If a policy change causes a Pareto improvement, is the outcome necessarily Pareto efficient if a policy change causes a Pareto improvement, then the outcome is not necessarily Pareto efficient this is because another change in the policy could cause another Pareto improvement.
A Pareto development is a development of a device whilst an alternative in the allocation of goods harms no person and advantages as a minimum one character. Pareto enhancements also are called "no-brainers" and are generally predicted to be rare, due to the plain and effective incentive to make any available Pareto development.
Factors that lie within the PPF display an inefficient or below-usage of resources – this is Pareto inefficient. A Pareto development way that output of both products can increase as we move from inside the PPF to factors at the PPF boundary.
Learn more about Pareto here:
brainly.com/question/7304310
#SPJ4
The correct answer is the first option. By protecting the privacy of personal information collected on its website a company like apple would be behaving in a socially responsible way towards its customers. Technology companies like apple have a responsibility to protect the personal information of its customers, if this wasn't the case then people would not buy their products as they would not have any faith in the company.
I’m pretty sure the answer is c
Im guess it would be 20,000 but im not positive
Generally speaking, a
business message expressing negative news (reader will react negatively) should
be organized indirectly. The message should be delivered among other
information and should not stand out. This is only appropriate if it is
practical to deliver the message in this way (immediate action is not
required). A more positive message should be prominent in the communication and
expressed in a more direct way, since it is assumed that the reader will react
positively.
