Answer:
The benefits of a High Speed Rail in California:
- It becomes a feasible alternative to air travel, because it can be either cheaper, or even faster, since passengers do not have to spend as much time on a train station as they do on an airport.
- If demand is high enough, state highways can become less congested, because many people who would otherwise travel by car, would take a high speed train instead.
- Because the trains are electric, they are likely to help reduce pollution.
The cons would be:
- We cannot know for sure how many people would take the high speed trains. Demand could not be high enough to justify the cost.
- The line would be very costly.
- It could end up benefit only a small section of the population who would take the trains, or who travel often.
I believe that the benefits outweigh the drawbacks, as can be seen in most countries where high speed lines have been made between large cities. For example, in Spain, the line between Madrid and Barcelona is profitable. The same would likely happen for a line between Los Angeles and San Francisco.
What are the implications of starting a project based on tenuous projections that may or may not come true 10 years from now?
If demand projections are tenous, there is always the possiblity that the high speed line could not be profitable. However, this risk can be lowered if the line is made between highly populated cities.
Could you justify the California high-speed rail project from the perspective of a massive public works initiative?
Yes, a high speed rail would be a project that could massively impact California. The benefits of its operation could outweight the cost.
In other words, what other factors enter into the decision of whether to pursue a high-speed rail project?
As I said before, the most important factor is to construct line between highly populated cities in order to reduce the risk of not having enough demand. It has been demonstrated around the world, in Spain, in Italy, in Japan, in China, that high speed lines that connect very populated regions, can be profitable.
Answer:
Native ads have been shown to perform better on mobile than those of traditional design as well. This is because in order to make an effective native ad, it has to be relevant to the content in which it is featured—unlike traditional ads that are placed on screen and don't necessarily match up with messaging.
Explanation :
Answer:
- Tax Code. For most small business owners, government regulation questions almost always begin with taxes. ...
- Employment and Labor Law. ...
- Antitrust Laws. ...
- Advertising. ...
- Email Marketing. ...
- Environmental Regulations. ...
- Privacy. ...
- Licensing and Permits.
Hope this is helpful to you
The option of becoming less ignorant and much more focused or thoughtful about your grammar.
Answer:
Return on investment = -0.71%
Explanation:
<em>The return on investment is the sum of the dividends earned and capital gains made during the holding period of the investment. </em>
<em>Dividend is the proportion of the profit made by a company which is paid to shareholders. </em>
<em>Capital gains is another type of the return made on an equity investment as a result of increase in the value of the shares. It is difference between the cost of the share and the value at the time of disposal</em>.
Therefore, we can can compute the return on the investment as follows:
Total Return on investment =
(Capital gain/ loss + dividend )/purchase price × 100
Capital loss = (184 -140) × 120 = - 480
Dividend = 427
Commission = 34 + 39 =-73
Net loss on investment = - 480 - 73 + 427= -126
Return on investment = -126
/(148× 120) = -0.71%
Return on investment = -0.71%
