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:
The correct answer is b) Product of the number of workers and the level of human capital
Explanation:
The efficiency unit of labor is determinate as a product of the total number of workers in the economy, where the human capital is the best indicator of productivity
<span>One result of the global economy is that trade
between the United States and other countries has decreased. </span>
Answer:
194,112.8
Explanation:
The computation of Net Present Value is shown below:-
Net Present Value = Present value of cash inflows - Present value of Cash outflows
= -757,000 + 396,000 × PVAF (12%, 3 years)
= -757,000 + 396,000 × 2.4018
= -757,000 + 951,112.8
= LLC 194,112.8
= 194,112.8
Therefore for computing the net present value we simply applied the above formula.
Answer:
b. Tyco is liable because it authorized Jane to issue payroll checks.
Explanation:
There is the company responsibility to put the right person for the specific job. Here in the given situation Jane would not be a liable person for an vital position of the company. in the case when the fraud done by the employee so the firm would be liable as the company provide the authorization to the person who have to perform that job
Therefore, the option b is correct