Answer: D. Restrictions on travel into and out of affected areas.
Explanation:
Restrictions on travel in and out of affected areas can lead to Scarcity in a Pandemic because there is no free movement of labour and capital.
With borders shut down, goods that were normally imported will suddenly become very hard to acquire because getting them through travel bans is very hard and in most cases, impossible.
Also affected are services as, for instance, the people who provided such services might live in or come from the place they provide said service to. Getting into those areas might prove too cumbersome a task thereby limiting Service provision.
Looking at the current Corona Virus Pandemic that has seen the most extensive Travel Restrictions by Countries in recent times and looking at the Scarcity being suffered by those same countries, drawing the conclusion that the Scarcity is as a result of an impediment to free movement of Goods and Services is most logical.
Answer:
Portfolio B has a higher return but more volatile stocks. However it depends on how the individual can tolerate risks.
Explanation:
Expected return= free return + Beta (Expected rate of return – risk free rate)
Portfolio A
6%+ +.8*6%
= 6%+4.8%= 10.8%
Portfolio B
6%+1.5(6%)
6%+9%= 15%
It depends on different factors. Portfolio B has a higher return but more volatile stocks. However it depends on how the individual can tolerate risks.
Answer:
First we need to first find the equilibrium quantity and price during normal times.
The equilibrium price in normal times is P=$3 and the equilibrium quantity is 55 bottles.
During the hurricane, the government will set a price ceiling of $3. We can infer from the table that the quantity supplied at P=$3 is 55 bottles while the quantity demanded during hurricane at the price of $3 per bottle is 105 bottles. Hence,
105-55= 50
During a hurricane, there would be a shortage of 50 bottles of water.
If there were no price ceiling, then the equilibrium price would be such that the quantity demanded during hurricane equals the quantity supplied. From the table we can see that the equilibrium price would in that case be P=$5 per bottle where the equilibrium quantity is 85 bottles. With the price ceiling only 55 bottles are available for trading. Now without the price ceiling 85 bottles are available.
Hence consumers would have to pay an additional $2 (=5-3) but they can now buy an additional 30 bottles [=85-55].
Without the antiprice gouging law, consumers would have to pay $2 more than the ceiling price, but they would bv able to buy 30 more bottles of water.
Answer:
36.35%
Explanation:
According to the scenario, computation of the given data are as follows,
Sales = $78,400
Net income = $2,400
Cost of goods sodl = $43,100
Depreciation = $6,800
So, we can calculate the EBIT value by using following formula:
= EBIT ÷ Sales
= ($78,400 - $43,100 - $6,800) ÷ ($78,400)
= $28,500 ÷ $78,400
= 36.35%
Hence, the common-size statement value of EBIT is 36.35%
Explanation:
C. Created in the interview.
hope this helps you
have a nice day:)
