Answer:
1. Increasing
2. A. The elasticity of private saving with respect to the after-tax real interest rate
B. The response of private saving to changes in the government budget deficit
C. The elasticity of investment with respect to the interest rate
Explanation:
1. It is difficult to implement both of these policies at the same time because reducing taxes on private spending has the effect of <u><em>Increasing</em></u> the government budget deficit.
A Government budget deficit is acquired when the government spends more than it earns. The Government earns money from taxes and if it spends more than it receives in taxes, that will lead to a deficit. If taxes on Private spending are reduced, this will lead to less tax revenue for the government thereby increasing the Deficit.
2. All of the listed options are useful in determining which policy would be a more effective way to raise investment.
The elasticity of private saving with respect to the after-tax real interest rate refers to how much private saving changes in reaction to a change in the tax rates. This can enable one decide how much investment will be expected if the Government reduces or increases taxes.
The response of private saving to changes in the government budget deficit is also a useful factor to look at because private savings reduce when government deficits reduce.
Also how much does investment change by due to interest rates. This will be important to note in terms of Private Investment to see if it will be beneficial to use it over reducing the government budget deficit given a certain interest rate.
Answer:
The answer is given below;
Explanation:
Preferred Stock Dr.$39,000,000
Common Stock Cr.$33,000,000
Paid in capital in excess of par-Common stock (39,000,000-33,000,000) Cr.$6,000,000
As the book value of preferred stock is greater than the price paid at the time of conversion into common stock,therefore excess amount is paid in capital in excess of par for common stocks.As the preferred stock is reduced by their book value,therefore it is debited and common stock is credited with its cost.
Answer:
<u><em>But where do we go from here? </em></u>
It depends on the result of more government intervention on quality life standards.
<u><em>Do we need less or more government involvement? </em></u>
It depends on the problems that need to be addressed. For example, to address problems such inequality it is mandatory that the government gets involve and create laws to prevent it. But surely for more movement of capitals there is no need of higher government involvement.
<u><em>Is it a question of the quality of that involvement? </em></u>
Yes. If government has an effective involvement there is even desirable to have its intervention but if it complicates everything then is repeled.
<u><em>Could it be smarter rather than just less? </em></u>
Yes, because it is proved that the economy acts in an effective way to good policy making.
<u><em>How can the cost of government involvement decrease?</em></u>
In this aspect it is important to mention the environmental issues in nowadasy economy. If the measurement of what is defined as "cost" is understand in the long run as conservation and balance between nature and economic explotation of resources.
Answer:
$119.56
Explanation:
We will use compound interest formula to solve this problem.
The formula is:
Where
F is the future value
P is the present amount
r is the rate of interest per period
t is the number of periods
Here,
F is the value we want, after 3 years
P is the present amount, $100
r is the rate of interest per quarter (per period)
Given r = 6% annually, so that would make:
6%/4 = 1.5% per quarter, or 1.5/100 = 0.015
Also, t is the number of quarters in 3 years, that would be 4*3 = 12
Now, substituting, we get our answer:
The first answer choice is right, $119.56
