Answer:
This is an example of technology spillover and positive externalities.
Explanation:
Technology Spillover: The advantageous outcomes of new technological expertise on the productivity and creative capacity of other firms and nations are summoned as technology spillover.
Positive Externalities: When the consumption of goods and services leads to the benefits of other people, the term is known as positive externalities. If I become an educationist (assuming education as a good), it will help me to receive the private benefit. Besides the individual interest, I can help others to educate people.
Therefore, when Turning Inc. creates the first solar-powered cell phone battery, and it lasts up to 10 hours, it produces spillover technology.
When another company encourages to formulate technology with more lasting power, it creates a benefit for the other people as well as the technology spillover.
Answer:
true
Explanation:
Services are different than products because they:
- products can be stored for future use while services perish immediately after being performed or if they are not consumed, e.g. unsold spaces in a theater cannot be stored for later use ⇒ Perishability
- products are tangible, while services cannot be measured, weighted, etc. ⇒ Intangibility
- products can be mass produced and can be homogeneous, while services are unique because every time they are consumed, the experience varies depending on the conditions and circumstances that surround it ⇒ Heterogeneity
- You can own and transfer the title of a product, while you cannot transfer the title of services, e.g. you rent the room of a hotel for a night but that doesn't make you owner of the room ⇒ Ownership
- Products are independent and separate from the people or machines that produce them, while services cannot be separated from the people or things that provide them ⇒ Inseparability
Answer:A. Leontief assumed that U.S. and foreign technologies were the same, while the Heckscher-Ohlin model assumes they are different
B. Leontief ignored land abundance in the United States
D. Leontief’s test distinguished between skilled and unskilled labor, but ignored capital.
Explanation:Leontief paradox is a Russian-American economist, his work was based on the work of Wassily W. Leontief he attempted to test the Heckscher–Ohlin theory ("H–O theory") empirically.
in economics tries to explain that a country with a higher capital per worker has a lower Capital per labor ratio in export than when compared to Import.
LEONTIEF IGNORED THE ABUNDANCE OF LAND IN MAKING HIS ASSUMPTIONS
HE ALSO CLASSIFIED THE U.S TECHNOLOGY AND OTHERS AS THE SAME WHICH IS NOT IN LINE WITH THE H-O MODEL ASSUMPTION.
LEONTIEF THEORY IGNORED CAPITAL DURING HIS TEST.
Answer:
A) $102,000
Explanation:
The computation of the amount used today for preparing the operating budget is shown below:
= Contract value × forward rate
= $100,000 × $1.02
= $102,000
For computing this, we consider the forward rate and the same is multiplied with the contract value so that the correct amount can come.
All other information which is given is not relevant. Hence, ignored it
Answer: cost ratio
Explanation: The terms of trade must be higher (graphically to the right) of a nation's own production cost ratio. The production cost ratio allows small-scale manufacturers to determine their cost more accurately as well as control known cost parameters and is a method that can be adapted and applied to any business.
In a multi-product manufacturing firm, the production cost ratio is necessary for accurate compilation and allocation of production costs to each category of product especially when both the Production Time and the Production Runs are not the same and/or when fixed labor, overhead and other costs are drawn from the same pool. When the ratio is not applied results in a skewed allocation of production costs. This in turn can affect the business as it becomes difficult to ascertain the products whose production are more profitable to the business.
