The statement bakers are much likely to supply pastries to the market if property rights are not enforced is <u>false</u>.
<h3>What is property rights? </h3>
Property rights can be defined as the right given to person to own and use their property they way they like or wish to use it.
The statement is not true because bakers are much likely to supply their pastries to the market if property rights are enforced.
Therefore the statement bakers are much likely to supply pastries to the market if property rights are not enforced is <u>false</u>.
Learn more about property right here:brainly.com/question/913138
brainly.com/question/22370263
#SPJ1
Answer:
The main reasons for policy intervention by the government are:
To correct for market failures.
To achieve a more equitable distribution of income and wealth.
To improve the performance of the economy.
Explanation:
To correct for market failures: This is achieve by creating regulation institutions for the most important sectors in any given economy e.g. Federal Reserve, Treasury Department
To achieve a more equitable distribution of income and wealth: This is the aim of a develop economy to allocate the resources where needed and for that some countries rely in the government capability to prevent Monopoly creation or to protect its Internal Labor market.
To improve the performance of the economy.: In order to meet the economical agenda of any given government the institutions use variation on the interest rate, the government expenditure or the tax policies.
Answer:
D. $285,000
Explanation:
When a company is acquired by another company, the parent company (the new owner) must report the assets at fair market value - amortization.
FV = $300,000
amortizable value = $100,000
depreciation for 3 years (2017, 2018 and 2019) = ($100,000 / 20) x 3 = 415,000
reported value = $300,000 - $15,000 = $285,000
<span>Technically, Kyle lied to Patrick about the time at which he would punch him. However, there is no contract to prove that this was what was said on the phone (heresay). Additionally, it does not mention that there was any sort of agreement or consideration made between the two of them regarding this. And even if there was, there might be a legality issue due to the fact that punching is both assault and battery when committed on a person, so the contract may not even be enforceable.
In terms of civil torts, Kyle didn't really commit anything that is pursuable in court, but did commit battery and assault. If Patrick fell or hit his head further and was injured/killed, he would be liable for an involuntary action, of which would be manslaughter if Patrick died. He would also be able to be sued for wrongful death by Patrick's family.</span>
An issue disturbing the continuation of an activity
