Answer:
A
Explanation:
A budget constraint is a graph that shows all the combination of goods a consumer can consume given current prices and income of the consumer.
If income increases, the budget constraint will shift out parallel to the old
If income decreases, budget constraint will shift in parallel to the old one.
Answer: Applicant's cognitive abilities
Explanation:
Cognitive ability could be defined as mental skills we need to projects or given activities within any capacity they would come. Cognitive ability looks at out ability to answer questions, learn, remember and pay attention.
It could also be seen as the ability of someone to perform different mental task where learning and solving problems are involved. Considering the interview, Francis would choose or make his choice based on how both candidate are able to solve problems and their approach to it.
Answer:
May 20
No Entry
June 14
Dr. Dividends $255,000
Cr. Dividend Payable $255,000
July 14
Dr. Dividend Payable $255,000
Cr. Cash $255,000
July 31
Dr. Retained Earnings $255,000
Cr. Dividend $255,000
Explanation:
Dividend = $0.5 x 510,000 = $255,000
May 20
Dividend is declared, No entry is required
June 14
Dividend to be recorded on this date. As dividend is not paid yet so it will be recorded as payable and on the other hand dividend account is debited to make a contra capital account of dividend.
July 14
Dividend is paid as cash is paid so, it will be credited and the liability is reduced so, it will be debited.
July 31
At the end of the period we have to adjust the Dividend Contra capital account in retained earning to make the dividend account zero.
Answer:
Certainly, they cannot prevail. The contract terms stated clearly that "time is of the essence of this contract." The Bassos and Miceli and Slonim Development Corp did not actually respect this contract term.
The contract was expected to have closed at 10:00 am on May 16, 1988, and not after. By the time that Dierberg left the venue, the contract should have been finalized. Alternatively, if there were unseen delays, Dierberg should have been informed at least 30 minutes before 10:00 am.
Explanation:
The argument by Miceli and Slonim does not hold water. The contract did require closing exactly at 10:00 AM, and not some time on May 16. In my considered opinion, suing Dierberg is a waste of court time and process.
One of the main cause is an expansion in the cost of raw materials for a certain product. The law of expanding costs is a rule that expresses that once all components of creation are at most extreme yield and proficiency, delivering more will cost more than normal. As generation builds, the open door cost does also.
