Answer and Explanation:
a. The computation of depreciation for each of the first two years by the straight-line method is shown below:-
Depreciation
= (Assets cost - Salvage value) ÷ Useful life
= ($171,000 - 0) ÷ 25
= $6,840
For First year = $6,840
For Second year = $6,840
It would be the same for the remaining useful life
b. The computation of depreciation for each of the first two years by the double-declining-balance method is shown below:-
First we have to determine the depreciation rate which is shown below:
= One ÷ useful life
= 1 ÷ 25
= 4%
Now the rate is double So, 8%
In year 1, the original cost is $171,000, so the depreciation is $13,680 after applying the 8% depreciation rate
And, in year 2, the ($171,000 - $13,680) × 8% = $12,585.60
Answer: B. Cats in a bag
Explanation:
oligopolistic firms is a small number of firms who realize that they all constitute such a small number of firms that they enjoy a lot of power together. so together they are cats in a bag.
Answer and Explanation:
According to the scenario, computation of the given data are as follow:-
1) Marginal propensity to consume (MPC) for this economy is 0.75 as it denotes the spending of the household and saving of 0.25 and the spending multiplier for this economy is
= Spending Multiplier(M)
= 1 ÷ 1 - MPC
= 1 ÷ 1-0.75
= 1 ÷ 0.25
= 4
2). Decrease in government purchases will lead to a decrease in income, generating an initial change in consumption
= -Amount of Government Decrease Purchases by × MPC
= -$250 billion × 0.75
= -$187.5 billion
3). Decrease income again, causing a second change in consumption
= Amount Decrease in Government Purchases × MPC
= -$187.5 billion × 0.75
= $140.6 billion
4).Total change in demand resulting from the initial change in government spending
= Amount of Government Decrease Purchases by × Spending Multiplier(M)
= $250 × 4
= $1,000 billion
= $1 trillion
As we can see that the income falls by $1000 billion in the end, so AD shifts to the left by the size of $1 trillion
In the question the graph is missing. Kindly find the attachment for both of question and answer
Answer:
Answer Illustration : Opportunity Cost of producing Wine is lesser in France, Opportunity Cost of producing Sweaters is lesser in Tunisia. So, France has comparative advantage in Wine, Tunisia in Sweater.
Explanation:
Opportunity Cost is the cost of next best alternative foregone while choosing an alternative.
Opportunity Cost of producing Sweaters & Wine in France & Tunisia are quantities of other goods (Sweaters or Tunias) sacrifised while choosing either. Sweater Opportunity Cost - Wines sacrifised, Wine Opportunity Cost - Sweaters sacrifised.
The country has a comparative advantage in a good if it can produce it with relatively less opportunity cost (in terms of other good sacrifised) than other country.
Ex : Production Possibilities
Wine Sweater Trade off (Wine :Sweater)
France 10 5 1:0.5 or 2:1
Tunisia 8 24 1:3 or 0.33:1
- France produces Wine with lesser opportunity cost (sweater sacrifised) than Tunisia [0.5 sweater < 3 sweaters] ; it has comparative advantage in Wine.
- Tunisia produces Sweater with less opportunity cost (wine sacrifised) than France [ 0.33 wine < 2 wines] ; it has comparative advantage in Tunisia
