<u>Complete Question:</u>
Why do some lenders require borrowers to secure credit?
A. To prevent defaults
B. To guarantee full repayment
C. To avoid any losses
D. To reduce risk
Answer:
Option D. To reduce risk
Explanation:
The reason is that the lender faces the credit risk which is the risk of the loss of the repayment in whole or in parts and the risk of default of the interest payments by the borrower.
So if we see the options, the option A, B and C are basically the credit risk that the lender is facing so the only option that is more general (not specific as the option A, B and C) and includes these three options is option D.
So the option D is correct.
Answer:
From the end of the Middle Ages to the first centuries of the Modern Era, some new investment strategies were developed, which contributed greatly to the development of capitalism.
Explanation:
In particular, group investment in companies that did not have a single, personal owner. This is what we know today as corporations.
The main advantage of a corporation is that many investors pour their money, something that raises the amount of capital, while at the same time not holding full personal responsability over their investments in case the corporation fails. In other words, investors do not have to pay with their personal wealth in case of corporate failure.
Two important early corporations are the Dutch East India Company, and the British East Indian Company. They were very important for the development of capitalism.
Answer:
<u><em>But where do we go from here? </em></u>
It depends on the result of more government intervention on quality life standards.
<u><em>Do we need less or more government involvement? </em></u>
It depends on the problems that need to be addressed. For example, to address problems such inequality it is mandatory that the government gets involve and create laws to prevent it. But surely for more movement of capitals there is no need of higher government involvement.
<u><em>Is it a question of the quality of that involvement? </em></u>
Yes. If government has an effective involvement there is even desirable to have its intervention but if it complicates everything then is repeled.
<u><em>Could it be smarter rather than just less? </em></u>
Yes, because it is proved that the economy acts in an effective way to good policy making.
<u><em>How can the cost of government involvement decrease?</em></u>
In this aspect it is important to mention the environmental issues in nowadasy economy. If the measurement of what is defined as "cost" is understand in the long run as conservation and balance between nature and economic explotation of resources.
