<span>One of the most important factors when it comes to making work meaningful for employees and professionals is that of responsibility in their task delegation, and ascribing to the vision that the company holds in their operations and company culture itself.</span>
Answer:
The correct answers are:
1) "B": common pool resources are overused.
2) "C": overfishing in public waters.
Explanation:
1) The tragedy of the commons is a resource-based economic problem that takes place when given resources are overexploited without a clear renewable plan or government restrictions that avoid the extinction of those resources. Those resources are usually scarce.
2) <em>Overfishing in public waters</em> is a clear example of the tragedy of the commons. Certain types of fish are scarce. The situation worsens when there are no clear limits imposed on fishermen who tend to overexploit fishing for economic purposes. A real-life example of this is the collapse of the North Atlantic Cod fisheries on Canada's eastern coast.
Answer:
You question is missing some data.so i am adding a sample question matching the above conditions.i hope it will help.
You have just taken out a $15,000 car loan with a 8% APR compounded monthly. The loan is for five years. When you make your first payment in one month, how much of the payment will go toward the principal of the loan and how much will go towards the interest? (Dont round intermediate steps to six decimal places)
Round answers to nearest cent
Explanation:
Please find attached file for complete answer solution and explanation of same question.
Answer:
The benefits of a High Speed Rail in California:
- It becomes a feasible alternative to air travel, because it can be either cheaper, or even faster, since passengers do not have to spend as much time on a train station as they do on an airport.
- If demand is high enough, state highways can become less congested, because many people who would otherwise travel by car, would take a high speed train instead.
- Because the trains are electric, they are likely to help reduce pollution.
The cons would be:
- We cannot know for sure how many people would take the high speed trains. Demand could not be high enough to justify the cost.
- The line would be very costly.
- It could end up benefit only a small section of the population who would take the trains, or who travel often.
I believe that the benefits outweigh the drawbacks, as can be seen in most countries where high speed lines have been made between large cities. For example, in Spain, the line between Madrid and Barcelona is profitable. The same would likely happen for a line between Los Angeles and San Francisco.
What are the implications of starting a project based on tenuous projections that may or may not come true 10 years from now?
If demand projections are tenous, there is always the possiblity that the high speed line could not be profitable. However, this risk can be lowered if the line is made between highly populated cities.
Could you justify the California high-speed rail project from the perspective of a massive public works initiative?
Yes, a high speed rail would be a project that could massively impact California. The benefits of its operation could outweight the cost.
In other words, what other factors enter into the decision of whether to pursue a high-speed rail project?
As I said before, the most important factor is to construct line between highly populated cities in order to reduce the risk of not having enough demand. It has been demonstrated around the world, in Spain, in Italy, in Japan, in China, that high speed lines that connect very populated regions, can be profitable.
Answer:
The correct answer is option (B).
Explanation:
According to the scenario, the given data are as follows:
Bond carrying value = $1,470,226
Rate of interest = 8%
Rate of interest (Semiannual ) = 4%
So, we can calculate the the bond interest expense on the first interest payment by using following formula:
The bond interest expense = Bond carrying value × rate of interest (semiannual)
By putting the value we get
= $1,470,226 × 4%
= $58,809