The rate of change is +2
as an ordered pair it would be (1,-3),(2,-1)(3,1),(4,3)
In order to see the probaability of this we need to do an easy calculation here:
If X<span> is the price for the policy, then we proceed like this:
</span>0.982x = 0.0275*<span>31,000
</span><span>
x = 0.0275*</span><span>31,000</span><span>/0.982
Minimum ammount he can expect to pay = $868.12 </span>
Answer:
a)what was concluded is spurious
b) what was concluded could betrue
Step-by-step explanation:
a) Considering the number in Michigan, there is higher number of crimes but considering the population in Minnesota, the population is much less than Michigan, considering the crime the crimes per capital with the population size, Therefore Minnesota could have more crimes than Michigan's so, The conclusion is not true.
b)There is reduction of crimes from 1991 to 2001, so it can be assumed that the population has increased over the times, therefore, the per capita number of crimes decreased.
I believe the answer will be 23in
