Microsoft<span> was </span>considered a monopoly in the late 90's because <span>there was effectively no other option than to use Windows, so Windows </span><span>had </span>monopoly market power, especially in the <span>"Business Operating System" market.</span>
<span>Microsoft could set prices for users, and dictate user's behavior.
</span>
Answer:
B) induces buyers to consume less, and sellers to produce less.
Explanation:
Taxes are a necessary evil since they always increase the price of the goods and services that consumers buy and decrease the amount of money that producers receive from selling their goods and services. But taxes are necessary and unavoidable.
But once a market assumes all the effects of existing taxes it reaches an equilibrium price that both consumers and producers are satisfied with. If a new tax is levied than the deadweight losses are greater since consumer surplus and producer surplus are both reduced. This will lead to a reduction in the incentive that both consumers and producers have to engage in transactions. Many times consumers will substitute heavily taxed goods for other goods since they feel they are getting more from consuming those goods (consumer surplus). The same happens to producers, many producers will change their heavily taxed goods for other goods.
If the price elasticity of demand or supply of a certain good is large (elastic demand and supply), the deadweight loss will be greater.
Answer:
Incase of any emergency like an accident 5hey can support you
The term is SOCIAL ENGINEERING.
Social engineering is the art of manipulating people into breaking information security procedures or to give away confidential information which they have at their disposal.<span />
Answer:
AFS 2004 market price decline exceeded 2005 market price recovery
No No
The security cannot be classified as available-for-sale because the unrealized gains and losses are recognized in the Income Statement. Unrealized gains and losses on available-for-sale securities are recognized in owners' equity, not earnings.
The second part of the question is somewhat ambiguous. The 2004 price decline could exceed or be exceeded by the 2005 price recovery. The loss in the first year is not related in amount and does not constrain the realized gain in the second year.
The way to answer the question is to read the right column heading as implying that the earlier price decline must exceed the later price recovery. With that interpretation, the correct answer is no.
For example, assume a cost of $10 and a market value of $4 at the end of the first year. An unrealized loss of $6 is recognized in earnings. During the second year, the security is sold for $12. A realized gain of $8 is recognized-the increase in the market value from the end of the first year to the sale in the second year. Thus, the market decline in the first year did not exceed the recovery in year two. (It could have exceeded the recovery in year two but there is no requirement that it must.)
Explanation:
