Answer:
When labor unions successfully bargain for wage rates that are HIGHER THAN the equilibrium wage rate, they may cause AN INCREASE IN STRUCTURAL UNEMPLOYMENT.
Explanation:
When a labor union bargains for wages that are above equilibrium rate, this will produce the same effect as a price floor. The supply of labor will increase, while the demand for labor will decrease. This deadweight loss generated by high wages will result in an excess supply that will eventually lead to higher structural unemployment.
Answer:
She lost $754.05.
Explanation:
Giving the following information:
Liz Mulig earns 52,000 per year as a philosophy professor. She receives a raise of 2.5% in a year in which CPI increases by 3.8%.
<u>The rise in her salary allows her to increase her purchasing power. On the contrary, inflation decreases purchasing power. We need to calculate the differences between both effects and determine whether she can buy more or less.</u>
<u></u>
Increase in salary= 52,000*1.025= $53,300
Inflation effect= 52,000/(1-0.038)= $54,054.05
To maintain her purchasing power, now, she needs to earn $54,054.05.
She lost $754.05.
Answer:
$3.389
Explanation:
Data provided as per the question below
Fixed cost = $300,000
Variable cost = $200,000
Total cost = $500,000
Units produced = 59,000
The computation of variable cost per unit is shown below:-
Variable cost per unit = Variable cost ÷ Units produced
= $200,000 ÷ 59,000
= $3.389
Therefore we applied the above formula.
I wholeheartedly agree and think it’s practically self-evident.
Here’s an excellent example from history.
For 28 years, the Berlin Wall separated East Berlin from West Berlin and was the most heavily militarized border crossing in the Western hemisphere. In 1989, during a press conference with western media, Gunther Schabowski was handed a note explaining a change in policy governing border crossing. Several discussions took place about making a show of opening the border between East and West Germany, but nobody informed Schabowski.
At the end of the press conference, he appears to have remembered the note belatedly, and read it verbatim—which was not what was intended. When asked about when the border would open, he assumed it was immediate.
The reality of course was that East Germany had no intention of opening the border, and certainly not immediately.
Within hours, the border crossing was practically buried under thousands of East Germans eager to be reunited with their families and other loved ones after 28 years on the press conference, which had been broadcast live.
The East Germans believed what they were told: Schabowski said immediately, and they intended to go immediately.
Border guards kept calling for instructions, until finally, they relented.
Perception became reality, and the border between East and West Berlin opened, spelling the de facto end of the separation of Germany.
273 viewsView 2 Upvoters · Answer requested by Never Wong
Related Questions (More Answers Below)
