If a policy change causes a Pareto improvement, is the outcome necessarily Pareto efficient if a policy change causes a Pareto improvement, then the outcome is not necessarily Pareto efficient this is because another change in the policy could cause another Pareto improvement.
A Pareto development is a development of a device whilst an alternative in the allocation of goods harms no person and advantages as a minimum one character. Pareto enhancements also are called "no-brainers" and are generally predicted to be rare, due to the plain and effective incentive to make any available Pareto development.
Factors that lie within the PPF display an inefficient or below-usage of resources – this is Pareto inefficient. A Pareto development way that output of both products can increase as we move from inside the PPF to factors at the PPF boundary.
Learn more about Pareto here:
brainly.com/question/7304310
#SPJ4
Answer:
The maximum that should be paid for the stock today is $30.23.
Explanation:
The total return on a stock is made up of dividend received on the stock plus the capital gain received from selling the stock. The holding period is one year that means a 10% return on the amount invested in required for one year. We need to calculate the present value of the total of selling price plus the dividend to calculate the price of the stock today. As 10% return is required, the discount rate is also 10%.
PV = (1.25 + 32) / 1.1
PV = 30.227 rounded off to 30.23
Answer:
An investment readily convertible to a known amount of cash
Explanation:
Cash equivalents are items usually recognized in the balance sheet along with cash (then names Cash and cash equivalent) that are readily or easily convertible to cash at an amount that is measurable.
Examples of cash equivalents include commercial papers, bank certificate of deposit, treasury bills usually with a tenor of 3 months or less etc.
Cash equivalents are assets and help improve the company's liquidity.
Answer:
The declaration is mostly accurate or correct.
Explanation:
- Task success can be induced by work satisfaction. But that could also be accurate the opposite way round, i.e. work success affects employee satisfaction.
- The inference reached here does not specify which incident seems to be the reason and which one is the trigger's consequence. A significant direct connection between the two can not be identified. Other than that, there could be other variables that may control the two variables.
