Answer:
Sell the parts without any processing because the profit is higher ($20,000 vs $15,000)
Explanation:
they have two options:
- option A, sell the parts as they are and make $20,000 in profits (= $120,000 - $100,000).
- option B, further process the parts by spending $75,000 and sell them for $190,000, and make only $15,000 in profits (= $190,000 - $100,000 - $75,000).
The best option is A, to sell the parts without any processing because the profit is higher and they do not have to spend more money.
The Right Response is Option C which is Long Term Changes in the Economy.
<h3><u>
Why Did Friedman Argued So?</u></h3>
- The concept of monetarism, which refers to the management of money in the economy, was developed by Milton Friedman. According to Friedman, changes in the money supply can have both long- and short-term consequences.
Friedman suggested that long-term changes in the economy had an impact on consumer behavior. Long-term economic developments have an impact on how consumers behave while making purchases. For instance, if long-term economic trends are favorable, consumer spending will rise; otherwise, it would fall.
Therefore, "long-term changes in the economy" is the right response.
To learn more about Long Term Changes in the Economy. Click the links.
brainly.com/question/20822981
#SPJ4
Correct Question - Milton Friedman argued that consumers are more likely to alter their behavior based on
a) changes in the unemployment rate.
b) short-term changes in the economy.
c) long-term changes in the economy.
d) changes in the inflation rate.
Answer:
D) $31.
Explanation:
The computation of the predetermined overhead rate is shown below:
Predetermined overhead rate = Estimated manufacturing overhead ÷ estimated direct labor hours
where,
Estimated manufacturing overhead is
= Salary of factory supervisor + Heating and lighting costs for factory + Depreciation on factory equipment
= $37,600 + $22,000 + $5,600
= $65,200
And, the direct labor hours is 2,100
So, the predetermined overhead rate is
= $65,200 ÷ 2,100
= $31
Solution:
Let's start by assuming that the taxi ride demand is extremely elastic, to the extent that it is vertically sluggish! If the cabbies raise the fair price by 10% from 10.00 per mile to 11.00 per kilometre, the number of riders remains 20.
Total income before fair growth= 20* 10= 200.
Total income following fair growth = 11* 20= 220.
A 10% increase in the fare therefore leads to a 10% increase in the driver's revenue.
Therefore, the assumption in this situation is that the cab drivers think the taxi driving requirement is highly inelastic.
The demand curve facing the drivers of the cab is still inelastic, but not vertically bent.
When the rate increased from 10% to 11, riders declined from 20% to 19%
Total revenue before fair growth is 20* 10= 200
The gap between revenue and fair growth is 19* 11= 209
This means that a realistic 10% raise doesn't result in a 10% boost on income Because the market curve for taxi rides is not 100% inelastic, but rather low inelastic, so that a fair increase (control) allows consumers to lose their incomes.
