Answer:
they help d*mb brains like you
Explanation:
no kizzy
Answer:A Surrendering Arms
Explanation:
Answer: A. designating an anti-charity should be more effective because loss aversion will provide additional motivation
.
Options:
A. designating an anti-charity should be more effective because loss
aversion will provide additional motivation
B. designating a charity should be more effective because it avoids all potential for loss
C. it shouldn’t matter whether one designates a charity or anti-charity
D. self-interest biases generally keep people from choosing the anti-charity
Explanation:
The study of behavioral Economics shows that people are more driven by the loss of fear than the hope of gain. This is known as loss aversion. In commitment contracts where penalty money is promised to a charity or an anti-charity if the goal is not achieved, those who promise their money to an anti-charity tend to achieve their goals more. The same also applies when comparing this group and those who do not have to forego anything if they do not meet their target.
This is because giving to a charity will still seem beneficial while losing the money to an anti-charity will seem like a total loss.
Make a quizlet and type the info in and review review review on the flash card platform
Answer:
True
Explanation:
This is the case of exposing the trade secret of a business. The word "may" has significant impact here as the court may or may not hold Mort liable(depending on the circumstances) since the trade secret isn't expressly protected by Southern Bar-B-Q albeit implied that an employee doesn't divulge the trade secret of the business which could bring damages to it.
