Answer:
$121,363
Explanation:
The amount in 30 years is known as the Future Value (FV) . We arrive at this figure by compounding the Present Value using the interest earned on the savings as follows :
PV = $50,000
P/yr = 1
N = 30
PMT = $ 0
i = 3 %
FV = ?
Using a Financial calculator to enter the amounts as shown above, the FV can be determined as $121,363
Answer:
The actual unemployment rate was higher during the recession of 1990−1991, while cyclical unemployment was higher in 2001.
Explanation:
Given data in the question
In the year 1990-1991
The natural rate of unemployment = 5.9%
The rate of the actual unemployment = 7.0%
In the year 2001
The natural rate of unemployment = 4.8%
The actual unemployment rate = 6.0%
As we can see that
The actual unemployment is high in the year 1990-1991 i.e 7.0% as compare to the year 2001 i.e 6.0%
While the cyclical unemployment rate is high in 2001 i.e 1.2% (6.0 - 4.8%) as compare to the year 1990-1191 i.e 1.1% (7.0% - 5.9%)
Answer: government taxes on products or services entering a country that primarily serve to raise prices on imports.
Explanation:
Tariffs are known to be taxes which the government of a particular country charges on goods and services which are imported into the country from other countries. It is a form of trade protection which the government uses in protecting local companies. Thus, the government imposes taxes on imported goods in order to make the prices of the goods high so that citizens can buy local or domestic goods and as a result encourage domestic companies to produce more of the local goods.
Answer:
High capital expenditures, low depreciation, increasing working capital
Explanation:
In simple words, cash flows refers to the in and out transnfer of cash from and by a company while operating their business and doing several differnet transactions. You just had to spend a great deal for cashflow to really be unfavorable, despite higher profits. Reinvestment consists of two components: the disparity among the capital expenditure and the deterioration which is also termed as net capital expendture as well as the working capital impact (with diminishing cash flows increasing).
M1 money growth in the US was about 16% in 2008, 7% in 2009 and 9% in 2010. Over the same time period, the yield on 3-month Treasury bills fell from almost 3% to close to 0%. Given these high rates of money growth, why did interest rates fall, rather than increase? What does this say about the income, price level and expected-inflation effects?
Higher money growth (increase in the money supply) should have the following effects:
Liquidity effect indicates that this growth in money should shift money supply to the right, which should decrease the interest rate.
Income effect indicates that the growth in money should increase income levels, which should increase the demand for money and shift the demand curve to the right. This should increase the interest rate.
The price level effect indicates that the growth in money should increase price levels, which should increase the demand for money and shift the demand curve to the right. This should also increase the interest rate.
During this time period, unemployment was high, economic growth was weak and policymakers were more concerned with deflation than they were with inflation.
Therefore, the expected inflation effect was almost non-existent (due to the concerns with deflation) and the liquidity effect dominated all other effects, which made interest rates fall.
<span>This is illustrated with the first graph on slide 32 of the Theory of Money Powerpoints.</span>