Answer:
The Jerry's adjusted basis in his partnership interest at the end of the year is $45,500
Explanation:
The adjusted basis of Jerry in his partnership is shown below:
= Partnership interest - Ordinary loss + long term capital gain + dividend - non deductible expense + cash contribution - share reduction
= $50,000 -$15,000 + $3,000 + $2,000 - $500 + $10,000 -$4,000
= $45,500
The ordinary loss, share reduction, and non deductible expense would decrease the Jerry interest in partnership firm while all other cost would increase his interest. That's why the amount is added and subtracted.
Hence, the Jerry's adjusted basis in his partnership interest at the end of the year is $45,500
Answer:
The US is the largest economy in the world, but it only represents about 1/4 of the total. That means that the opportunities of earning higher profits and effectively using all their resources increases dramatically when you serve the whole world. E.g. Apple is the mot valuable firm in the world and about 60}% of its revenue comes from foreign markets. Something similar applies to most large corporations, that would be much smaller and less profitable is they only served the US market.
Good like fashioned meet and greet
Answer:
Sink-Cost Fallacy
Explanation:
According to my research on studies conducted by various behaviorists, I can say that based on the information provided within the question the mental bias that describes Les's behavior is called the Sink-Cost Fallacy. This fallacy/bias refers to when an individual relentlessly continues's a behavior solely because of the resources that they have invested, either being time, money, or effort. Which in this case since, Les invested money into the drink so he does not want to waste it even though it might make him sick.
I hope this answered your question. If you have any more questions feel free to ask away at Brainly.
Answer:
I believe that a form of universal income would be a better policy than the traditional directed government benefits or welfare.
Explanation:
This is because the idea of the universal income would be to replace the welfare programs, by giving people a reasonable amount of money so that they can decide by themselves in what utilities or amenities to spend that money.
Programs with poor incentives like food stamps, or inefficiently run public-programs, could be replaced by universal income without causing harm to ther beneficiaries, and possibly even generating more benefit.
