Answer:
a. Direct materials
b. Direct labor
c. Variable overhead
d. Fixed overhead
Explanation:
The absorption costing is the costing in which the income statement should includes all types of production cost i.e. direct material cost, direct labor cost, variable overhead and the fixed overhead
So as per the given statement, all the four types of costing should be involved while preparing the income statement under the absorption costing
Hence, all 4 options should be considered
Answer:
high,high
not all prices adjust quickly
below
Explanation:
According to the sticky-wage theory, the economy is in a recession because the price level has declined so that real wages are too high, thus labor demand is too high.
Real wages decline as nominal wages are adjusted. As a result, the economy returns to full employment
According to the sticky-price theory, the economy is in a recession because not all prices adjust quickly.
As people observe the lower price level, the economy returns to the long-run aggregate supply curve.
According to the misperceptions theory, the economy is in a recession when the price level is below what was expected.
As people observe the lower price level, their expectations adjust.
Answer:
hey mate your answer is here
<span>The primary purpose of the requirements analysis phase is to determine and document the specific features and functions of the new system. It does not eliminate obviously nonsensible projects before forming a project development team. Identify the requisite skills needed or show personnel assigned to the project or investigates how much similar projects have cost in the past.</span>
Since Intel has a history of effectively transforming
R&D investment into income, the pro-forma version of the ration seems to be
of more significant. A company starting, for instance, would be unalike: its
track record would be much poorer and probabilities are that the criteria set
in place would not be as rough as Intel’s. Therefore, it appears that the significance
hinge on the kind of business: if future benefit is more of a doubt, then
R&D should be expensed. The contradictory is true if benefit is almost certain.
Intel also has the advantage of being very vibrant with its R&D objectives
and having exact, measurable standards. They note obviously what the funds are apportioned
to and what the end outcomes should be of the growth.
