Answer:
a per se violation of antitrust law.
Explanation:
The antitrust laws can be defined as those laws that are created by the US government to protect consumers from unfair means of competition in market. The aim of creating such laws is to ensure the protection of customers from corruptive business practices and also to ensure safe healthy competitive environment among same business companies.
<u>In the given scenario, the Association of Organic Food Growers is violating the antitrust law by boycotting farmers, ranchers, etc. The antitrust laws are violated by companies in several ways among them is by boycotting</u>.
Boycotting can be defined as an agreement between several companies that excludes a group of customers or market to avert them from buying aanyy goods or products.
This boycotting agreement is a per se violation of antitrust law.
CDE are the answers to this question.
Answer:
It is C.
Explanation:
When food is delivered to the table, the server does not have to ask the guests to identify who ordered what because they eat whatever is being ordered by people at their table. Hope this helps :)
Answer:
The correct answer is option c.
Explanation:
Country A and country B are the same. But country A has more capital than country B. Both the countries increase their capital by 100 units while other factors are constant.
This increase in capital will cause the output of country B to increase more than output in country A. This happens because of the law of diminishing marginal returns.
Law of diminishing marginal returns states that as the number of inputs employed the return from each input goes on declining. As country A possesses more capital, the return from the capital will be fewer. So the increase in output will also be relatively less.
