The above answer is definitely correct in its details. I'd just like to emphasize a couple of important ideas about Hoover's response.
<span>He tried to do more to fix the economy than any president had ever done before. The government had been very hands-off up to that point.He believed the government should not go in debt no matter what. This limited what he was willing to do. Please note that economists back then agreed with this idea so it's not like Hoover was just being mean. In fact, FDR believed the same thing and it's often said that he undermined the New Deal by trying to balance the budget too soon.</span>
So, overall what I want to point out is that Hoover did more than anyone else, and he did what most economists of the time would have said was the right thing to do. But it didn't work and so he's seen as one of the worst presidents ever, which seems a bit unfair.
It is a well-known fact that water is a basic need of a human being in order to survived. Generally, a person is known to survive for only 3 days without water. Thus, the best thing that I would send to a person who bought a house with no water is any amount of water which will allow them to survive until they procure their own supply.
Answer:
d. Enrique subscribes to the "bird in the hand "theory when it comes to dividends
Explanation:
Cash that is ready to use is better than having other assets that need to be converted into cash to be enjoyed later. This is the simple explanation of the "bird in the hand" theory. An investor who subscribes to this theory will highly likely prefer a cash dividend over a stock dividend.
Answer:
Yes, Dealer could collect damages from GM because basically GM breached the contract. Any time a contract is breached, the non-breaching party can sue. But the real question here is what amount could the court assign to Dealer as compensation for damages incurred. If you want to rephrase this question, it would be: What damages did Dealer suffer due to GM's breach.
If the damages are not significant, then the court will probably assign some amount for nominal damages. To be honest, the greatest expenses here are actually the legal costs of the lawsuit. Unless Dealer can prove that assigning the contract actually hurt them (which I doubt), then the court will assign a small amount. Sometimes nominal damages can be very small and mostly symbolic, e.g. $1.
Answer:
$10
Explanation:
Steve achieved a producer surplus of $10, which is commensurate with the value of the 6-pack of beer he received from his neighbor. This means he practically sold the old surfboard for $10.
