Answer:
if she deposits for 12 months she would have to deposit 642.
Step-by-step explanation:
Equations:
4x - 2y = 12
-4x - 9y = 54
Multiple them in both sides
4x - 2y - 4x - 9y = 12 + 54
-2y - 9y = 66
-11y = 66
y= -6
If y= -6 then put y in first or second equation.
I put it in first equation
4x - 2.(-6) = 12
4x + 12 = 12
x= 0
Therefore
(x,y) = (0, -6)
Answer:
There is not enough evidence to support the claim that Alaska had a lower proportion of identity theft than 23%.
Step-by-step explanation:
We are given the following in the question:
Sample size, n = 1432
p = 23% = 0.23
Alpha, α = 0.05
Number of theft complaints , x = 321
First, we design the null and the alternate hypothesis
This is a one-tailed test.
Formula:
Putting the values, we get,
Now, we calculate the p-value from the table.
P-value = 0.298
Since the p-value is greater than the significance level, we fail to reject the null hypothesis and accept the null hypothesis.
Conclusion:
Thus, there is not enough evidence to support the claim that Alaska had a lower proportion of identity theft than 23%.
1) 6 positive
2) - $25 negative
3) -8 negative
4) 82 positive