Answer:

since 

Explanation:
U(q₁ q₂)

Budget law can be given by

Lagrangian function can be given by

First order condition csn be given by



From eqn (i) and eqn (ii) we have

Putting
in euqtion (iii) we have

since 

Answer: violated organizational ethics
Explanation: because that makes most sense
Answer:
the discount is for 60 dollars
therefore Simmons will pay 2,940 dollar for the inventory
Explanation:
From the invoice nominal we should remove the returned goods.
nominal 5,000
returns 2,000
balance: 3,000
commercial terms: 2/10 the discount is 2% if paid within 10 days
3,000 x 2% = 60 dollars
net cash disbursements: 3,000 - 60 = 2,940 dollars
Answer:
E. efficiency wages
Explanation:
Clearly this isn't a discrimination case, as Rob has a robust background with the company (15 years). Although their work output may be the same, Rob's experience justifies the higher pay.
This is one form of efficiency wage theory, holding that higher wages lead to increased employee productivity. This way, Rob gets an incentive for staying with the company.
Answer : The p-value of 0.0743 is greater than alpha at 0.05; so we fail to reject the null hypothesis and conclude that there is no significant difference in the number of unique users before and after a change in policy.
In this question, the manager wants to know if the number of users has changed.
So, the null and alternate hypotheses are:
Null Hypothesis: 
Alternate Hypothesis :
Type of test : Two-tailed test
The level of significance is 95%
We can calculate alpha (α) as follows:


The p value = 0.0743.
We use the following rules to arrive at a conclusion when p-values and alpha is given:
If
, reject the null hypothesis
If
, we don't reject the null hypothesis.
Since the p-value is greater than alpha, we don't reject the null hypothesis.