Answer:
Part 1. Unemployment due to recession is Cyclical Unemployment.
Part 2. Mushashi recently lost her job because of Structural Unemployment.
Part 3. Rina is unemployed due to Frictional unemployment in the economy.
Explanation:
Part 1. A cyclical unemployment is the unemployment for a specific time duration and is inevitable due to serious issues across the country. Like nowadays, countries are suffering from great recession of all times recorded due to Corona-virus pandemic. One can assume that we will get rid of it sooner, so it is cyclical.
Part 2. Musashi is unemployed due to lower jobs demand of the skills that she possesses in the economy. Such type of unemployment that resulted because of the changes in the demand of the skills required is often referred to as structural unemployment.
Part 3. The frictional unemployment is the type of unemployment which exists in every economy because it occurs due to the process of employees shifting to other jobs by moving from one to another which is the case of Rina. She is now trying to shift to full-time position as she has graduated from college.
Answer:
What is its NOWC?
500
Explanation:
NOWC=(CURRENT ASSETS-EXCESS CASH)-(CURRENT LIABILITIES-NOTES PAYABLE)
Answer:
16.1%
Explanation:
According to CAPM :
expected return = risk free rate + ( beta x expected market return)
4.1% + (1.2 x 10%) = 16.1%
Answer:
<u>True</u>
Explanation:
Remember, Consideration is that thing that is legally agreed and given such as money, property in exchange for something.
What usually should come first in any contract is sufficient consideration; presence of value to be given.
Therefore, a Court can refuse to enforce an agreement due to insufficient consideration because it is the primary thing that should come first in any contract.
For example, a father gives his adult son $5 on Monday as a present and the son is impressed he says he’ll give his father $10 the following day, there is no contract. In this scenario the son does not have to give his father $10 on Tuesday, because they (son and father) did not agree to give $5 in exchange for $10. A court would term this case as having insufficient consideration.