Answer:
A hostile takeover with IDNIC corporation as the target company.
Explanation:
Since SKRAM is appealing directly to shareholders of IDNIC to acquire stocks of IDNIC corporation, it means they have a target of getting them to have a certain percentage of ownership in IDNIC because owning a stock in a company means having a percentage of ownership in that company.
This kind of appeal can be likened to trying to an aggressive push to make the shareholders take over the IDNIC corporation.
Answer:
affect nominal but not real variables. This view that money is ultimately neutral is consistent with classical theory.
Explanation:
This idea is held by classical economists (not by most economists) since they believe in the quantitative theory of money:
MV = PQ
- M = quantity of money
- V = velocity of money
- P = price level
- Q = quantity of goods
Classical theory was abandoned 90 years ago (according to classical theory, recessions were not possible and couldn't exist, but then the Great Depression came and the impossible became true). Neo-classical or monetarists appeared in the 1960s, and lately, neo-neo-classical appeared with George W. Bush. The problem with the quantitative theory is that it needs the following things to be true in order to hold, and empirical evidence over the last 90 years showed that none of them are true:
- the velocity of money has to be constant (AND IT IS NOT CONSTANT)
- real output is independent on money supply (NOT TRUE)
- causation goes from money to prices (MODERN ECONOMISTS BELIEVE IT IS THE OTHER WAY)
Answer:
Answer:
I realized that sports is my thing, although I'm not that athletic. I always have a blast whenever I'm engaging in sports. I also like watching it on television.
I fell in love with sports because exercise is good for our health. Engaging in sports also help improve my mood and boost my energy.
#BrainliestBunch
Answer:
See below
Explanation:
From the above information, we can deduce that the stock owned by Carol and Dave falls in value by $2,000 I.e ($10,000 - $8,000) ; it is to be noted that Carol solely has realised and recognized loss of $2,000.
Here, one of the cogent factors that determines whether a sale has taken place is if realization has been effected. Here, stock sold by Carol qualifies as a disposition while the decline in the value of stock sold by Dave does not qualify as disposition.
With regards to the foregoing, we can conclude that the federal income tax law treat the decline in the value of the stock differently for Carol and Dave.
