In inductive reasoning, the premises are seen as supplying strong evidence for the truth of the conclusion. The conclusion is definite, but the truth may be probable, based on the available evidence. So she might say, that based on the past history of the company involved, whenever the company is losing money for a given length of time, there are layoffs, so in these similar circumstances it is probable that these planned layoffs will occur.
Answer: Company Pays $1640
Carol Bryd pays $410
Explanation:
The total bill is $2300 and the deductible needs to be taken out.
$2300-$250
=$2050
Company Payment.
Company Pays 80% which translates to 0.8
0.8*2050
= $1640 is the company Payment.
Carol then pays the difference which is
$2050 - $1640
= $410
Carol pays $410
Answer:
The operators have not violated the antitrust laws because they are only collaborating to lobby the government
Explanation:
The antitrust law in the U.S. can be described as a group of federal and state government laws enacted to regulate the activities of business firms in order to enhance competition to the advantage of consumers.
The antitrust law aims to collusive activities that suppress trade, any merger and acquisition that would reduce competition, and prevent the the abuse of monopoly power.
Since the activity of the operators of adult bookstores does not fall under what the antitrust law aims to prevent but it is just a collaboration to lobby the government, they have a good defense that they have not violated the antitrust laws.
She profits more each month
Usually, a brand promise is some sort of statement said by an organization to its consumers, or customers, stating what the customers may expect from their product(s) and/or service(s).
Hope this helps!
