Starting from a steady state with greater capital than the Golden Rule, a decrease in the saving rate results in a decline in investment.
<h3>What is the definition of the golden rule?</h3>
The Golden Rule instructs people to make decisions for others based on their own personal preferences. Putting yourself in another person's shoes or "doing unto others as you would have them do unto you" are two common definitions of the Golden Rule (Baumrin 2004).
The golden rule would advise us to release someone who has been convicted of a crime and given a prison sentence, for instance, because we would not want to go to prison ourselves. This holds true even if we use the platinum rule because it's likely that the prisoner would choose to stay out of jail or prison.
To learn more about Golden Rule, refer to:
brainly.com/question/16313509
#SPJ4
Answer:
Options C and E
Only Nick and Jake are optimising over his choice of fruit?
Explanation:
The marginal utility obtained from the purchase of a product is the amount of satisfaction derived from purchasing an additional unit of the product.
The utility is maximised when the satisfaction in terms of marginal utilities obtained from each product is equal to each other.
We obtain this simply by dividing the marginal utilities for each fruit by their price, and comparing them.
Dmitiri:
Apples: 8/1 =8
Pears: 10/2 =5
8/1 is not equals to 10/2
Frances:
Apples: 7/1 =7
Pears: 16/2 =8
7 is not equals to 8
Jake:
Apples: 6/1 =6
Pears: 12/2 =6
The marginal utility is equal hence Jake's choice is optimal
Latasha:
Apples: 5/1 =9
Pears: 9/2 =4.5
9 is not equals to 4.5
Nick:
Apples: 4/1 =4
Pears: 8/2 =4
The marginal utility is equal hence Nick's choice is optimal
Answer: Please refer to Explanation.
Explanation:
Two Companies. We shall call them A and B.
If A and B decide not to advertise, they both get $5,000,000.
If A advertises and B does not then A captures $3 million from B at a cost of $2 million meaning their payoff would be,
= 5 million - 2 million + 3 million
= $6 million.
A will have $6 million and B will have $2 million as $3 million was captured from them. This scenario holds true if B is the one that advertises and A does not.
If both of them Advertise, they both reduce their gains by $2 million while capturing $3 million from each other so they'll essentially both have just $3 million if they both decide to advertise.
With the above scenarios, it is better for both companies to ADVERTISE if there is NO COLLUSION. This is because it ensures that they do not get the lowest payoff of $2 million if the other company decides to advertise and they do not.
However, if they DO COLLUDE. They must both decide that NONE of them SHOULD ADVERTISE and this would leave them with their original $5 million each which is a higher payoff than the $3 million they will both receive if they were both advertising.
Answer:
Horizontal merger
Explanation:
An horizontal merger is a consolidation or merging of companies that are the same industry. Merging of companies in the same industry helps the companies to have a greater market share of the industry.
As seen in the question below, both companies are beer companies and are consolidating or merging to form the largest beer company in the world. This wold give them a global coverage as opposed to the few countries they were restricted to before the merger.
Cheers.
Answer:
d. $141,000
Explanation:
As the following information is given
Purchase of raw material = $165,000
Beginning Raw material balance = $22,000
Completed direct material = $141,000
Completed indirect material = $13,000
Since the work in progress includes only direct material i.e $141,000 as indirect material is allocated to the overhead account. Therefore, only $141,000 of raw material is transferred to work in process account
So other information which is mentioned is ignored