Answer:
d. $5,000
Explanation:
Patnode's information is missing, so I looked it up. I found the balance sheet for 2014 and 2015. Hope that it is the same question:
total depreciation expense for 2015 = change in accumulated depreciation (2015 - 2014) + change in accumulated amortization (2015 - 2014) = ($3,000 - $0) + ($3,000 - $1,000) = $3,000 + $2,000 = $5,000
An unexpected result is examined a lot more closely, since it must disagree with some currently accepted theory to be accepted as unexpected. If something is expected, we generally don't question it, although this is sometimes a tragic mistake and may cost a lot more for a person.
Answer:
Answer Illustration : Opportunity Cost of producing Wine is lesser in France, Opportunity Cost of producing Sweaters is lesser in Tunisia. So, France has comparative advantage in Wine, Tunisia in Sweater.
Explanation:
Opportunity Cost is the cost of next best alternative foregone while choosing an alternative.
Opportunity Cost of producing Sweaters & Wine in France & Tunisia are quantities of other goods (Sweaters or Tunias) sacrifised while choosing either. Sweater Opportunity Cost - Wines sacrifised, Wine Opportunity Cost - Sweaters sacrifised.
The country has a comparative advantage in a good if it can produce it with relatively less opportunity cost (in terms of other good sacrifised) than other country.
Ex : Production Possibilities
Wine Sweater Trade off (Wine :Sweater)
France 10 5 1:0.5 or 2:1
Tunisia 8 24 1:3 or 0.33:1
- France produces Wine with lesser opportunity cost (sweater sacrifised) than Tunisia [0.5 sweater < 3 sweaters] ; it has comparative advantage in Wine.
- Tunisia produces Sweater with less opportunity cost (wine sacrifised) than France [ 0.33 wine < 2 wines] ; it has comparative advantage in Tunisia