Answer:
b. could be low because people might adjust their expectations quickly if they found anti-inflation policy credible
Explanation:
In the given situation, it is mentioned that the rational expectations proponets said that the sacrified ratio would be lesser as the people wants to adjust their expectations in a fastest way in the case when they found that the anti-inflation policy is credible
Therefore as per the given situation, the option b is correct
Answer:
you can get more of one good only by giving up some of another good
Explanation:
A production possibilities frontier shows the opportunity cost of producing one good instead of another. This way, as you follow the curve, the combination of goods will vary, increasing the production of one good but deceasing the production of the other.
Opportunity costs are the benefits lost or extra costs associated to choosing one activity or investment over another alternative. Since resources are scarce, you must always give something up in order to obtain another thing, e.g. you give up your leisure time in order to study.
Answer:
Annual Financial advantage $ 550
Explanation:
<u>Computation of income/loss on special order</u>
Unit product costs
Normal product costs $ 19.20
Incremental variable costs $ 1.30 per unit <u>$ 1.30</u>
Total product costs $ 20.50
Revenues per unit <u>$ 26.00</u>
Profit per unit $ 5.50
Sales Units 2,100 units
Total incremental profit on order $ 11,550
Less; cost of moulds <u>$ 11,000</u>
Incremental profit on S 47 order $ 550
Answer:
The statement is false
Explanation:
The economy in 1933 had negative investment, but that doesn't mean that it didn't produce any capital goods during the year.
A negative net investment means that the money invested in new capital goods was less than the depreciation of existing capital goods. Theoretically it can also result form no new capital gains, but in real life that doesn't happen.