Answer:
I feel like my strongest aspect of professionalism would be communication. My career interests require lots of communication with customers. I would need to be able to communicate with the customer’s feelings and needs for whichever situation they are in and what they want to accomplish.
Explanation:
I believe my strongest aspect of professionalism is clear and effective communication. I am constantly working on improving my ability to understand non-verbal cues and refute counterclaims respectfully and factually.
The aspect of professionalism I feel I am strongest at is clear and effective communication. I believe this is a strong point in my professional character because I consistently strive to ensure my explanations are understood. My ability to articulate complex concepts into simpler understandable points is what sets me apart in my profession. In terms of personal development, there is always room for growth when it comes to active listening.
One area of my communication skills that could use development is understanding non-verbal cues. Often, these subtitles are just as important, if not more so, than the words being spoken. In my journey to become a better professional, I also make it a point to refute counterclaims sincerely and factually, respecting differing viewpoints without compromising on integrity.
#SPJ3
Answer:
Game Theory is a general mathematical analysis to investigate the strategic interactions among players. Game theorists attempt to provide precise descriptions of situations of conflicting interests in order to study the behavior that such a conflict would (or, in some cases, should) elicit from rational agents. Players are assumed to consider the position and perceptions of other players while forming their strategies. In our examples, we will assume that there are two players, and that each has two choices and the fact that the players are selfish (operate in their own best interests) and rational .
Limitations of Game Theory :
The biggest issue with game theory is that, like most other economic models, it relies on the assumption that people are rational actors that are self-interested and utility-maximizing. Of course, we are social beings who do cooperate and do care about the welfare of others, often at our own expense. Game theory cannot account for the fact that in some situations we may fall into a Nash equilibrium, and other times not, depending on the social context and who the players are.
Answer:
Following are the responses to the given points:
Explanation:
For point a:
The fund would have been less dangerous for sales and profitability. Each reason would be that growth funds only appreciate investment returns. And on the other side, the growth and economy grew yield gains in term both of equity investment returns or dividend/interest payments, that result throughout the investor's reduced risk.
For point b:
High-quality bond funds are far less dangerous. The reason for this is the investment income is subject to risk and depends on the financial performance of the firm and many other external factors, including that of the country's macroeconomic scenario. Besides that, equity investment dividends aren't guaranteed. That bondholders benefit from the strong business credibility as well as the loan repayments on the investments are assured, independent of the company earnings performance.
For point c:
Its municipalities with such a good return would be less harmful. That reason is that such bonds are provided by public authorities (such as municipalities). Even so, these devices cannot obtain a reputation for credit mostly on market. Consequently, until investing in such securities, it is important to take into account credit scores (assigned to such bonds).
For point d:
The equilibrium fund is much less risky. It is because balanced funds participate in various types of financial securities like assets and liabilities. It helps balance the risk linked to stock market fluctuations with fixed liability returns. In contrast, foreign money invests mainly in foreign share trading and is thus exposed to market volatility and rapid share price fluctuations.
Answer:
B
Explanation:
b. A recession increases the number of recipients of unemployment benefits.
c. Legislators increase tbc generosity of unemployment benefits.
d. A law is enacted that increases government spending on health-care programs
1. Discretionary spending
2. Automatic stabilizers
Answer:
a. automatic stabilizers.
b. automatic stabilizers.
Discretionary spending
Discretionary spending
Explanation:
Automatic stabilizers are stabilizers that adjust the economy automatically without the intervention of external agents . examples include progressive tax and transfer payments
In an expansion, progressive tax increases the tax paid and this reduces disposable income
In a contraction, tax paid is reduced and this increases disposable income
Discretionary fiscal policies are deliberate steps taken by the government to stimulate the economy in order to cause the economy to move to full employment and price stability more quickly than it might otherwise.
Discretionary fiscal policies can either be expansionary or contractionary
Expansionary fiscal policy is when the government increases the money supply in the economy either by increasing spending or cutting taxes.
Contractionary fiscal policies is when the government reduces the money supply in the economy either by reducing spending or increasing taxes
Answer:
Market capitalization - $155.26
Stock price - $26.77
Explanation:
The computation of the market capitalization is shown below:
= last year dividend × (1 + growth rate) ÷ (cost of capital - growth rate)
= $5.18 billion × ( 1 + 7.9%) ÷ (11.5% - 7.9%)
= $5.58,922 billion ÷ 3.6%
= $155.26
And, the stock price would be
= Market capitalization ÷ outstanding shares
= $155.26 ÷ 5.8 billion
= $26.77
Answer:
the break-even point in dollars is $6,500,000
Explanation:
The computation of the break even point in dollars is shown below;
As we know that
Break even point in dollars is
= Fixed cost ÷ contribution margin ratio
Since the variable cost is 80%, so the contrbibution margin is 20% so that the total selling price would be 100%
now
= $1,300,000 ÷ 20%
= $6,500,000
Hence, the break-even point in dollars is $6,500,000