Answer:
(B) $20 billion
Explanation:
Given a certain level of MPC, an increase in government spending (G) by a certain amount translates to an increase in aggregate demand (AD) through the relationship below.
![ΔAD = \frac{ΔG}{1 - MPC}](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=%CE%94AD%20%3D%20%5Cfrac%7B%CE%94G%7D%7B1%20-%20MPC%7D)
where Δ means <em>change.</em>
<em />
Therefore, given ΔAD of $50 billion, and MPC of 0.6,
![ΔAD = \frac{ΔG}{1 - MPC}](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=%CE%94AD%20%3D%20%5Cfrac%7B%CE%94G%7D%7B1%20-%20MPC%7D)
= ![50 = \frac{ΔG}{1 - 0.6}](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=50%20%3D%20%5Cfrac%7B%CE%94G%7D%7B1%20-%200.6%7D)
= ![50 = \frac{ΔG}{0.4}](https://tex.z-dn.net/?f=50%20%3D%20%5Cfrac%7B%CE%94G%7D%7B0.4%7D)
= ΔG = 50 * 0.4 = 20
Therefore, increase in government purchases = $20 billion.
Answer:
TRUE
Explanation:
When supply is perfectly inelastic, the supply curve is vertical as shown in the attached plot. Thus, the tax that shifts the supply curve upward would have no effect on the equilibrium quantity or price paid by consumers. Since equilibrium quantity or price paid by consumer don't change there's no burden on them. However, no team's owners would receive a lower after tax price and thus bearing the entire tax burden.
Answer:
moral hazard
Explanation:
Banks reduce the risk of moral hazard when they monitor and supervise how their clients are using the loans and credits made to them.
Some types of credits do not require any type of monitoring or control, e.g. a credit card which a client can use basically however he/she wants to. But other types of credit that are taken for purchasing assets, e.g. a mortgage, must be used by the bank's client to specifically carryout the intended activity.
In economics, moral hazard refers to the tendency that an economic party can engage in unusually risky activities because the capital (money) that they are investing is not theirs and the negative effects of a potential loss will be suffered most by other parties.
Answer:
Direct denial
Explanation:
In responding to obejections one can use various methods that suits the particular situation. A person can provide a logical argument when the objection is valid in a bid to convince the other party that their product is suitable for their needs.
In this instance Vince's firm has been in operation for over 15 years. The objection that start-up landscaping firms go in and out of business in just a few months can be answered with a direct denial.
Vince told them the business is not a startup but has been in business for 15 years.