sales representative of medical equipments for granting him the distribution rights for Nigeria. The expected amount of money was not transferred in the account of plaintiff inspite of his attempts of meeting the requirements of the defendants. The defendants acted on the behalf of Central Bank of Nigeria and as Nigerian individuals.
3.Procedure [Who brought the appeal? What was the outcome in the lower court(s)?] - The appeal was filed by the defendants Central Bank of Nigeria,?Paul Ogwuma, Alhaji Rasheed, Alhaji M.A. Sadiq. The lower court gave the decision that the claims of fraud and misrepresentation do not hold against the defendants as the plaintiff entered into an arrangement with them which is not legal and as per the rules. However the lower court ruled that immunity cannot be given under FSIA to the defendants as the commercial activity is an exception and claims for violation of RICO are applicable on them.
4. Issue [Note the central question or questions on which the case turns] - The case turns on the appeal of defendants to be granted immunity under Foreign Sovereign Immunities Act. The ruling indicated that the defendants have sovereign authority. Also, the commercial activity clause did not apply in this case as the activity was not done in United States and did not meet the legal standards of a commercial activity.
5.Explain the applicable law(s). - Applicable laws are Common law fraud, violations of RICO(Rackteer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act), Misrepresentation.
6.Holding [How did the court resolve the issue(s)? Who won?] - The court resolved the issue by giving a decision in the favor of defendants by ruling that immunity is given to Foreign nationals under FSIA and dismissed any claims filed against them under RICO.
7.Reasoning [Explain the logic that supported the court's decision] - The logic supporting the court's decision is that the arrangement between the plaintiff and defendants including the signed contract was not as per the laws and rules and was not legally compliant. Moreover the commercial activity was out of bounds for United states so the exception to FISA is not applicable. The defendants claimed that they did not enter into the contract with the plaintiff.
Explanation:
