Answer:
The criticism is true to a certain degree, and unjustified to another degree.
Explanation:
It is true in the sense that the U.S. has indeed lost a lot of manufacturing to Mexico, simply because Mexico has far lower labor costs, and U.S. manufacturers have decided to take advantage of that by taking their plants to Mexican states.
It is also true that Mexico has been running a trade surplus with the United States in recent years, mainly because of the large manufacturing sector that Mexico has been developing.
On the other hand, the criticism is unjustified because neither a trade deficit nor the moving of manufacturing to Mexico mean that the United States as a whole is in worst condition than before NAFTA. In fact, most economists agree that free trade is a good thing for the economy as a whole, and that most people benefit from the lower costs and specialization that trade brings about.
The problem lies then, in the people who lose their jobs: formerly unionized manufacturing workers from the Rust Belt, for example. These people need to be helped with government assitance, both in terms of welfare, and training, so that they can find new jobs and make ends meet in the meanwhile.
Answer:
The answer to this question is c. Kathy has to pay based on a quasi contract.
Explanation:
Based on the scenario displayed above Kathy has to pay based on a quasi contract.
A Quasi contract is a contract that is created by a court order, not by an agreement made by the parties to the contract. For example, quasi contracts are created by the court when no official agreement exists between the parties, in disputes over payments for goods or services
In this case there has not been an official agreement between Kathy and the hospital, However she has to pay the bill presented to her based on Quasi contract which is created to prevent an individual to be unjustly enriched or from benefiting from the situation when he/she does not deserve to do so.
Hence the answer is c. Kathy has to pay based on a quasi contract.
