1answer.
Ask question
Login Signup
Ask question
All categories
  • English
  • Mathematics
  • Social Studies
  • Business
  • History
  • Health
  • Geography
  • Biology
  • Physics
  • Chemistry
  • Computers and Technology
  • Arts
  • World Languages
  • Spanish
  • French
  • German
  • Advanced Placement (AP)
  • SAT
  • Medicine
  • Law
  • Engineering
balu736 [363]
3 years ago
8

The rise of fast-food restaurants, such as McDonald's, made it easier for families to go out to eat rather than preparing their

food at home. All other things being equal, the shift of food preparation from the home to the fast-food restaurant would have the effect of:
Business
1 answer:
liberstina [14]3 years ago
6 0

Answer:

These are the options for the question:

a. lowering GDP

b. raising GDP

c. leaving GDP unchanged

And this is the correct answer:

b. raising GDP

Explanation:

Going out to eat at a fast food restaurant such as McDonald's is usually (not always) more expensive that buying groceries, and preparing meals at home. This means that eating out increases spending, raising GDP.

Eating out also increases spending on gasoline, tips to waiting staff, and even on merchandise, because it is frequent that parents buy toys to kids while eating out. All this actions contribute even more to increasing GDP.

You might be interested in
According to McGregor which of the following characterizes the assumptions of a Theory X manager?
Korvikt [17]

Answer:

All of the above

Explanation:

This theory is one of the theories of work and motivation as it pertains to certain workers. The theory is by Douglas MacGregor

These are the assumptions

1.that many people hate anything work and would do anything they can to avoid working.

2.people are not ambitious. They would rather avoid responsibility

3. People have to be forced to work, so they must be directed.

7 0
3 years ago
10 points Item Skipped eBookPrintReferencesCheck my workCheck My Work button is now enabledItem 7 Assume Organic Ice Cream Compa
serious [3.7K]

The completion of separate depreciation schedules for each of the alternative depreciation methods is as follows:

<h3>a. Straight-line Method:</h3>

Year          Cost         Annual Depreciation     Accumulated      Net Book

                                                                         Depreciation          Value

Year 1     $20,000             $4,455                       $4,455            $15,545

Year 2    $20,000             $4,455                          8,910              11,090

Year 3    $20,000             $4,455                        13,365              6,535

Year 4    $20,000            $4,455                        17,820               2,180

<h3>b. Units-of-production Method:</h3>

Year          Cost         Annual Depreciation     Accumulated      Net Book

                                                                         Depreciation          Value

Year 1     $20,000             $7,128                         $7,128            $12,872

Year 2    $20,000            $5,346                         12,474               7,526

Year 3    $20,000            $3,564                        16,038               3,962

Year 4    $20,000            $1,782                         17,820               2,180

<h3>c. Double-declining-balance Method:</h3>

Year          Cost         Annual Depreciation     Accumulated      Net Book

                                                                         Depreciation          Value

Year 1     $20,000             $10,000                       $10,000         $10,000

Year 2    $20,000              $5,000                          15,000            5,000

Year 3    $20,000             $2,500                           17,500            2,500

Year 4    $20,000                $320                           17,820             2,180

<h3>Data and Calculations:</h3>

Cost of asset = $20,000

Residual value = $2,180

Depreciable amount = $17,820 ($20,000 - $2,180)

Estimated productive life = 4 years or 9,900 hours

<h3>Annual depreciation rates:</h3>

Straight-line method = $4,455 ($17,820/4)

Units-of-production Method per unit = $1.8 ($17,820/9,900)

Double-declining-balance Method rate = 50% (100/4 x 2)

Learn more about depreciation methods at brainly.com/question/25806993

#SPJ1

3 0
2 years ago
Suppose that France and Denmark both produce fish and stained glass. France's opportunity cost of producing a pane of stained gl
andriy [413]

Answer:

France has a comparative advantage in the production of stained glass.

Denmark has a comparative advantage in production of fish.

France will gain from trade as long as it gets more than 3 pounds of fish for each pane of stained glass.

Denmark can gain from trade if it gets more than 0.09 pane of stained glass for each pound of fish it exports.

4 pounds of fish per pane of stained glass.

7 pounds of fish per pane of stained glass.

Explanation:

France and Denmark both produce fish and stained glass.

France's opportunity cost of producing a pane of stained glass

= 3 pounds of fish

Denmark's opportunity cost of producing a pane of stained glass

= 11 pounds of fish

France's opportunity cost of producing a pound of fish

= \frac{1}{3}

= 0.33 pane of stained glass

Denmark's opportunity cost of producing a pound of fish

= \frac{1}{11}

= 0.09 pane of stained glass

France has a lower opportunity cost of producing stained glass so we can say it has a comparative advantage in the production of stained glass. While Denmark has a comparative advantage in the production of fish.

If both countries start to trade with each other, France will gain from trade as long as it gets more than 3 pounds of fish for each pane of stained glass.

While Denmark can gain from trade if it gets more than 0.09 pane of stained glass for each pound of fish it exports.

Both the countries will gain from trade if the trade price lies between their opportunity cost. both countries will gain from trade if the price is 4 pounds of fish per pane of stained glass or 7 pounds of fish per pane of stained glass.

8 0
3 years ago
You own a portfolio of two stocks, a and
Furkat [3]
Stock a is $2000. Calculate 10.5% of $2000, which equals $210.
Stock b is $3000. Calculate 14.7% of $3000, which is $441.

The expected return on the portfolio is $210 + $441, which equals $651. 
7 0
3 years ago
Which of the following statements is true regarding variable costing?Multiple Choice
pentagon [3]

Answer:

a

Explanation:

8 0
3 years ago
Read 2 more answers
Other questions:
  • 6. You have 45 years left until retirement and want to retire with $4 million. Your salary is paid annually, and you will receiv
    5·1 answer
  • If you are able to produce 1 piece of fine furniture or 10 birdhouses using the same resources, and your competitor is able to p
    11·1 answer
  • Compare and contrast the potential for a perfectly competitive firm and a monopolistically competitive firm to earn positive eco
    12·1 answer
  • Large ice crystals in frozen food product are often an indication that the food product has undergone:
    5·1 answer
  • Loggers are much likely to supply wood to the market if property rights are enforced. In the presence of market failures, public
    10·1 answer
  • Luke is the owner of Fun Times, a U.S. event-planning company. He plans to open an event-planning company, Events &amp; Adventur
    5·1 answer
  • A British Tran jet costs $ 42,000,000 and is expected to fly 350,000,000 miles during its 12​-year life. Residual value is expec
    12·1 answer
  • Inventories refer to goods that have been produced and sold in the same year. goods which have been presold before they are prod
    11·1 answer
  • 1. If Bodin Company plans to sell 480,000 units during the year, compute the number of units the firm would have to manufacture
    7·2 answers
  • Hyperlink is a feature that - a- calculates data in a cell B- connects test in the doc to an outside source C- saves a worksheet
    6·1 answer
Add answer
Login
Not registered? Fast signup
Signup
Login Signup
Ask question!