Answer:
Free trade of goods and services benefits all countries in the world. This is because of the concept of comparative advantage that tells us that some countries are better at providing specific goods and services than others.
For example, Japan is made up of relatively small islands that are very mountainous, forested, and lacking in natural resources. Besides, the country has a large population concentrated in the few flat areas. This essentially means that Japan is severly lacking in agricultural land and raw materials, and has to import most of its food, oil, natural gas, among other things. This is why the country has specialized in electronics, automobiles, and pharmaceuticals.
Brazil is the opposite: a very large country with hundreds of thousands of square miles fit for agricultural production. The country is a great exporter of soy, rice, sugar, and oil. However, the brazilian industry is not competitive, and most of its exports are to neighboring Argentina.
Without free trade, Japan could hardly feed itself, or it would do so with great difficulty. At the same time, Brazil would have a large surplus of food and raw materials, but its citizens would lack access to high-tech Japanese goods such as Toyota cars, or Sony electronic devices. Both countries would be worse-off.
Answer:
Purchases= 408,000 pounds
Explanation:
Giving the following information:
Production:
2nd Q= 99,000 units
3rd= 109,000 units
Four pounds of material A are required for each unit produced.
Desired ending inventory= 30% of the next quarter's production
<u>To calculate the purchases for the second quarter, we need to use the following formula:</u>
Purchases= production + desired ending inventory - beginning inventory
Purchases= (99,000*4) + (109,000*4)*0.3 - (99,000*4)*0.3
Purchases= 396,000 + 130,800 - 118,800
Purchases= 408,000 pounds
Answer: E - The technology which the company is considering adopting was recently developed and has not yet been successfully implemented in a real business context.
Explanation: the company would be able to recover the cost of adoption of the new technology . This strengthens the argument that the upgrade should take place.
The new technology would improve cost of production and efficiency. This strengthens the argument that the upgrade takes place.
Because the upgrade hasn't been successfully tested, it might have an unintended negative impact which would erode all the benefits of the upgrade
Answer:
All i know is no its not illegal at all .
Explanation:
The spending that would occur during the third round of spending if the marginal propensity to consume (MPC) was 0.6 will be $420 billion.
- Increase in expenditure = $700 billion.
- Marginal propensity to consume = 0.6
The amount of spending based on the information given will be:
= 0.6 × $700 billion
= $420 billion.
Therefore, the correct option is $420 billion.
Read related link on:
brainly.com/question/17012549
