The answer to this question is <span>Company strengths and weaknesses.
In this context, company strength refers to all the factors that make the company stand out among other competitors in the market (such as good products, fame, good researchers, etc)
The weakness, on the other hand, refers to something that needed to be taken care of if the company want to win the competition in the market. (such as huge debt ratio, scandals, etc)
</span>
Answer:
The correct answer is A. Brazilian tomato producers are worse off.
Explanation:
A country has a comparative advantage in producing a good and service if its opportunity cost of producing that good and service is lower than that of its trading partner. So it is better off for a country that has a lower opportunity cost in production a good or service to specialise in that good or service.
Brazil has a comparative advantage in coffee production, meaning, it is better off in specialising in the production of coffee and will be worse off if Brazil specialises in Tomato
Mexico has a comparative advantage is Tomato, meaning, she is better off in specialising in Tomato and worse off if she specialises in Coffee
Answer:
hedonic Theory of Wages:
Accept just two kinds of occupations in the work showcase (safe employments versus unsafe occupations). Under this, sheltered employments have likelihood of zero that specialist gets harmed. Unsafe occupations have likelihood of 1 and laborers know this. Laborers care about whether their occupations are sheltered or hazardous.
Laborers expand utility by picking wage-chance blends that offer them the best measure of utility. Expect laborers disdain hazard, yet to various degrees, for example they have diverse ideal pay chance blends. Firms are on their isoprofit bends that give the hazard wage mixes that give zero (financial) benefit. They vary between firms. An indulgent pay work mirror the connection among wages and occupation qualities. It matches laborers with various hazard inclinations with firms that can give employments that coordinate these diverse hazard inclinations.
Apathy bends uncover the exchange offs that a laborer favors among wages and level of hazard (chance thought to be an 'awful'). To give a similar utility, dangerous occupations must compensation higher wages than safe employments. The more prominent the laborer's aversion for hazard, the more prominent the pay off required for changing from a safe to an unsafe activity, and the more noteworthy the booking cost. As the pay firms bring to the table for hazardous occupations increments, less firms will extend to dangerous employment opportunities and bringing about a descending slanting interest bend as it turns out to be increasingly productive for firms to make occupations spare than to pay the higher compensation.
Suppositions of Differential Wage Theory are:
- The compensation differential is sure. Hazardous employments pay more than spare occupations.
- The balance wage differential is that of the last laborer employed (the peripheral specialist). It's anything but a proportion of the normal abhorrence for chance among laborers in the work showcase.
- Along these lines, everything except the minimal specialist are overcompensated by the market.
On the off chance that a few specialists like to work in dangerous occupations (they are eager to pay for the option to be harmed) and if the interest for such laborers is little, the market repaying differential is negative. At point P, where supply rises to request, laborers utilized in unsafe occupations acquire not as much as laborers utilized in safe employments. The outline given beneath shows the circumstance:
Isoprofit Curve:
As it is exorbitant to create well-being, a firm contribution hazard level P* can make the working environment more secure for example move left on flat pivot, just on the off chance that it diminishes compensation while keeping benefits consistent, so that the iso-benefit bend is upward slanting. Higher isoprofit bend returns lower benefit.
Answer: 1. A.Both firms will choose the low price.
2. B. Both firms would choose the high price.
Explanation:
1. If the firms cannot cooperate with each other and must choose simultaneously, both firms will choose the low price.
This is because at the low price both of them are at the highest profit they can make when they are not cooperating. For instance, if Firm B chooses Low Price and Firm A chooses High Price, Firm A will make $3 million while Firm be will make $8 million.
If Firm B decides to have a high price then firm A will take the low price and make $8 million in profit while Firm B makes $4 million. If they are not working together, they will both have to take the low price to make the most profit.
2. If the firms could cooperate with each other, both firms would choose the high price.
The is because they will be making more than competing and getting a lower profit. Should they cooperate they will each get $7 million in profit because they will pick the option they can both make the highest profit at. The is better than competing and making only $5 and $6 million respectively.
If you need any clarification do comment. Cheers.
Answer:
The correct answer is letter "D": represents the universality of exchange rate systems.
Explanation:
Purchasing Power Parity or PPP compares different countries' currencies through a market's basket of goods approach. Two currencies are in PPP when a market basket of goods, taking into account the exchange rate is priced the same in both countries. PPP currency rates are considered more accurate than market-exchange rates.