The term is "selection".
Paul B. Baltes was a German therapist whose expansive scientific plan was dedicated to building up and advancing the life-span orientation of human advancement. He was likewise a scholar in the field of the psychology of aging. Baltes was born in 1939 and died in 2006 at the age of sixty-seven.
-dress nicely
-be prepared
-empathize
Where are your options? Anyway, I hope this helps!!! :)
Answer:
b. 6 pairs of jeans per crate of olives; and
c. 4 pairs of jeans per crate of olives
Explanation:
Olives Jeans Trade off Ratio (Olives:Jeans)
Spain 1 3 1:3 or 0.33:1 (1/3 = 0.33)
Denmark 1 11 1:11 or 0.09:1 (1/11= 0.09)
Spain & Denmark have less opportunity cost & hence comparative advantage than each other, in Olive & Jeans respectively.
Spain will export Olives to Denmark (importer). Denmark will export Jeans to Spain (Importer). Trade will be gainful if they get exchange ratio better than domestic exchange ratio.
- '2 jeans pairs per olive crate' not gainful trade ratio for Spain, as it is getting more i.e 3 jeans pair per olive crate at its own domestic ratio.
- '13 jeans per olive' not gainful for Denmark, as 0.07 = (1/13) olive per jeans is worse than its own domestic ratio i.e 0.09 = (1/11) olive per jeans
'4 jeans pairs per olive crate' is gaining trade ratio for:
- Spain: As it gets 4 i.e more than 3 pairs of jeans per olive crate
- Denmark : As it gets 0.25 = (1/4) i.e more than 0.09 olive crates per pair of jeans
'6 jeans pairs per olive crate' is gaining trade ratio for:
- Spain: As it gets 6 i.e more than 3 pairs of jeans per olive crate
- Denmark : As it gets 0.16 = (1/6) i.e more than 0.09 olive crates per pair of jeans
Both of them are gainful trade ratios, but:
- 1olive:4 jeans is more gainful for Denmark, as it is gaining relatively more than domestic exchange rate (0.25 is more > 0.09 than 4 > 3).
- 1olive:6jeans is more gainful for Spain as it is gaining relatively more than domestic exchange rate (6 is more > 3 than 0.16 > 0.09)
Answer and Explanation:
The computation is shown below:
a. Holding period return would be
= Income + (End of Period Value - Initial Value) ÷ Initial Value
= 0 +($2,178 - $1,902) ÷ $1,902
= 0 + $276 ÷ $1,902
= 14.51%
b. The annual percentage rate is
For 3 months, the rate is 14.51%
Now
For 12 months, it is
= 14.51% ÷ 3 × 12
= 14.51 % × 4
= 58.04%
c. The effective annual rate is
= ( 1 + r ÷ m)^m - 1
= (1 + 58.04% ÷ 4)^4 - 1
= (1 + 0.5804 ÷ 4)^4 - 1
= (1 + 0.1451)^4 - 1
= (1.1451)^4 - 1
= 1.719387079 - 1
= 0.719387079 or 71.94%
Answer:
corporate philanthropy.
Explanation:
Corporate philanthropy refers to an act done by a corporation or business organization with a motive to promote the welfare of a society by charitable donations of funds
Since in the question it is mentioned that the Jessica already aside the amount of $10,000 for the nonprofit organization and already it meets the requirement of government to contribute 4% of the company revenue for the social benefits
So this given situation represents the corporate philanthropy.
