The factors that led to the explosive growth of digital
crime over the past few decades are the following;
<span>·        
</span>Credit card fraud – credit card info became a
vulnerable to theft because of the online purchases made by consumers
<span>·        
</span>Identity theft – personal information of other
people are being used by fraud to retrieve information or to retrieve things
that could be of favor to them.
 
        
             
        
        
        
Answer:
The correct answer is: unemployment and inflation are negatively related. In the long run they are largely unrelated problems.
Explanation:
According to the Philips curve, in the short run, inflation and unemployment rate are inversely related. This implies that when inflation decreases, the unemployment rate increases.  
This is indicated by the downward-sloping Phillips curve. When the government adopts a contractionary policy to reduce inflation, unemployment will increase.  
In the long run, the Phillips Curve will be a vertical line at the natural rate of unemployment. The inflation rate is not related to the unemployment rate in the long run.
 
        
             
        
        
        
Answer:
1.28 times
Explanation:
How many times as large the revenue generated in 2017 is compared to that of 2016 can be derived from the division of the revenues for both years.
Given that the total revenue for 2017 is $175,200 and that for 2016 is $136,900
The number of times 2017 revenue is as large as that of 2016
= $175,200/$136,900
= 1.28 times
 
        
             
        
        
        
Answer:
c. This contract is void.
Explanation:
Since in the question it is mentioned that one day Anna received a phone call from the health insurance salesman and she purchase a $400 medigap insurance policy so the contract should be void in the eyes of law as it is not valid in terms of law plus nothing is specified for whom she purchased the policy for $400
Therefore the correct option is c. 
 
        
             
        
        
        
Answer:
Should not be concerned
Explanation:
In the scenario being described, it can be said that the homeowner should not be concerned. That is because even though she did discriminate against the individual, Single-family homes rented without the use of a real estate agent or advertising are exempt from the federal Fair Housing Act. This holds true as long as the owner of the property does not own more than three homes at any given time. Therefore since there was no real estate agent, the man can't sue.