Answer:
Raw materials purchased = $111,000
Explanation:
given data
Beginning Ending
Raw materials inventory $47,000 $50,000
Finished goods 58,000 50,000
raw materials use manufacturing = $108,000
solution
we get here Raw materials purchased that is express as
Raw materials purchased + beginning raw material = ending Raw materials + Raw materials used ...................1
put here value and we get
Raw materials purchased = $50,000 + $108,000 - $47,000
Raw materials purchased = $111,000
I would say "B. Who is the enemy?" , because of its generalization and vagueness. I recommend looking deeper into the definitions, but who is the enemy is definitely my choice.
Answer:
The correct answer is letter "B": Choosing less harmful products.
Explanation:
Everyday companies are growing consciousness on the type of products the human being uses to satisfy basic needs or simply perform routine duties. Though, many of those the items used can cause harm to the environment. <em>Mothballs, oven cleaners, furniture polish and stain, and toilet bowl cleaners</em> are examples of those items that can put individuals and eventually societies at risk.
<em>By choosing less harmful products like the mentioned above and choosing alternative solutions to cover common activities, humanity's global footprint will be reduced.</em>
Answer:
has less of an effect on aggregate demand than if households view it as permanent
Explanation:
Tax Cut is an expansionary fiscal policy; where government uses its expenditure, receipt policy to increase aggregate demand.
A tax cut affects aggregate demand by increasing it, as it increases the disposable income & purchasing power. However: if households view a tax cut as temporary, it has less impact then that if it is viewed as permanent.
Such because, a tax cut considered temporary would be seen as a temporary increase in disposable income, purchasing power. However, consumers usually weigh marginal utility of a money unit gained less than marginal disutility of a money unit lost. Simply, increasing standard of living is easier, but degrading even temporarily improvised standard of living again is difficult. So, Consumers are averse to reduce their once raisen standard of living . This would make them change their aggregate demand less firstly itself, if the tax cut is considered to be temporary (to avoid disutility of degraded standard of living after tax cut reversal).
