Answer: Federal aid
Explanation:
Federal aid helps students with the cost of tuition for everyone. It allows for students to keep out of major debt.
The correct answers to these open questions are the following.
Maple Farms, Inc. v. City School District of Elmira.
Could something like this bankrupt a company?
Yes, it can, if the proper forecast were not done taking into consideration all of the possible variables at medium and long-range.
Do you agree with the decision?
It was a tough decision because the court declared in its decision that the performance was not impracticable, as Maple Farm Inc indicated when decided to break the contract.
In strict theory, I agree with the court's decision because the explanation was that an "impractical" occurred when an event happened totally unexpected. And in this case, Mapple Farm Inc could have taken extra provisions knowing that milk had a 10% increase the last year and had the chance of more increases in the present year.
That is how a company can avoid this type of situation. Taking better provisions, contemplating all kinds of variables, knowing that in the future, something unexpected can happen and could be prevented with the proper forecast.
Simplifying
(2a + 5)(3a + -4) = 0
Reorder the terms:
(5 + 2a)(3a + -4) = 0
Reorder the terms:
(5 + 2a)(-4 + 3a) = 0
Multiply (5 + 2a) * (-4 + 3a)
(5(-4 + 3a) + 2a * (-4 + 3a)) = 0
((-4 * 5 + 3a * 5) + 2a * (-4 + 3a)) = 0
((-20 + 15a) + 2a * (-4 + 3a)) = 0
(-20 + 15a + (-4 * 2a + 3a * 2a)) = 0
(-20 + 15a + (-8a + 6a2)) = 0
Combine like terms: 15a + -8a = 7a
(-20 + 7a + 6a2) = 0
Solving
-20 + 7a + 6a2 = 0
Solving for variable 'a'.
Factor a trinomial.
(-5 + -2a)(4 + -3a) = 0
Subproblem 1
Set the factor '(-5 + -2a)' equal to zero and attempt to solve:
Simplifying
-5 + -2a = 0
Solving
-5 + -2a = 0
Move all terms containing a to the left, all other terms to the right.
Add '5' to each side of the equation.
-5 + 5 + -2a = 0 + 5
Combine like terms: -5 + 5 = 0
0 + -2a = 0 + 5
-2a = 0 + 5
Combine like terms: 0 + 5 = 5
-2a = 5
Divide each side by '-2'.
a = -2.5
Simplifying
a = -2.5
Subproblem 2
Set the factor '(4 + -3a)' equal to zero and attempt to solve:
Simplifying
4 + -3a = 0
Solving
4 + -3a = 0
Move all terms containing a to the left, all other terms to the right.
Add '-4' to each side of the equation.
4 + -4 + -3a = 0 + -4
Combine like terms: 4 + -4 = 0
0 + -3a = 0 + -4
-3a = 0 + -4
Combine like terms: 0 + -4 = -4
-3a = -4
Divide each side by '-3'.
a = 1.333333333
Simplifying
a = 1.333333333
Solution
a = {-2.5, 1.333333333}
Answer: No, Paul has not breached a contract.
Explanation: To answer this, we must first we must define what a contract is.
A contract is an agreement between two or more people that is legally binding, and which guides or governs the actions or conducts of the parties involved.
A quality that makes a contract legally binding is that it is enforceable by law.
In the scenario given in the question above, Paul has not breached any contract because there isn't one. The promise to buy dinner has not been legally bound, therefore, it is not enforceable by law, in essence, it is not qualified to be called a contract.
Answer:
B. Less than 10%
Explanation:
An addition increase by 10 % in the physical capital stock (which is a factor of production consisting of man made goods like machineries and so on) will lead to a less than 10% increase in the Gross domestic product. This is due to the law of diminishing marginal utility which talks about the consumption increases marginal utility from each additional unit declines. Thus, the more the physical capital stock increases, the GDP will increase at a decreasing rate.
