"Real Wages" are wages that are adjusted for inflation and rising prices. As prices rise, people are able to buy less and less with their "nominal" (aka un-adjusted) wages.
One example is gas for your car. If you make $1000 a month and gas goes up from $2.50 to $3, your un-adjusted wages stay the same (you still make $1000) but you can't buy as much of other things because your "real" wages have effectively gone down due to the price increase of gas.
Answer:
C) Horizontal growth strategy.
Explanation:
In the given situation, blue ridge would added non related products for the customers who already purchased it from them. Also it shows the concept of one-stop shop i.e. catering should be provided to all rounds requirement for the customers who visited them
Therefore as per the given scenario, the option c is correct
And, the same would be considered
Answer:
A. No, because Ahmed is not a merchant.
Explanation:
Implied warranty of merchantability is a law in contract which states that when there is a transaction between a seller (the merchant), and a buyer, there is an unwritten guarantee from the seller, that the product meets up to the ordinary standards of care. This means that the goods must be fit to do what the merchant says it will do. Therefore, if the seller finds it defective, he could return it to the seller. and if the seller refuses to make a change, a legal case could be established. The merchant by law is a wholesaler or retailer, who sells goods in which he has expertise or special skills.
Ahmed in the question could be argued in court to not be a merchant of cars and as such, has no expertise with which he can make a guarantee for the car being sold to Carlos.
It cant be B because the exit wound is usually big , so im going with A
Answer:
a. Jasmine can be removed for cause.
Explanation:
Voir Dire is the questioning phase of jury selection in which the attorneys of both sides ask questions to see if the jury members are qualified.
When someone is removed for cause it means that the attorney thinks that the jury member can't be impartial based on bias or conflict.
In this case Jasmine can't be impartial because of her past relationship with the prosecutor.
