Answer:
See explanation
Step-by-step explanation:
1. Angles AOM and MOC are supplementry angles. If m∠MOC = 135°, then
m∠AOM = 180° - 135° = 45°
2. OM − angle bisector of ∠AOB, then
m∠AOM = m∠MOB = 45°
3. Now
m∠BOC = m∠MOC - m∠MOB
m∠BOC = 135° - 45° = 90°
4. Since m∠BOC = 90°, BO is perpendicular to AC.
5. Consider isosceles triangle ABC (because AB ≅ BC). BO is the height drawn to the base, so it is an angle B bisector too, thus
∠ABO ≅ ∠CBO
Answer:
there is insufficient evidence to support the claim that more than 10% of the employees are paid minimum wage.
Step-by-step explanation:
Given that:
A marketing organization claims that more than 10% of its employees are paid minimum wage.
The null hypothesis is:

The alternative hypothesis is:

If a hypothesis test is performed that fails to reject the null hypothesis, how would this decision be interpreted
i.e Decision Rule: fails to reject the null hypothesis
Then the interpretation of the decision is that, there is insufficient evidence to support the claim that more than 10% of the employees are paid minimum wage.
Well for starters that would be $108/6 weeks when a unit rate is anything over one. To put it as a unit rate (how many dollars per hours) you just divide $108 by 6 (since you would divide 6 by 6 to get) and the unit rate would end up being $18 per hour.
117 - 30 = 87
87/3 = 29
The car was towed 29 miles
hope this helps