Considering the scenario described above, at the store, I am an employee. This is because I'm hired full-time.
Also, because an office manager is supervising me, that shows I am an employee.
Also, given that I work within normal business hours at the store, that is a characteristic of an employee. Again, payment of wages is associated with employee relations.
On the other hand, I work as an independent contractor at the pub because I decide the music to play and get paid per gig.
Also, given that I don't work at normal hours and get paid at a lump sum, this is an independent contractor working feature.
Hence, in this case, it is concluded that I worked as an independent contractor at the pub and an employee at the store.
Learn more here: brainly.com/question/20834227
Answer:
scarcity
tradeoffs
Explanation:
Humans have unlimited wants and the resources available to satisfy this wants are limited. Thus, humans have to choose the most important wants and give up less important wants.
For example, if you have $20 and you want to buy a textbook , ice-cream or jeans. Each cost $20. If you need the textbook to study for a test, you would choose the book. Here $20 is the scarce resource. jeans and ice cream are what you traded off
Answer:
is this a question? maybe you could give more context.
Answer:
<em>Yes, this is antitrust violation. Because, the tend to restrain trade in that small city thereby denying other small player brokerage firms from making a living due to their monopolistic actions among themselves.</em>
Explanation:
Antitrust laws are designed in-order to prohibit a number of business practices that restrain trade. Examples of illegal practices are price-fixing conspiracies, corporate mergers that are likely to cut back the competitive fervor of certain markets, and predatory acts designed to gain or hold on to monopoly power.
<em>Violations of such laws attract sanctions and punishment from the regulatory body in-charge of protecting such.</em>