Answer:
the answer is (C) both of the choices would produce the same return
Answer:
$5,000 favorable
Explanation:
The computation of the total variable overhead variance is given below:
= Budgeted machine hours allowed for actual output × Budgeted variable overhead rate per machine hour - Actual total variable overhead
= 32,000 hours × $2.50 - $75,000
= $80,000 - $75,000
= $5,000 favorable
Since the favorable is more than the actual so it should be favorable
Answer:
The correct answer is Inductive reasoning.
Explanation:
Inductive reasoning is a form of reasoning in which the truth of the premises supports the conclusion, but does not guarantee it. A classic example of inductive reasoning is:
- All the crows observed so far have been black
- Therefore, all crows are black
In principle, it could be that the next crow observed is not black. In contrast to deductive reasoning, inductive reasoning has the advantage of being expansive, that is, the conclusion contains more information than is contained in the premises. Given its expansive nature, inductive reasoning is very useful and frequent in science and in everyday life. However, given its fallible nature, its justification is problematic. When are we justified in making an inductive inference, and concluding, for example, that all crows are black from a limited sample of them? What distinguishes a good inductive argument from a bad one? These and other related problems give rise to the problem of induction, whose validity and importance has continued for centuries.
Answer:
No, Jim is not correct.
Explanation:
Betty will win this case.
Generally, the law encourages marriage as its policy. If there is any contract that prevent or restrict marriage in whatever way, such contract would be considered null and void because it is against the public policy.
Despite the above, contracts will be generally considered valid when they place reasonable restrictions on marriage. In this question, the restriction placed on Betty that she should get married until after her 22nd birthday is reasonable and has to be considered to be valid. Based on this, Betty has to be paid the $25,000 as laid down in the binding contract between the two parties.
Therefore, Jim is not correct.
Just going on a whim:
primary beneficiary?
