Answer: O EQUILIBRIUM
HOPE THIS HELPS
CAN YOU PLEASE HELP ME TOO
The answer is<u> "political risk".</u>
Political risk is among the most critical hazard factors confronting international investors. In many rising and frontier markets, the political circumstance is altogether less steady than the United States with the potential for across the board extortion and defilement.
Political risks are those related with changes that jump out at a nation's approaches administering organizations, and additionally outside elements that could influence organizations.
Answer:
He can include $16,000 in his gross income.
Explanation:
As the life insurance policy was transferred for some valuable consideration so the amount of valuable consideration will be deducted from the insurance proceeds.
Also premium paid by the transferee will be deducted from proceeds.
Now as the transferee received $25,000 from insuarance company.
So Tylor can include $25,000 less $7,500 less $1,500 in his gross income.
He can include $16,000 in his gross income.
Answer: 10% or $2,000,000
Explanation:
Seeing as no figures were produced, we will have to do this ourselves.
We will make assumptions which include the following,
Life of the equipment = 10 Years
Salvage value = 0
Those are our 2 assumptions.
In that case then,
The Annual Depreciation will be,
Depreciation = (Cost of equipment - Estimated salvage value) / Estimated useful life
= (20 - 0) / 10
= $2 million
Seeing as 2 million is,
= 2/20 * 100
= 10%
That would mean that annual depreciation costs at that facility will rise by $2 million or 10%.
If you need any clarification do react or comment.
Answer:
False.
Explanation:
The concept of "Nash equilibrium" is been by economist and also by "gamers" in game theory. Nash equilibrium is so good for making decisions and the determination of strategies.
In playing this game, the players or participants can use the pure strategy or the mixed strategy. The mixed strategy is the use of different strategies randomly.
"If a player chooses a mixed strategy in a Nash equilibrium, this implies that the payoff from using that mixed strategy is the same as the payoff from using any of the pure strategies in it".
The statement given above is FALSE because the PAYOFF WILL INCREASE IF WE ARE TO PLAY A MIXED STRATEGY.
For instance if we have a head of 1 and -1, and a tail of -1 and 1, the payoff for pure strategy is likely one or minus one but for a mixed strategy it could be zero.
