Answer:
I, II, and III.
Explanation:
Market efficiency demonstrates that prices mirror the entire information regarding a specific market or stock which is accessible at a given point of time. There are certain important characteristics of an efficient market which include a number of participants, uniformity in products, etc. As per the options, all the three options could be characterized as the important characteristics of market efficiency which are as follows:
I). 'There are no arbitrage opportunities' as there is complete awareness among the consumers regarding the availability of products and its prices.
II). 'Security prices react quickly to new information' as there is a consensus value of a product set by all the customers and sellers after assessing its value.
III). 'Active trading strategies will consistently outperform passive strategies' as there is perfect competition and therefore, there is a liberty to enter and exit the market at any point in time.
The assumptions are that if you cut taxes and costs for companies, then the company owners and investors will be able to bring about the growth of economy and employ more pepople. The benefits were that the economy entered a peacetiime and people were generally living better. The bad side was that public debt increased by a lot and this would come back to haunt the people later after Reagan was long gone.
Answer: Boycotting basically
shoutout to: @Greenleafable
remain heartless
Some measure to develop industries in Nepal are :
- Increase the investment in the industries..
- Make provision to provide security to the industries...
- Stop strikes of labourers...
- Give priority to the domestic products...
- Make availability of skilled manpower...
- Maintain political stability...
- Provide communication and transportation facilities...
- Form simple, clear and stable government policies...
- Mobilized local capital and resources...
- Encourage entrepreneurs to establish new industries
- Make simple procedures of obtaining license...
~nightmare 5474~
There is no objective answer to this question, as both sides have arguments that support their views.
If you believe that you are bound by Hobbes' argument, it is because of tacit consent. Tacit consent means that, even though you have not explicitly agreed to follow laws, you have indicated your agreement through other means, for example, by using the public services of the government or by remaining within the limits of your country. Also, you could argue that any rational person would prefer to follow the rules of the government than to live in the state of nature. Therefore, if you are rational, your consent is assumed. Finally, you could also argue that while you did not explicitly agreed, maybe your ancestors did, which still binds you as a member of the same society.
On the other hand, if you believe that you are not bound by Hobbes' argument, you could argue that any contract that is not freely agreed upon is not valid. As the government uses force to make you act according to the law, you cannot be considered to be freely consenting. Also, you can argue that agreeing to follow some rules does not imply following <em>all</em> of the laws of the country. Finally, a common argument against Hobbes is the lack of empirical data. As we do not know if the state of nature is actually bad, or if the contract ever happened, the government cannot gain its legitimacy in that way.
Im pretty sure a federal reserve is a private organization.
