1. Because only 25% of the foreign investment went from MDCs to LDCs.
2. Money is not invested evenly among LDCs (most money went to China).
Answer:
$66,700
b. LIFO = $70800
67807.81
Explanation:
LIFO means last in first out. It means that it is the last purchased inventory that is the first to be sold.
(8130 x 8) + [(9090 - 8130) x 6) = 70800
FIFO means first in, first out. It means that it is the first purchased inventory that is the first to be sold
(3010 x 6) + [(9090 - 3010) x $8] = 66,700
Average cost = [(3010 x 6) + (8130 x 8)] /
18060
48640
b 65040
5760
Answer:
The appellate court did not rule in favor of Hall. Instead, it upheld the lower court's rulings. When Hall appealed up to the Supreme Court, the highest court affirmed Hall's conviction and sentencing.
This shows that there was no violation of the Fourth Amendment in Hall's case. In addition, the prosecution established the existence of probable cause in the absence of a valid warrant to search and obtain evidence that would establish the case against Terrence Hall, leading to his eventual conviction.
Explanation:
Although, the Fourth Amendment of the US Constitution protects an individual from unreasonable searches and seizures by the government, it does not guarantee against all searches and seizures. It only guarantees against searches and seizures that are regarded as legally unreasonable. This implies that there may be probable cause for searches and seizures.
Answer:
Process
Explanation:
A process involves the steps or actions that are taken for the accomplishment and achievement of a particular aim or objective. A business process is a structured, related, activities by individuals or machines whereby a specific sequence leads to the production of a product or a service for a particular set of people.
Processes occur at every organizational levels. Without processes in organizations, the accomplishment of organization goals will not be feasible.
A. Substantive unconscionability B. Adhesion conscionabilityC. Procedural unconscionabilityD. Exculpatory clausesE. An inparidelictoagreement.
Substantive unconscionably
Answer: Option A.
<u>Explanation:</u>
Unconscionability (now and then known as unconscionable managing/lead in Australia) is a teaching in contract law that depicts terms that are so very out of line, or overwhelmingly uneven for the gathering who has the predominant haggling power, that they are in opposition to great inner voice.
Substantive unconscionability alludes to the unconscionability in the details of an agreement. It implies that the target terms of the agreement are uncalled for. Substantive unconscionability results when agreement terms are unnecessarily abusive or cruel.
