All categories

2 years ago

Which is not a reason for supporting ethical relativism?

1 answer:

4 0

This is not the reason why not support ethical relativism; Ethical relativism holds that there is a right and wrong, even though we do not agree about what is right and wrong and If people disagree about some moral matter, their disagreement will always be due to their having different moral values.

You might be interested in

The number at the bottom right of each supplier’s box shows the portion of Boeing’s costs in thelast year that went to that supp

vaieri [72.5K]

Answer:

both

United Continental with a capital expenditure of 60.68%
Southwest Airlines with a capital expenditure of 51.38%

Explanation:

Since United Continental's purchases of Boeing planes represent over 60% of their capital expenditures, this means that Boeing had to be the primary plane supplier. Even if the company purchased planes form other manufacturer, their purchases would not even be 40% of the company's purchases.

The same applies to Southwest Airlines, even though the purchases from Boeing are a little lower, they are still over 51%. This means the company could not have spent more money on purchasing planes from another company. The maximum purchase from another airplane manufacturer would have been less than 49% at most.

Besides the previous analysis, you must also consider that the company spends money on things besides airplanes, e.g. new training facilities, equipment, computer software, other vehicles, etc.

5 0

2 years ago

Suppose that at prices of $1, $2, $3, $4, and $5 for product Z, the corresponding quantities supplied are 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 unit

klio [65]

Answer:

Explanation:

An improve in technology will allow firms to produce in an effective way therefore, with the same resources, firms will produce more units. This will cause an increase in total supply: at the same price, firms will offer more units. In this case, at prices $1, $2, $3, $4 and $5 the new quantities will be 6,8,10,12. In the demand and supply graph, this looks as shift to the right of the supply curve (figure attached).

It is not option B because the problem says increase in quantities "at these prices". It is not option C because an increase in taxes will increase costs of production, thus firms will decrease units of production. It is not option D because changes in income will affect demand.

4 0

2 years ago

Today's consumers do not need to rely on marketer-supplied information about products and services because they can use ________

MariettaO [177]

Answer:

The answer to the question would be C

Explanation:

Without a doubt, the economic crisis has changed the way consumers approach the market for goods and services. In this new era, austerity, discounts and the search in different channels of the best price / benefit ratio dominate.

Of course, technology and the Internet are the best allies of the consumer who wants to be informed: thanks to smartphones, bar scanners, social networks or websites that compare prices or offer discounts, we are the buyers with more prior information on what we want or need to acquire.

4 0

2 years ago

Bryan searched for a new bank prior to filling out his direct deposit form at his new employer. He noted that 2-4-7 Bank offered

VikaD [51]

Answer:

2-4-7 has low operating costs

Explanation:

The 2-4-7 bank must be an online bank only. Online-only banks provide banking services, just like traditional banks. However, they offer higher interest rates to their customers as compared to traditional banks.

Online-only banks do not require branches to serve customers; neither do they do not need to hire a large number of employees. Their transactions are done via the internet. An online-only bank, therefore, has low operating costs as it does not pay rent for several branches and has a lean staff. Online banks pass the benefits of low operating costs to customers in the form of higher interest rates.

Online-only banking is a new concept in the banking industry. Online banks are using high interest rates to popularize the concept and attract customers.

4 0

2 years ago

Joe is currently unemployed and without health insurance coverage. He derives utility (U) from his interest income on his saving

sveta [45]

Answer:

1. Joe's expected utility without any insurance coverage is $985.36

2. Joe's expected Income without any insurance is $39,000

3. Joe will not buy insurance; if he buys insurance, it'll lower his income (and utility) to below the level he can expect to obtain without purchasing the insurance.

4. Yes, he will (See Explanation Below)

Explanation:

Given

Function,U= 5(Y^½) where Y = Savings

Let P = Chances of having a heart attack = 5% = 0.05

Let Q = Chances of not having a heart attack = 1 - 5% = 1 - 0.05 = 0.95

Let C = Cost of Treatment = $20,000

Let A = Income per year = $40,000

1. Expected utility without any insurance coverage is calculated as follows:

Expected Utility = 5PC^½ + 5QA½

Substitute respective values in the above equation

Expected Utility = 5 * 0.05 * √20,000 + 5 * 0.95 * √40,000

Expected Utility = 985.3553390593273

Expected Utility = 985.36 ---- Approximated.

Hence, Joe's expected utility without any insurance coverage is $985.36

2. Expected income without any insurance coverage is calculated as follows

Expected Income = QA + P(A-C)

Expected Income = 0.95 * $40,000 + 0.05 * ($40,000 - $20,000)

Expected Income = $39,000

Hence, Joe's expected Income without any insurance is $39,000

3. First, we'll calculate his expected Loss.

Expected Loss is calculated as = ∆Income

∆Income = Difference in Income if he has insurance and if he doesn't

Income if he has insurance = $40,000

Income if he doesn't = $39,000

Expected Loss = $40,000 - $39,000

Expected Loss = $10,000

He has an expected loss of $1,000.

U40,000= $1,000, compared to U39,000 = $987.42, and U38,500= $981.07.

Joe will not buy insurance

If he buys insurance, it'll lower his income (and utility) to below the level he can expect to obtain without purchasing the insurance.

Assume that Joe is taxed at 33% rate, the following analysis applies

Annual tax = 33% of $39,000 = $12,870

He's left with $39,00 - $12,870 = $26,130

Utility = $808.24

If premium = $1,500, the following analysis applies;

Income = $40,000

Taxable Income = $40,000 - $1,500 = $38,500

Annual tax = 33% of $38,500 = $12,705

He's left with $38,500 - $12,705 = $25,795

Utility = $826.06

If he chooses tax free insurance, the following analysis applies.

Utility is greater

If premium is tax exempt, he'll pay insurance

This means that incentives can apply for people with good investments.

As it is, currently the US is making attempts to do with fines for failure to carry health insurance under ACA.

4 0

2 years ago