Answer:
The benefits of a High Speed Rail in California:
- It becomes a feasible alternative to air travel, because it can be either cheaper, or even faster, since passengers do not have to spend as much time on a train station as they do on an airport.
- If demand is high enough, state highways can become less congested, because many people who would otherwise travel by car, would take a high speed train instead.
- Because the trains are electric, they are likely to help reduce pollution.
The cons would be:
- We cannot know for sure how many people would take the high speed trains. Demand could not be high enough to justify the cost.
- The line would be very costly.
- It could end up benefit only a small section of the population who would take the trains, or who travel often.
I believe that the benefits outweigh the drawbacks, as can be seen in most countries where high speed lines have been made between large cities. For example, in Spain, the line between Madrid and Barcelona is profitable. The same would likely happen for a line between Los Angeles and San Francisco.
What are the implications of starting a project based on tenuous projections that may or may not come true 10 years from now?
If demand projections are tenous, there is always the possiblity that the high speed line could not be profitable. However, this risk can be lowered if the line is made between highly populated cities.
Could you justify the California high-speed rail project from the perspective of a massive public works initiative?
Yes, a high speed rail would be a project that could massively impact California. The benefits of its operation could outweight the cost.
In other words, what other factors enter into the decision of whether to pursue a high-speed rail project?
As I said before, the most important factor is to construct line between highly populated cities in order to reduce the risk of not having enough demand. It has been demonstrated around the world, in Spain, in Italy, in Japan, in China, that high speed lines that connect very populated regions, can be profitable.
Answer:
Darla's amount realized on the sale is $800
Adjusted basis in the assets sold is $300
Producing a realized gain on the sale of $500
Explanation:
Amount realized = cash received + FMV of other property + buyer’s assumption of seller’s liabilities – seller’s expenses
Amount realized = 600 + 200 + 0 -0
= $800
Adjusted basis = initial basis – cost recovery deductions
Adjusted basis = 2500-2200 = $300
Gain or loss realized = amount realized – adjusted basis = 800-300
= $500
Therefore Darla's amount realized on the sale is $800 and the adjusted basis in the assets sold is $300, producing a realized gain on the sale of $500
Answer:
1. Neither ; 2. Consumer Surplus ; 3. Producer Surplus
Explanation:
Consumer Surplus is the difference between a good's price paid by consumer, & maximum price the consumer is willing to pay for the good.
Producer Surplus is the difference between a good's price received by a seller, & minimum price at which the seller is willing to sell the good.
1. Willing to pay $209 for watch, buyer willing to sell at $196, no trade as price ceiling at $190 : It illustrates neither concept as transaction has not actually occurred, so no price established.
2. Willing to pay $39 for sweater, purchased it for $32 : It illustrates 'Consumer Surplus' case = $7 , as it shows difference between maximum willingness to pay by buyer ($39) & the actual buy price ($32)
3. Willing to sell laptop at $190, sold it at $199 : It illustrates 'Producer Surplus' case = $9 , as it shows difference between minimum willingness to sell price ($190) & actual sale price ($199)
They perform a " waggle dance" to indicate the direction of the hive and also to tell them how to get to flowers- it's sort of like a map for them
