Answer:
The marginal cost will most likely increase to $2.00
Answer:
The price elasticity of demand for icecream is -0.75, that means that is inelastic.
Explanation:
Price elasticity of demand measures the porcentage of the change in the demand when there is a change in the price. If the change in porcentage of the demand is less than the pocentage of change in the price we talk about inelastic demand. An increase in the price of inelastic goods will result in bigger revenues, as the porcentage in the drop of sales is less than the porcentage of increase in the price.
The formula is: % in change demand/% in change of price
-3%/4= -0.75
The minus symbol indicates that when the price rises the demand decrease.
Suppose a worker quits her job in order to look for new work. after a week or two of looking, she finds a new job. during her brief job search, she experienced frictional unemployment
<h3>What is frictional Unemployment</h3>
Frictional unemployment occurs when an individual is temporarily unemployed as a result of searching for new or better job.
This is a time of transition usually from an existing job to a new one.
Therefore, Suppose a worker quits her job in order to look for new work. after a week or two of looking, she finds a new job. during her brief job search, she experienced frictional unemployment
Learn more on frictional unemployment below,
brainly.com/question/11481076
#SPJ12
Answer:
Corporate Bonds and T-Bills will have return above 8%
Explanation:
given data
investments = 4
investment = 8 %
solution
first of all we get 95% confidence interval that is as
and here investment returns and standard deviation are attach so
95% confidence interval = Return - 2 × SD to Return + 2 × SD ................a
so here
we can see here as per table attach
here only Corporate Bonds and T-Bills will have return above 8%
Answer: C. The court concluded that Microsoft violated the Sherman Act
Explanation: The case between United States v. Microsoft Corporation which took place at the
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit during the period February 26–27, 2001 and was finally decided June 28, 2001.
It was decided by the District Court that Microsoft violated the Sharma Antitrust Act of 1890.
