Answer:
Since 1980s, the proportion of the income of the top 5% of the richest Americans has risen and the proportion of income of the lowest fifth or the poorest Americans has fallen.
Explanation:
According to the source, the U.S. Census Bureau, the Aggregate Income received by each fifth and top 5% of households was tabulated and it was found that the proportion of the income of the top 5% of the richest Americans has risen, whereas the proportion of income of the lowest fifth or the poorest Americans has fallen, since the 1980s.
Answer:
The reduction in assets would improve the ROE by 7.81%.
Explanation:
This can be calculated as follows:
Previous equity = (100% - Debt-to-total-capital ratio) * Previous total invested capital = (100% - 39%) * $440,000 = 61% * $440,000 = $268,400
Previous return on equity (ROE) = (Net income / Previous equity) * 100 = ($28,250 / $268,400) * 100 = 10.53%
New equity = (100% - Debt-to-total-capital ratio) * New total invested capital = (100% - 39%) * $252,500 = 61% * $252,500 = $154,025
New ROE = (Net income / New equity) * 100 = ($28,250 / $154,025) * 100 = 18.34%
Change in ROE = New ROE - Previous ROE = 18.34% - 10.53% = 7.81%
Since change in ROE is 7.81% and positive, this implies that the reduction in assets would improve the ROE by 7.81%.
Answer:
Investing all of your money into 1-2 funds so that you can focus on making money through compound interest.
Explanation:
Answer:
The correct answer is: a decrease in the price and quantity of hybrid cars.
Explanation:
According to the Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH), publicly-available information influence the asset's price movement. In that sense, if it is widely known that the gas prices will fall sharply, hybrid cars -fuel and electrical fueled cars, will see a fall in their price since the demand will increase. As implies fewer profits for a company, they are likely to produce fewer units of those types of vehicles.
I feel like this is a trick question because it would not be that simple of a decision but if those were the only two things to consider then I guess it would be true. But in real life you would have to worry about employment costs, advertisement of the new store, who will manage each store when you are at the other store, etc. There would be so many more things going into that decision than just 450,000-400,000=50,000. But I would go with true.
Hope that helps.
