<u>The reason that Pablo Picasso, become wealthy during his lifetime and the artist, Vincent van Gogh, remain poor his entire life:</u>
Pablo Picasso and Vincent van Gogh had more features in common. They had unanimously indistinct style of arts which had become immediately identifiable.
In spite of all that, Picasso died as a rich man owning an estate which is estimated at nearly 750 million dollar whereas Van Gogh died as a pauper.
Studies claim that the reason behind this would be that, Van Gogh remained to be a loner and socially inactive. He was depending on his brother to meet the social world and in contrast Picasso was a charismatic active member in various social clubs where her had multiple number of contacts and connections.
It's been said that Pablo Picasso was a hub who had a vast network of social lines and Vincent Van Gogh was a silent or solitary node.
But now, the paintings of both the greatest artists were well spoken and sell for more than 100,000,000 US Dollars.
In a perfectly competitive market bell computers will cause profits to increase by producing one more.
A hypothetical market system is referred to as perfect competition. Perfect competition offers a valuable model for illustrating how supply and demand influence pricing and behaviour in a market economy, despite perfect competition seldom occurring in actual markets.
One of the most efficiently operating markets is one with perfect competition, when a large number of buyers and suppliers cooperate perfectly. Sadly, it is a hypothetical event that does not occur in the real world. But in order to guarantee a fair price for all goods and services, markets should strive to be as similar to this type of market as feasible.
Learn more about perfectly competitive market here:
brainly.com/question/13961518
#SPJ4
Answer:
Increased publicity
Explanation:
if a judge overturns a case from a trial court and rejects precedent, the judge should get publicity for her decision and modification of the precedent so that it becomes a new way or basis of judging similar cases. In other words if judge Karen decides that the precedent before her to judge the case is outdated as a result of technological changes, she will decide on the case before her based on what she believes the precedent should reflect(new technologies) and this becomes the new basis for judging all such cases and as a result should be publicised for other judges to take note
Answer:
The answer is A. A debit to Accounts Receivable for $ 586,080
Explanation:
Sales tax is an additional amount of money one pays based on a percentage of the selling price of goods and services that are purchased.
The sales tax amount will be added to sales revenue to form the total bill.
Sales revenue ----------------- $528,00
Sales tax -------------------------- 11%
Sales tax amount
$528,00 x 0.11
= $58,080
Therefore, total bill is:
$528,00 + $58,080
=$586,080.
Debit increases an asset(accounts receivable) while credit decreases an asset(accounts receivable).
Since the accounts receivable will increase, it will be on debit side.
Answer:
Salary raises based on length of service
Explanation:
Agency conflict occur when the owners of a firm do not manage the company. Instead, the firm is managed by mangers. As a result, the interest of the manger might not be aligned with that of the owners and as a result the manager would not act in the best interest of the owners.
Agency problem is more common in public companies
If management compensation tied to the market value of the firm's stock, it would incentivise managers to take steps that would ensure that the value of the company's stock increases. This is because they would also benefit if the value of the stock increases
A stock option plan gives managers the option of buying a company's stock if certain targets are met. This would motivate an employee to work in the best interest of the shareholders
A proxy fight and a takeover would make the managers to lose their jobs. Most managers would not want to lose their jobs. A threat of a takeover or a proxy fight can serve to motivate mangers to act in the best interest of the stockholders