Base on the given situation above, if there is a presence of
stricter quota such as with the 30,000 tons of apricots to be provided and was
imposed on a market, it is expected that quantity demand and the imports in the
market to decrease even if the domestic quantity and price that has been
provided will increase.
Answer:
Studies show that OSHA employees fail to properly inspect and regulate many workplaces, primarily because they do not have __________.
sufficient resources.
Explanation:
OSHA means Occupational Safety and Health Act. The law was passed in 1970 to protect workers rights to safe working environments and to promote good health of workers. OSHA employees are expected to properly inspect and regulate all workplaces. But lack of resources (human, material, and financial) have hindered the attainment of the objectives of the law. The OSHA employees have also faced challenges from employers who would rather not comply with workplace safety regulations.
Answer: d) Cannot sue Bob for misrepresentation
Explanation: A misrepresentation is a false statement made from one person to another that a certain fact is true or accurate when it is indeed false. The fact that the value of the stock I bought on Bob's opinion does not give me the right to sue him for misrepresentation (intentional). The reason is this, Bob's expression of his opinion concerning the HotNet stock does not usually constitute a misrepresentation even when it turns out that his opinion is incorrect. It wasn't intended, however, he could be sued for negligent misrepresentation.
Answer:
Factor must opt to agree as well as purchase the deal from the provider. A further explanation is provided below.
Explanation:
The given problem seems to be incomplete. Find the attachment of the complete question below.
Given:
Direct material,
= $8.70
Direct labor,
= 24.70
Overhead,
= 43.50
Now,
If the offer is accepted, the cost per unit will be:
= 
= 
= 
($)
Thus the above is the correct answer.
Based on the percentage of readers who own a particular make of the car and the random sample, we can infer that there is sufficient evidence at a 0.02 level to support the executive claim.
<h3>What is the evidence to support the executive's claim?</h3>
The hypothesis is:
Null hypothesis : P = 0.55
Alternate hypothesis : P ≠ 0.55
We then need to find the test statistic:
= (Probability found by marketing executive - Probability from publisher) / √( (Probability from publisher x (1 - Probability from publisher))/ number of people sampled
= (0.46 - 0.55) / √(( 0.55 x ( 1 - 0.55)) / 200
= -2.56
Using this z value as the test statistic, perform a two-tailed test to show:
= P( Z < -2.56) + P(Z > 2.56)
= 0.0052 + 0.0052
= 0.0104
The p-value is 0.0104 which is less than the significance level of 0.02. This means that we reject the null hypothesis.
The Marketing executive was correct.
Find out more on the null and alternate hypothesis at brainly.com/question/25263462
#SPJ1
