Answer:
Option B
Explanation:
Null hypothesis: ∪ = $175
Alternative hypothesis: ∪ₐ ≠ $175
With a pp value of 0.0021 which is less than value at the level of significance, the null hypothesis is not rejected as there is no sufficient statistical evidence that the mean is greater than $175.
Answer:
I should not accept the bet; the precise level of risk aversion does matter.
Explanation:
Risk averse person is the one who is not willing to take the risk even if he is given high returns. Risk averse person will always avoid the risks. In the given scenario the person is risk averse. If he rolls out the dice he has to pay $200 times the dice number which means he just have two chance (dice rolls 1 or dice rolls 2) for getting return otherwise he will loose the bet and he will have to pay money from the pocket.
Answer:
Business umbrella approach gives inclusion to the firm against those misfortunes that may bankrupt the firm. The arrangement covers a definitive misfortune in abundance of held breaking point happens because of real injury, property harm, promoting and individual injury. A definitive misfortune is the lawful risk to which back up plan is committed to pay. As far as possible is the accessible furthest reaches of the fundamental protection. According to the umbrella arrangement, the protected needs to keep up some base measure of obligation before the case is paid by the umbrella strategy. In the event that the guaranteed is secured under some other strategy, at that point first that sum is paid and remaining sum is paid by umbrella approach in the wake of fulfilling oneself safeguarded maintenance.
The complete loss to the organization is $5 million, at that point $1 million will be paid by general obligation strategy and $1 million will be paid by business auto approach. Out of the remaining $3 million, self-safeguarded limit is $100,000 which demonstrates that $2.9 million ($3 million less 5100,000) will be paid by umbrella arrangement.
Answer:
All macroeconomic goals are achieved.
Explanation:
All macroeconomic goals should be achieved in the long term macro equilibrium.
On the long term macro equilibrium, real GDP should be equal to potential GDP. This is all theoretical since there is no real possibility that the potential GDP is ever equal to the real GDP. There will always be at least one economic actor that is not being 100% efficient, so potential GDP is unreachable.
