Answer:
Yes, in the question there are is a clear example of economic discrimination.
Explanation:
The fact that Sharna does not purchase Earth prodcuts is not economic discrimination because each consumer is free to decide what to purchase.
However, Sharna is not only a consumer, but also a producer, and one that is a monopoly, and using the power of her monopolistic position to refuse to sell to Earthlings, or loan less to Earthlings, not because of legitimate economic justifications or concerns, but because she dislikes Earthling poetry, is a clear example of economic discrimination that would be struck down in an Earthling court.
Mark's initial revenue was $450 (150lb)($3) and his new revenue was $500 (100lb)($5). Since Mark's revenue increased when the price if apples rose, the demand for Mark's gourmet applies must be inelastic. Elastic, because even though there was a change in price, the change in price wasn't substantial.
Answer:
1) The $30,000 will be posted to the debit side of the Cash account.
2) The $30,000 will be posted to the credit side of the Common Stock account.
Explanation:
Answer:
Without cafeteria plan Karen taxable income is 2250 dollars and with cafeteria plan the taxable income is $2135.
Without cafeteria plan Katie taxable income is 2075 dollars and with cafeteria plan the taxable income is $1960.
Explanation:
A married women Karen earns = $2250
Katie single women earn = $2075
Employee contribution to health care = $115
If the Karen decline to participate in the cafeteria then her taxable income is $2250 (wages).
If the Karen accept to participate in the cafeteria then her taxable income is $2250 - $115 (contribution) = $2135
If Katie declined to participate in the cafeteria then her taxable income is $2075 (wages).
If Katie accept to participate in the cafeteria then her taxable income is $2075 - $115 (contribution) = $1960