Answer:
The correct answer is Contrast and repetition.
Explanation:
Contrast: it has to do with sensory stimuli that allow highlighting elements or areas in a composition through the opposition or difference between them, that is, in a graphic design, a contrast is generated when there is a notable difference between two elements.
Repeat: the repetition is nothing more than identical identical forms that appear more than once in the design, that is to say, it would be a question of using the same element several times and distributed throughout the composition.
It is very important to resort to repetition especially when we are designing a graphic product that consists of several pages (catalog, magazine, etc.).
The repetition gives unity to the whole design, consistency and cohesion. Sometimes even on single page products, such as a diptych or triptych, it gives the feeling of continuity and that everything is "well tied". However, it should not be exceeded in its use. Repeating one or two graphic patterns is fine, but after three it would not be correct.
Answer:
Explanation:
Solution-
According to Senator Jones, the elasticity of taxable income is larger, which means that due to a certain percentage rise in taxes, the taxable income rises by a greater percentage. Also, according to Senator Smith, the elasticity of taxable income is small, which means that due to a certain percentage rise in taxes, the taxable income rises by a smaller percentage.
(I) Under Senator Jones assumptions, due to rise in taxes, the taxable income has risen considerably as compared to Senator Smith assumptions. Thus the estimates of additional revenue from the tax increase will be larger under Senator Jones assumptions, compared to Smith's assumptions.
(ii) Since under Senator Jones assumptions, elasticity of taxable income is large. So due to rise in taxes, there is a significant proportional rise in taxable income under Jone's assumptions compared to Senator Smith assumptions. Thus the costs of the tax increase is borne more under Senator Jones assumptions , compared to Smith's assumptions.
Answer:
Savings and loan association
Explanation:
Answer:
win based on strict liability
Explanation:
Strict liability is a liability that is imposed on party by the claimant that proves that an action occurred and the defendant is responsible for it.
This provision does not require the claimant to prove a fault by the defendant. It is mostly used when an action is considered dangerous.
In this scenario Mike was blasting some holes in rocks. This is a dangerous activity that can cause harm.
Myra who broke her legs in the explosion only needs to prove Mike was responsible for the explosion that occurred for her to win based on strict liability provision.