Answer:
C
Explanation:
Something with a mistake is never best ignored it’s best if they change it and get it corrected.
Answer:A. The lack of incentive voters have to become well-informed about candidates and issues because their vote is unlikely to affect the outcome of an election.
Explanation: Rational ignorance is a term used to describe the intentional decline or refusal by a person or group of persons to gain certain knowledge,mainly after considering the cost and benefits attached to gaining that knowledge.
When people choose not to learn a particular trade,subject etc after comparing the costs to the potential gains.
RATIONAL IGNORANCE IS ALSO CONCERNED WITH THE DECISION OF VOTERS WHEN MAKING CHOICE OF NOT PARTAKING IN AN ELECTION BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE THAT THEIR VOTES DO NOT COUNT OR HAVE EFFECTS ON THE FINAL OUTCOMES ETC.
Answer: The Contract is valid.
Explanation:
Under the UCC’s Statute of Frauds, transactions above $500 for goods cannot be made orally alone and have to be written in writing as well. This is the law that Rosenfield relied on.
However, Fallsview can argue that the Passover Retreat is not a Good, but rather a Service in which case it does not fall under the Statute.
The main bone of contention thereby becomes, if indeed it is a service or a good.
If it is a Hybrid of both, then the Court needs to decide if the services outweigh the goods involved.
From the text we see that the following were included in the package, food, entertainment, and lectures on religious subjects.
Food is the only good there and is outweighed by Entertainment and lectures on religious subjects.
As such, the contract is valid as it is for more service than good.
<span>The most probable thing that will happen if the pie maker keeps making additional pies is this: the marginal costs will continue to rise, increasing the total cost, while the marginal revenue remains the same, decreasing the profit. This is to assume that no buyer is interested in purchasing the pies at a certain period of time. </span>
Answer:
Alice's consumer surplus = $5
Jeff's consumer surplus = $16
Nicole's producer surplus = $1
Explanation:
Consumer surplus is the difference between the willingness to pay of a consumer and the price of a good.
Consumer surplus = willingness to pay - price of the good
Producer surplus is the difference between the price of a good and the least price the producer is willing to accept
Producer surplus = price of the good - least price the producer is willing to accept
Alice's consumer surplus = $30 - ($35 - $10) = $5
Jeff's consumer surplus = $20 - [$16 - (0.75 x $16)] = $16
Nicole's producer surplus = $501 - $500 = $1
