Answer:
Candonia has a comparative advantage in the production of <u>LEMONS</u>, while Lamponia has a comparative advantage in the production of <u>COFFEE</u>. Suppose that Candonia and Lamponia specialize in the production of the goods in which each has a comparative advantage. After specialization, the two countries can produce a total of <u>36</u> million pounds of coffee and <u>36</u> million pounds of lemons.
Explanation:
Since a lot of information was missing, I looked it up and found the attached graphs. The graphs referred to production of coffee and lemons, but I guess they are similar questions.
For every pound of lemons that Candonia produces, it will not be able to produce ¹/₂ pounds of coffee (opportunity cost of producing lemons instead of coffee).
For every pound of coffee that Lamponia produces, it will not be able to produce 1¹/₂ pounds of lemons (opportunity cost of producing coffee instead of lemons).
Answer:
d. The skill level of workers is identical in both countries.
Explanation:
The Law of One Price is an economic theory which explains that the price of identical or similar goods in different markets must be the same after taking the currency exchange into consideration. In law of one price, there is perfect competition and It ensures that buyers have the same purchasing power across global markets.
Answer:
Explanation:
The aggregate supply curve shifts to the left as the price of key inputs rise, making a combination of lower output, higher unemployment, and higher inflation possible. When an economy experiences stagnant growth and high inflation at the same time it is referred to as stagflation.
Answer:
The correct answer is 842.1 Pesos and 941.18 Pesos.
Explanation:
According to the scenario, the given data are as follows:
Price of Jeans = $80
So, if exchange rate is $0.095 = 1 pesos
Then pesos required to buy that jeans can be calculated as follows:
Pesos required = $80 ÷ $0.095
= 842.1 Pesos
And if 1 Pesos = $0.085, then
Pesos required = $80 ÷ $0.085
= 941.18 Pesos
Answer:
The correct answer is C. This claim is most likely based on the right to substantive due process.
Explanation:
Substantive due process is a means by which the government's ability to interfere with the fundamental rights of individuals is limited. In this case, the fundamental right violated is that of freedom of expression, guaranteed by the First Amendment. Thus, since it is a right with constitutional protection, the government cannot curtail its operation without the due legal process necessary for this purpose.
