An inferior good is a type of welfare whose demand decreases when consumer income increases or demand increases when consumer income decreases. Therefore, if a consumer considers shirts to be inferior goods, the way he will stop consuming it will be when there is a real increase in his income.
In the case narrated, Alex had an increase in salary and remained working for the same number of hours. This means that with the same job, he will have a higher income, meaning there was a real increase in Alex's income. If he considers the $ 3 shirts a much lower asset, he will lessen the demand for it.
The best term to the situation where Greg is in is that he is an expatriate. It is a term called to a person who resides or is living outside his country. This explains the situation where Greg is in Saudi Arabia when he originally from Florida. This is also a term that describes to a person who is living abroad.
Given:
salary: <span>$10.50 an hour
25 hours a week
expenses:
Cellphone bill: $65/month
car insurance: $1,200/yr
*20% taxes.
There is no specific question but I will solve for Marcus net earnings for the year.
25 hours/week * 52 weeks/yr = 1,300 hours/year
Wages: 10.50 per hour * 1,300 hours/year = $13,650 Gross salary per year
Taxes: 13,650 * 20% = 2,730
13,650 - 2,730 = 10,920 net salary for the year
Cell phone bill: 65 per month * 12 months = 780
Net salary: 10,920
Cell phone bill (780)
Car insurance: <u> (1,200)</u>
Net Income: 8,940 per annum.
</span>
Answer:
The Home owner commenced the action in a state A court ( C )
Explanation:
The Defendant ( the contractor) can decide to transfer the case from a state court to a federal court within the same state in which the case was filled by the The home owner if the federal court has the Jurisdiction to rule on the case
Since the contract was signed in state A under the laws of the state the case is definitely a state case and the Homeowner's move to remand the case to a state court with the argument that the Federal court lacks proper Jurisdiction is in order. The court decision on the matter will be based on the fact that the Homeowner commenced the action in a state A court where the contract was signed.
Answer:
Competition act.
Explanation:
When same person on the board of two or more than two competing firms then such instance is referred to as interlocking directorate. This will significantly have an impact on the market and the competition.
