Depending on how beneficial the item is and how long the credit period can be extended, it can be better to save up and purchase something later rather than now. Therefore, option D is correct.
There are several reasons why it might be better to save up some money and buy something later rather than buying it on credit now:
Interest: When you buy something on credit, you are essentially borrowing money and will have to pay interest on that loan. This means that you will end up paying more for the item than if you had saved up and paid for it in cash.
Debt: Taking on debt can be a burden, especially if you are already struggling to make ends meet. By saving up and buying something later, you can avoid adding to your debt load.
Credit score: Your credit score is affected by your credit utilization ratio, which is the amount of credit you are using compared to the amount of credit available to you. If you use a lot of credit, it can lower your credit score, making it more difficult and expensive to borrow money in the future.
Flexibility: By saving up and buying something later, you have the flexibility to change your mind or adjust your priorities if something unexpected comes up. If you have already bought something on credit, you may be locked into paying for it even if your circumstances change.
Overall, while buying something on credit can be tempting, it's often better to save up and pay for it in cash later. This can help you avoid debt, save money on interest, and maintain your financial flexibility.
Learn more about credit score here:
#SPJ3
Answer:
you wont have to pay it off
Answer:
B
Explanation:
took the test
2. What two groups of people did it separate?
3. What was the purpose of the Proclamation Line of 1763?
The bulk of it was made up of the Salidar Six, minus Sheriam Bayanar who was already Egwene's Keeper of the Chronicles. The sixth member of the council was Nisao Dachen, who had also sworn an oath of allegiance to Egwene. She used the oaths they had sworn to her to force them to get themselves chosen as the representative of their respective Ajahs. This was no easy task for some of them, but they managed to do it. This meant that she was surrounded with advisors that she felt she could trust as much as you can trust any Aes Sedai, at least.
1. Machiavelli's political treatise, The Prince, featured a new and different approach to political leadership at the time of its publication. Previous works on political leadership placed a strong stress on ethics and morality. For Machiavelli. ethics and morality, though present, do not and should not constrain the actions of a political leader: only the thought of the ultimate common good. If achieving the ultimate common implies telling lies, intimidating, bribing or even murdering others, morality should not get in the way. In this sense, Machiavelli was the first political author to propose a pragmatic view on politics deprived from any sentimentalism.
3. One way or another, whether they have read The Prince or not, most modern politicians would make proud disciples of Machiavelli because of the ease with which they lie, steal, coerce, etc. in order to advance their agendas.
4. I think there should be a sound balance between morality and political action. The political leader should understand that his/her goals should not be achieved setting their moral compass aside no matter how good it might for society as a whole.
5. Machiavelli's The Prince had a great effect and significance on political leadership and government for it changed the way that many kings, presidents and other kinds of rulers led their countries. Also, it raised certain opposition by other types of leaders who steered away from Machiavelli's teachings as they considered them immoral.