I would probably urge him to engage in guerrilla warfare to be more successful in his military campaigns against the American troops and to fortify his new town Prophetstown to be better prepared against attack by American forces .
Answer:
The answer is below
Explanation:
A What is the probability that all 4 selected workers will be the day shift?
B What is the probability that all 4 selected workers will be the same shift?
C What is the probability that at least two different shifts will be represented among the selected workers.
A)
The total number of workers = 10 + 8 + 6 = 24
The probability that all 4 selected workers will be the day shift is given as:


B) The probability that all 4 selected workers will be the same shift (
) = probability that all 4 selected workers will be the day shift + probability that all 4 selected workers will be the swing shift + probability that all 4 selected workers will be the graveyard shift.
Hence:

C) The probability that at least two different shifts will be represented among the selected workers (
)= 1 - the probability that all 4 selected workers will be the same shift(
)

Answer:
$21,080.2
Explanation:
The price of the car will be the down-payment plus the future value of 375 paid each month for 5 years compounded monthly at 9.72%.
The formula for calculating future value is
PV = P × 1 − (1+r)−n
r
PV is $350
r is 9.72 % or 0.0972 % per year or 0.0081
t is five year or 60 months
FV = 350 x (1-(1+0.0081)-60
0.0081
Fv =350 x 1-0.61628715419
0.0081
FV =350 x( 0.38371284581/0.00810
FV =350 x 47.371956
FV =16,580.20
The value of the car = $4500 + 16,580.20
=$21,080.2
<span>Lost profits are consequential damages. Haddad is right that a buyer may not recover consequential damages that it could have prevented by cover. But Jewell-Rung offered legitimate reasons for not covering: the only Lakeland garments now available to it were those made by Olympic. Olympic would not sell a competitor the garments at reasonable prices. Further, Jewell-Rung could not rely on the quality of the garments manufactured by a different company. Jewell-Rung's failure to cover was reasonable and the company was entitled to prove its lost profits. Jewell-Rung Agency, Inc. v. Haddad Organization, Ltd</span>