Answer: Please refer to Explanation
Explanation:
1. Inflationary Gap.
Due to the availability of more disposal income due to tax cuts, more amount is being spent on consumption leading to a rise in actual GDP which is more than the potential GDP as the economy has not adjusted.
2. Output Gap.
This is the difference between the Actual GDP and the Potential GDP.
3. Demand Shock
This increases or reduces Aggregate Demand due but only temporarily.
4. Recessionary Gap.
This is where actual GDP falls below Potential GDP.
5. Supply Shock.
Like a demand shock, it suddenly increases or reduces the supply of goods and services. It is temporary as well.
6. Self Correction
Economists believe that in the long run, the Economy is capable of adjusting to shocks and returning to it's potential and natural levels.
Answer:
Increase , increase
Explanation:
A decrease in the supply of a product increases in its price. Reduced supply means many buyers competing for the few available products. The prices of goods or services are determined by the intersection of the demand and supply curves. There is an indirect relationship between supply and price of quantity supplied when demand is constant. A reduced supply results in high prices while an increase in supply causes low prices.
As prices increase, suppliers will want to supply more to make profits. Constant demand and a high price will thus lead to an increase in equilibrium quantity.
I'm going with false. Let me know.
Answer:
c. $59,000
Explanation:
The cash flow statements shows the effect of the company's activities on cash. These activities are classed into operating, investing and financing activities.
When an asset is sold, the amount received from the sale is an inflow of cash to the company. This inflow is recognized in the investing segment of the cas flow statement.
Hence, the amount that should be reported as a source of cash under cash flows from investing activities is $59,000.
Answer:
The correct answer is that: informants are difficult to control and the police can not trust in them always.
Explanation:
To begin with, if the police officer finds out that the informant went behind his back and purchase drug then the officer must understand that the informant is not trustful and moreover<u> he could mean a risk to the whole undercover operation</u> that the police officer is managing, therefore that the scenario is propounding that situations like that exemplify that informants can not be trusted due to the fact that they are ex convicted and that is why the officers have to be carefull when working with them.
