Answer:
$115.20
Explanation:
Missing part is <em>"Assume that securitization combined with borrowing and irrational exuberance in Hyperville have driven up the value of existing financial securities at a geometric rate, specifically from $4 to $8 to $16 to $32 to $64 to $128 over a six-year time period. Over the same period, the value of the assets underlying the securities rose at an arithmetic rate from $4 to $6 to $8 to $10 to $12 to $14."</em>
<em />
If the underlying assets price fall by $10, then the securities value will fall by a ratio of $10
Value of securities = $128/$10 = $12.80
Decline in value of securities = $128 - $12.80 = $115.20. Thus, the Decline in value of the financial securities is $115.20
Answer:
e) capacity requirement planning
Explanation:
Based on the information provided within the question it can be said that the term being mentioned is called capacity requirement planning. Like mentioned, this term refers to the process that a company undergoes in order to calculate how much of something it needs to achieve a goal and whether or not it is feasible. Which can also be used regarding work schedules like in this scenario.
It is an example of cyclical unemployment.
I hope this helps!
Answer:
In employment law, a bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) (US) or bona fide occupational requirement (BFOR) (Canada) or genuine occupational qualification (GOQ) (UK) is a quality or an attribute that employers are allowed to consider when making decisions on the hiring and retention of employees—a quality that when considered in other contexts would constitute discrimination and thus be in violation of civil rights employment law. Such qualifications must be listed in the employment offering.[citation needed]
Explanation:
Canada
The law of Canada regarding bona fide occupational requirements was considered in a 1985 Canadian court case involving an employee of the Canadian National Railway, K. S. Bhinder, a Sikh whose religion required that he wear a turban, lost his challenge of the CNR policy that required him to wear a hard hat.[1] In 1990, in deciding another case, the Supreme Court of Canada amended the Bhinder decision: "An employer that has not adopted a policy with respect to accommodation and cannot otherwise satisfy the trier of fact that individual accommodation would result in undue hardship will be required to justify his conduct with respect to the individual complainant. Even then the employer can invoke the BFOQ defence."[2]
United States
In employment discrimination law in the United States, both Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act contain a BFOQ defense. The BFOQ provision of Title VII provides that:
[I]t shall not be an unlawful employment practice for an employer to hire and employ employees, for an employment agency to classify, or refer for employment any individual, for a labor organization to classify its membership or to classify or refer for employment any individual, or for an employer, labor organization, or joint labor-management committee controlling apprenticeship or other training or retraining programs to admit or employ any individual in any such program, on the basis of his religion, sex, or national origin in those certain instances where religion, sex, or national origin is a bona fide occupational qualification reasonably necessary to the normal operation of that particular business or enterprise ...[3]
i'm not able to add the balance of the answer so pls go to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bona_fide_occupational_qualification
