<em>we </em><em>can </em><em>attracted</em><em> </em><em>to</em><em> </em><em>the</em><em> </em><em>poultry</em><em> </em><em>farming</em><em> </em><em>these</em><em> </em><em>days</em><em> </em><em>by</em><em> </em><em>saying</em><em> </em><em>eveyone</em><em> </em><em>to</em><em> </em><em>involve</em><em> </em><em>in</em><em> </em><em>this</em><em> </em><em>work</em><em> </em><em>and</em><em> </em><em>be</em><em> </em><em>excited</em><em> </em><em />
Ill ask for help from another coworker- if there was no one else available to help them I would help the customer if I am in that field
i needed points
Answer:
45: $10,000
46: $40,000
47: $20,000
Explanation:
Total fixed cost of Amy =
TFC = yearly fixed cost + 5% of $20,000
TFC = $9,000 + $1,000
TFC = $10,000
Total cost =
TC = Variable cost + total fixed cost
TC = $30,000 + $10,000
TC = $40,000
The total profit she accrued is the difference between the total cost and the money she'd borrowed from her parents.
$40,000 - $20,000 = $20,000
Therefore, the total profit of Amy is $20,000
Answer:
Yes.
Explanation:
I agree with Unilever’s decision to link its brands with efforts to encourage healthy and environmentally sustainable behaviors because it is an innovative way to catch more customers who might have been in doubt of their products due to health and other related issues. It also presents a good image of the company and shows that Unilever is not only out there to sell their products and maximize profits but also to make sure that the consumers of their products are healthy and satisfied. This will help them retain their customers as well as to build unflinching loyalty.
Answer: BOWED OUT SO THAT FOR EVERY ADDITIONAL UNIT OF A GOOD GIVEN UP, YOU GET FEWER AND FEWER UNITS OF THE OTHER GOOD
Explanation:
The increasing marginal opportunity cost theory speaks of the additional cost that a company incurs for producing an additional good. At first more costs such as more raw materials and labour lead to more goods but it gets to a point where additional costs lead to less goods due to factors like redundancy i.e too many people doing the same thing.
The production possibility curve therefore measures the additional cost of production using the same resources by piting 2 goods against each other and checking what happens as one is continually given up for the other.
It is for this reason that it is bowed out because it shows that the more you give up one, the less of the other you receive.
It doesn't mean you don't gain the other good, you do but just less of it.
I have attached an example for you.
From the graph you see that giving up 25 units of food (100 -75) at point C gave 100 units of clothing.
But when a further 25 units of food were given up at point D, only 50 additional units of clothing was acquired.
This shows that you gain fewer of one good as you give up the other.