Answer:
ICRICT ... these challenges are the difficulties with technology ... and regulations for financial capital flows.
Answer:
the amortization of Other Comprehensive Loss for 2022 is $38,370
Explanation:
The computation of the amortization of Other Comprehensive Loss for 2022 is shown below;
= (Accumulated other comprehensive loss - 10% of Projected benefit obligation) ÷ given no of years
= ($503,700 - 10% of $1,200,000) ÷ given no of years
= ($503,700 - $120,000) ÷ 10 years
= $38,370
hence, the amortization of Other Comprehensive Loss for 2022 is $38,370
The same would be considered
<span>Meaning our boundaries
are ever-changing, defined by society, we don’t know what will happen next "so-called
improvements" are only superficial, it's only a distraction, distracts
oneself from the truth. The Society is unwieldy and overgrown, ruined by luxury
and heedless expenses. </span>
Answer and Explanation:
I will go through each and every option explaining the reasons and what option would be the best:
The (a) part says 'difference in wages will eventually disappear since a haircut is a homogeneous good' - This is not true because even though it is an homogeneous product, some customers do have a strong preference for barbers who are not going bald. Therefore, they know their worth and they would want to capitalize on that and get paid just a bit more than bald barbers.
The (b) part says 'barbershops that hire barbers with hair will be able to charge a higher price for a haircut to those consumers who have a strong preference for barbers with hair'. - If the barbershop charges higher price for barbers that have hair then the customers will prefer bald barbers as the questions mentions that there is high competition and since it is an homogeneous, customers would be willing to save money and get their haircut from some other barber.
The (c) part says 'barbershops that hire bald barbers will always be much more profitable' - Not necessarily. The reason is that some customers have a strong preference for barbers who are not bald and therefore, that would help barbershops who have barbers with hair to be a bit more profitable as some additional customers would want their services.
The (d) part says 'barbershops that hire barbers with hair will always be much more profitable' - This is the best option and the reason for it is because some customers have a strong preference for barbers with hair and that would help the barbershop to earn more. They would have the customers who already indifferent to whoever cuts their hair and in addition to that, they would also have the customers who have their preference.
Hence the answer is D.
Based on the fact that ActioNOW and Becca entered into an oral contract where Becca agrees to work on a project for ActioNOW for eighteen months, the enforcers of this contract are d. none of the choices.
<h3>Who can enforce this contract?</h3>
This transaction between Becca and ActioNOW was an oral contract which means that it falls under the Statute of Frauds. However, for an oral contract to be enforceable under this Statute, the goods or services exchanged have to be less then $500 in value.
The services or goods also have to be less than 1 year in duration. Because Becca and ActioNow agreed for a contract of 18 months which is more than a year, this contract is not enforceable under the Statute of Frauds and so the government cannot enforce this contract.
Options include:
- a. ActioNOW.
- b. Becca.
- c. any third party, such as ActioNOW’s clients.
- d. none of the choices
Find out more on the Statute of Frauds at brainly.com/question/14854791
#SPJ1
