The stock market is essential for companies because they can raise money for their operations. The stock market is important for investors because they can trade their stocks across different companies. The stock market allows both investors and companies to compare their options.
If a policy change causes a Pareto improvement, is the outcome necessarily Pareto efficient if a policy change causes a Pareto improvement, then the outcome is not necessarily Pareto efficient this is because another change in the policy could cause another Pareto improvement.
A Pareto development is a development of a device whilst an alternative in the allocation of goods harms no person and advantages as a minimum one character. Pareto enhancements also are called "no-brainers" and are generally predicted to be rare, due to the plain and effective incentive to make any available Pareto development.
Factors that lie within the PPF display an inefficient or below-usage of resources – this is Pareto inefficient. A Pareto development way that output of both products can increase as we move from inside the PPF to factors at the PPF boundary.
Learn more about Pareto here:
brainly.com/question/7304310
#SPJ4
When a sales job is being filled by an untrained individual, the job specifications list will most likely include __<u>E) personality traits</u>___ as a way to predict which candidate will perform the job well.
<h3>What are personality traits?</h3>
Personality traits are some characteristics or qualities associated with individuals. Some of the personality traits include extroversion, agreeableness, openness, conscientiousness, adaptability, and neuroticism.
<h3>Answer Options:</h3>
A) age and gender
B) length of previous service
C) past job performance
D) relevant certification
E) personality traits
Thus, since the individuals involved are not trained, the most important factor to consider is not age, gender, previous service, past job performance, or relevant certification, but <u>E) personality traits.</u>
Learn more about personality traits here: brainly.com/question/10082381
Note:
I wasn't able to access the Chester Income Statement but I successfully accessed a similar question Digby.
The Complete Question is as under:
Refer to the HR Reports in the Inquirer. Through past investments in recruiting and training Digby has obtained a productivity index of 109.6%. This means that Digby's labor costs would be increased by 9.6% if it did not have these productivity improvements. This is a competitive advantage that Digby can sustain or even widen further if its competitors have no HR initiatives. Now, refer to the Income Statement in Digby's Annual Report. How much did Digby's productivity improvements save it in direct labor costs (in thousands) last year?
A. $766
B. $29818
C. $3137
D. $3211
Answer:
Option D. $3,137
Explanation:
The Productivity Index of 9.6% shows that if the improvement plan is implemented then the efficiency gains would result in saving of 9.6% of total direct cost. So if we total the direct cost for the year for all of the four products then we have an amount of $32,680 which is given at the second last column.
The amount saved last year would be:
Savings = $32,680 * 9.6% = $3,137
Hence the option C is correct here.
