Ask question

Ask question

All categories

2 years ago

11

Ophira’s insurance company has notified her that her premiums will increase due to a poor insurance score and a recent claim she

filed. The recent claim has increased her premiums by 41%, and her poor insurance score will cost her an additional $25 per month. Ophira currently pays $815 per year for insurance. How much will she pay next year?
$1149.15
$1672.15
$1449.00
$1449.15

1 answer:

timurjin [86]2 years ago

8 0

Answer:

$1449.15

Step-by-step explanation:

currently paying 815

to pay next year: 41% increase + 25 extra per month

⇒ 141%·815 + 12·25

= 1149.15 + 300

= 1449.15

You might be interested in

Tacoma's population in 2000 was about 200 thousand, and had been growing by about 9% each year. a. Write a recursive formula for

KIM [24]

Answer:

a) The recurrence formula is $P_n = \frac{109}{100}P_{n-1}$ .

b) The general formula for the population of Tacoma is

$P_n = \left(\frac{109}{100}\right)^nP_{0}$ .

c) In 2016 the approximate population of Tacoma will be 794062 people.

d) The population of Tacoma should exceed the 400000 people by the year 2009.

Step-by-step explanation:

a) We have the population in the year 2000, which is 200 000 people. Let us write $P_0 = 200 000$ . For the population in 2001 we will use $P_1$ , for the population in 2002 we will use $P_2$ , and so on.

In the following year, 2001, the population grow 9% with respect to the previous year. This means that $P_0$ is equal to $P_1$ plus 9% of the population of 2000. Notice that this can be written as

$P_1 = P_0 + (9/100)*P_0 = \left(1-\frac{9}{100}\right)P_0 = \frac{109}{100}P_0$ .

In 2002, we will have the population of 2001, $P_1$ , plus the 9% of $P_1$ . This is

$P_2 = P_1 + (9/100)*P_1 = \left(1-\frac{9}{100}\right)P_1 = \frac{109}{100}P_1$ .

So, it is not difficult to notice that the general recurrence is

$P_n = \frac{109}{100}P_{n-1}$ .

b) In the previous formula we only need to substitute the expression for $P_{n-1}$ :

$P_{n-1} = \frac{109}{100}P_{n-2}$ .

Then,

$P_n = \left(\frac{109}{100}\right)^2P_{n-2}$ .

Repeating the procedure for $P_{n-3}$ we get

$P_n = \left(\frac{109}{100}\right)^3P_{n-3}$ .

But we can do the same operation n times, so

$P_n = \left(\frac{109}{100}\right)^nP_{0}$ .

c) Recall the notation we have used:

$P_{0}$ for 2000, $P_{1}$ for 2001, $P_{2}$ for 2002, and so on. Then, 2016 is $P_{16}$ . So, in order to obtain the approximate population of Tacoma in 2016 is

$P_{16} = \left(\frac{109}{100}\right)^{16}P_{0} = (1.09)^{16}P_0 = 3.97\cdot 200000 \approx 794062$

d) In this case we want to know when $P_n>400000$ , which is equivalent to

$(1.09)^{n}P_0>400000$ .

Substituting the value of $P_0$ , we get

$(1.09)^{n}200000>400000$ .

Simplifying the expression:

$(1.09)^{n}>2$ .

So, we need to find the value of $n$ such that the above inequality holds.

The easiest way to do this is take logarithm in both hands. Then,

$n\ln(1.09)>\ln 2$ .

So, $n>\frac{\ln 2}{\ln(1.09)} = 8.04323172693$ .

So, the population of Tacoma should exceed the 400 000 by the year 2009.

8 0

2 years ago

Read 2 more answers

What is the best estimate of the lateral area of a cube with edges that are 2.1 inches long?

Dimas [21]

The best estimate of the lateral area of the cube with edges that are 2.1 inches long is 4.2

8 0

2 years ago

HELP with these questions

zlopas [31]

<u>Step-by-step explanation:</u>

transform the parent graph of f(x) = ln x into f(x) = - ln (x - 4) by shifting the parent graph 4 units to the right and reflecting over the x-axis

(???, 0): 0 = - ln (x - 4)

$\frac{0}{-1} = \frac{-ln (x - 4)}{-1}$

0 = ln (x - 4)

$e^{0} = e^{ln (x - 4)}$

1 = x - 4

<u> +4 </u> <u> +4 </u>

5 = x

(5, 0)

(???, 1): 1 = - ln (x - 4)

$\frac{0}{-1} = \frac{-ln (x - 4)}{-1}$

1 = ln (x - 4)

$e^{1} = e^{ln (x - 4)}$

e = x - 4

<u> +4 </u> <u> +4 </u>

e + 4 = x

6.72 = x

(6.72, 1)

Domain: x - 4 > 0

<u> +4 </u> <u>+4 </u>

x > 4

(4, ∞)

Vertical asymptotes: there are no vertical asymptotes for the parent function and the transformation did not alter that

No vertical asymptotes

*************************************************************************

transform the parent graph of f(x) = 3ˣ into f(x) = - 3ˣ⁺⁵ by shifting the parent graph 5 units to the left and reflecting over the x-axis

Domain: there is no restriction on x so domain is all real number

(-∞, ∞)

Range: there is a horizontal asymptote for the parent graph of y = 0 with range of y > 0. the transformation is a reflection over the x-axis so the horizontal asymptote is the same (y = 0) but the range changed to y < 0.

(-∞, 0)

Y-intercept is when x = 0:

f(x) = - 3ˣ⁺⁵

= - 3⁰⁺⁵

= - 3⁵

= -243

Horizontal Asymptote: y = 0 <em>(explanation above)</em>

5 0

3 years ago

A 20-foot ladder touches a building 16 feet up the wall. What is the measure of the angle the ladder makes with the ground (mACB

Alecsey [184]

The answer is the last option, 27°

4 0

2 years ago

Read 2 more answers

If the bottom row as a result of sythetic division is 1 3 0 4 0, then the quotient is which of the following? Select one:

zmey [24]

The quotient of the synthetic division is x^3 + 3x^2 + 4

<h3>How to determine the quotient?</h3>

The bottom row of synthetic division given as:

1 3 0 4 0

The last digit represents the remainder, while the other represents the quotient.

So, we have:

Quotient = 1 3 0 4

Introduce the variables

Quotient = 1x^3 + 3x^2 + 0x + 4

Evaluate

Quotient = x^3 + 3x^2 + 4

Hence, the quotient of the synthetic division is x^3 + 3x^2 + 4

Read more about synthetic division at:

brainly.com/question/18788426

#SPJ1

3 0

1 year ago