Answer:
1. Increasing
2. A. The elasticity of private saving with respect to the after-tax real interest rate
B. The response of private saving to changes in the government budget deficit
C. The elasticity of investment with respect to the interest rate
Explanation:
1. It is difficult to implement both of these policies at the same time because reducing taxes on private spending has the effect of <u><em>Increasing</em></u> the government budget deficit.
A Government budget deficit is acquired when the government spends more than it earns. The Government earns money from taxes and if it spends more than it receives in taxes, that will lead to a deficit. If taxes on Private spending are reduced, this will lead to less tax revenue for the government thereby increasing the Deficit.
2. All of the listed options are useful in determining which policy would be a more effective way to raise investment.
The elasticity of private saving with respect to the after-tax real interest rate refers to how much private saving changes in reaction to a change in the tax rates. This can enable one decide how much investment will be expected if the Government reduces or increases taxes.
The response of private saving to changes in the government budget deficit is also a useful factor to look at because private savings reduce when government deficits reduce.
Also how much does investment change by due to interest rates. This will be important to note in terms of Private Investment to see if it will be beneficial to use it over reducing the government budget deficit given a certain interest rate.
Answer:
D) $130,000
Explanation:
We can compute this by calculating the total dividends payable to preferred stock holders each year.
Dividends payable = 10,000 * 90 * 0.10 = $90,000
Since the shares are cumulative, the total preferred dividend payable at the end of third year is = $90,000 * 3 = $270,000
So common share in dividend = Total paid - Preferred dividend cumulative
Common Dividend share = 400,000 - 270,000 = $130,000
Hope that helps.
Answer:
The correct answer to the following question will be Option C.
Explanation:
- Constant cost industries seem to be a sector wherein the proportion of units produced as well as manufacturing costs every unit maintains the very same irrespective including its amount of manufacturing or rise in population. Which doesn't use input data in the appropriate amount to influence the rates of that same components by a shift in industry revenue.
- This doesn't even use inputs in such amounts that perhaps the costs of that same inputs will be influenced by a change in business production.
The other choices are not linked to an industry of this kind. Therefore the clarification above is correct.
Answer:
D1 = $3.50
D2 = $3.50
D3 = $3.50
Ke = 10% = 0.1
Po = <u>D1</u> + <u>D2</u> + <u>D3
</u>
(1+ke) (1+ke)2 (1+ke)3
Po = <u>$3.50</u> + <u>$3.50</u> + <u>$3.50
</u>
(1+0.1) (1+0.1)2 (1+0.1)3
Po = $3.18 + $2.89 + $2.63
Po = $8.70
None of the above
Explanation:
In this scenario, we need to discount the dividend in each year by the required at rate of return of 10%. The aggregate of the price obtained as a result of discounting in year 1 to year 3 gives the current market price.
This website would not exist. Social lives would improve because everyone would actually hang out with people. We would not be able to get places fast because cars would not be developed.
