Answer:
The correct answer is the option A: the company's present business offer attractive growth opportunities and can be counted on to create economic value for shareholders.
Explanation:
To begin with, the fact that a company faces the dilemma between continue with the current business lineup or change it in order to begin producing a new one by starting from zero then a lot of variables must be taken care of and considered, that is, that at the moment of making the final decision the managers must understand the opportunity costs that can affect the organization and moreover the benefits that the actual lineup makes. That is why, that at the time of sticking with the current business lineup it makes sense to continue with the current one when the company's present business offer attractive growth opportunities and can be counted on to create economic value for shareholders.
When using the expenditure approach, we are looking at the total spending of a business that is included in the equation to compute for GDP. For this, I would say government purchases is the answer because government purchases would take up the biggest chunk of a country's revenue for development and imports.
<span>The Rule of 70 can be used to determine the length of time it would take for a variable to double. In this case, using a growth rate of 4%, we can divide 70/4 to find that it would take 17.5 years for the GDP of this nation to approximately double.</span>
Answer:
True
Explanation:
This is the case because tax cuts and government spending are instruments that could be used in expansionary fiscal policy.
Note that reduced taxes usually have a direct impact on the disposable income of a economy not the composition of labor demand. Tax cuts leads directly to consumption and savings increase, resulting from increase in disposable income in the economy.
