Answer:
UCL= <u>0.044</u>
LCL=<u>-0.004</u>
Explanation:
Use following formula to calculate the UCL and LCL
UCL = p + z
Where
P = defect rate = 2% = 0.02
z = sigma control chart limit = 3
n = samploe size = 300
PLacing values in the formula
UCL = 0.02+3
UCL = 0.02 + 3 x 0.008082904
UCL = 0.02 + 0.024248711
UCL = 0.044248711
UCL = 0.044
Now calculate LCL using folllowing formula
LCL = p - z
Where
P = defect rate = 2% = 0.02
z = sigma control chart limit = 3
n = samploe size = 300
PLacing values in the formula
LCL = 0.02 - 3
LCL = 0.02 - 3 x 0.008082904
LCL = 0.02 - 0.024248711
LCL = -0.004248711
LCL = -0.004
<u>According to keynesianism, as more items are being made, what happens to prices D. the prices stay the same</u>
Explanation:
Keynes advocated that an increased government expenditures and lower taxes can stimulate demand and it can pull the global economy out of the depression.
Keynesians believe that, because prices are somewhat rigid, fluctuations in any component of spending like consumption, investment, or government expenditure will cause the output to change. If government spending increases, for example, and all other spending components remain constant, then output will increase.
<u>According to keynesianism, as more items are being made, what happens to prices D. the prices stay the same</u>
Answer:
The benefits of a High Speed Rail in California:
- It becomes a feasible alternative to air travel, because it can be either cheaper, or even faster, since passengers do not have to spend as much time on a train station as they do on an airport.
- If demand is high enough, state highways can become less congested, because many people who would otherwise travel by car, would take a high speed train instead.
- Because the trains are electric, they are likely to help reduce pollution.
The cons would be:
- We cannot know for sure how many people would take the high speed trains. Demand could not be high enough to justify the cost.
- The line would be very costly.
- It could end up benefit only a small section of the population who would take the trains, or who travel often.
I believe that the benefits outweigh the drawbacks, as can be seen in most countries where high speed lines have been made between large cities. For example, in Spain, the line between Madrid and Barcelona is profitable. The same would likely happen for a line between Los Angeles and San Francisco.
What are the implications of starting a project based on tenuous projections that may or may not come true 10 years from now?
If demand projections are tenous, there is always the possiblity that the high speed line could not be profitable. However, this risk can be lowered if the line is made between highly populated cities.
Could you justify the California high-speed rail project from the perspective of a massive public works initiative?
Yes, a high speed rail would be a project that could massively impact California. The benefits of its operation could outweight the cost.
In other words, what other factors enter into the decision of whether to pursue a high-speed rail project?
As I said before, the most important factor is to construct line between highly populated cities in order to reduce the risk of not having enough demand. It has been demonstrated around the world, in Spain, in Italy, in Japan, in China, that high speed lines that connect very populated regions, can be profitable.
Answer:
59% - a)increase - b)decrease
Explanation:
First of all, we should say that the real exchange rate is calculated by multiplying the nominal exchange rate for the price index and then divide it by the price index of the other country. In another language, using this case as the example, the first nominal exchange rate is 50, as you need 50 rupees to buy 1 dollar. So to calculate the real exchange rate you need to multiply 50 by 100 (the price index of USA) and then divide it by 100 (the price index of India). Note that both price indexes are 100, just a coincidence for making easier the question. Result: 50.
Then we calculate the next real exchange rate: multiply 60 (the new nominal exchange rate) by 106 (the new US price index) and divide by 80 (the new India price index). This throws a result of 79,5. We see a 29,5 increase, and 29,5 represents 59% of 50 (the initial real exchange rate).
Then both questions is more common sense than the reading of the results we just calculated. For example, nominal exchange rate changed from 50 to 60, so the people in India will now have to collect 10 more rupees to buy the same dollar. Let's suppose a pair of shoes in USA costs 40 dollars. Before, Indians needed 2000 rupees to buy it. Now they will need 2400 rupees... it will be more expensive. Plus, the prices of USA had gone up 6%, which means the pair of shoes will now cost 42,4 dollars... even more expensive! As products in USA are more expensive, we can expect that India's consumption of American goods will decrease (law of demand).
With the American consumption of Indian goods happens the opposite, the goods in India became cheaper (price index has fallen), and for the Americans, the same dollars they had will buy more rupees when the exchange rate changed to 60.
Answer: A
Explanation:
The borrower can adjust the monthly payment depending on his or her income.
