Questions
Mayfair Co. allows select customers to make purchases on credit. Its other customers can use either...

Mayfair Co. allows select customers to make purchases on credit. Its other customers can use either of two credit cards: Zisa or Access. Zisa deducts a 3% service charge for sales on its credit card. Access deducts a 2% service charge for sales on its card. Mayfair completes the following transactions in June.

June 4 Sold $650 of merchandise on credit (that had cost $400) to Natara Morris terms n/30.
5 Sold $6,900 of merchandise (that had cost $4,200) to customers who used their Zisa cards.
6 Sold $5,850 of merchandise (that had cost $3,800) to customers who used their Access cards.
8 Sold $4,350 of merchandise (that had cost $2,900) to customers who used their Access cards.
13 Wrote off the account of Abigail McKee against the Allowance for Doubtful Accounts. The $429 balance in McKee’s account stemmed from a credit sale in October of last year.
18 Received Morris’s check in full payment for the purchase of June 4.


Required:
Prepare journal entries to record the preceding transactions and events. (The company uses the perpetual inventory system.) (If no entry is required for a transaction/event, select "No journal entry required" in the first account field.)

In: Accounting

Simmons Consulting Co. has the following accounts in its ledger: Cash; Accounts Receivable; Supplies; Office Equipment;...

Simmons Consulting Co. has the following accounts in its ledger: Cash; Accounts Receivable; Supplies; Office Equipment; Accounts Payable; Michael Short, Capital; Michael Short, Drawing; Fees Earned; Rent Expense; Advertising Expense; Utilities Expense; Miscellaneous Expense.

Oct. 1. Paid rent for the month, $4,200.
3. Paid advertising expense, $2,690.
5. Paid cash for supplies, $1,150.
6. Purchased office equipment on account, $17,700.
10. Received cash from customers on account, $5,760.
15. Paid creditors on account, $1,690.
27. Paid cash for miscellaneous expenses, $730.
30. Paid telephone bill (utility expense) for the month, $270.
31. Fees earned and billed to customers for the month, $38,400.
31. Paid electricity bill (utility expense) for the month, $460.
31. Withdrew cash for personal use, $2,900.

Journalize the selected transactions for October 20Y3. If an amount box does not require an entry, leave it blank.

20Y3 Oct. 1
20Y3 Oct. 3
20Y3 Oct. 5
20Y3 Oct. 6
20Y3 Oct. 10
20Y3 Oct. 15
20Y3 Oct. 27
20Y3 Oct. 30
20Y3 Oct. 31:
20Y3 Oct. 31:
20Y3 Oct. 31:

In: Accounting

Case Study: Personal Beliefs in the Workplace Don Shakow was a prominent professional who worked in...

Case Study: Personal Beliefs in the Workplace Don Shakow was a prominent professional who worked in Seattle and Massachusetts in U.S. This case study discusses the nature of Don Shakow’s professional and personal lives. When you read the case study, notice that Don had controversial personal opinions and choices. The heading of Don Shakow’s obituary reads, "Don Shakow’s moral beliefs put to test in the workplace." Although as an economist (rather than an engineer), Shakow’s commitments and expertise certainly overlapped those of engineers. Among other things, he served as an expert witness on the economics of rapid-transit and public energy proposals. In the mid-70s, he joined Mathematical Sciences Northwest to evaluate proposed power projects for Seattle City Light Company, the city’s electricity utility. His finding that regional energy needs were seriously over-estimated resulted in Seattle City Light withdrawing its support for two Washington public power supply system nuclear plants. Shakow’s former colleague, Frank Miller, commented that their eventual construction "resulted in the largest utility-bond default in U.S. history." Shakow supported many liberal political causes, such as organic farming, home grown food, and food cooperatives. He protested against the Vietnam War. He co-founded the Little Bread Co., which carried messages on its reader board, such as "We Can’t Support One Gov’t ‒ Let Alone Thieu" (A reference to the then premier of South Vietnam). No doubt a somewhat controversial figure throughout his activist life, he was characterized by the reporter, Carole Beers, as "that rare individual: he fully integrated his moral beliefs into his work life." Page 2 of 3 Discuss the difficulties of fully integrating one’s moral beliefs into one’s work life.

1. According to this case, what was the key thing Don Shakow was doing in his life? ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________

2. Is it desirable to try to mix ones moral beliefs with work life? Support your answer with an example. ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________

3. Can one’s personal obligations conflict with the obligations that one has as a professional engineer or employee?

Support your answer with an example. _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________

4. If so, how should such a conflict be resolved?

In: Operations Management

The following options prices were observed for calls and puts on Lannister Ltd for the trading...

The following options prices were observed for calls and puts on Lannister Ltd for the trading day of July 6 2019. Use this information in Questions 3-8. The stock was priced at $163.37. The expirations were July 17, August 21 and October 16. The continuously compounded risk-free rates associated with the three expirations were 0.0517, 0.0542 and 0.0565, respectively. The options have European expiries.

Lannister Ltd CALLS
STRIKE JUL AUG OCT
150 9.50 11.25 13.61
155 5.70 7.96 10.88
160 2.23 5.01 8.04
165 0.77 2.79 6.90
Lannister Ltd PUTS
STRIKE JUL AUG OCT
150 0.17 1.18 2.69
155 0.71 2.66 4.44
160 2.22 4.63 6.60
165 5.61 7.42 8.81

Question: Showing all formula and workings where applicable; Let the standard deviation of the continuously compounded return on the stock be 20 percent. Ignore dividends. Respond to the following:

  1. What is the theoretical fair value of the October 165 call? Calculate this answer by hand and then re-calculate it using BlackScholesMertonBinomial10e.xlsm.
  2. Based on your answer in part a, recommend a riskless strategy.
  3. If the stock price decreases by $1, how will the option position offset the loss on the stock?
  4. Use the Black-Scholes-Merton European put option pricing formula for the October 160 put option. Repeat parts a, b and c of Question 3 with respect to the put.
  5. Buy 100 shares of Lannister Ltd at $163.37 and short one October 165 call. Hold the position until expiration. Determine the profits and graph the results. Identify the strategy, breakeven stock price at expiration, the maximum profit, and the maximum loss. Discuss any special considerations associated with this strategy. Note: use the OptionStrategyAnalyzer10e.xlsm to obtain the required payoff diagram.
  6. Buy 100 shares of Lannister Ltd at $163.37 and go long one October 160 put. Hold the position until expiration. Determine the profits and graph the results. Identify the strategy, breakeven stock price at expiration, the maximum profit, and the maximum loss. Discuss any special considerations associated with this strategy. Note: use the OptionStrategyAnalyzer10e.xlsm to obtain the required payoff diagram.
  7. Construct an options strategy by going short one October 160 call and long one October 165 call using Lannister Ltd options. Hold the position until expiration. Determine the profits and graph the results. Identify the strategy, breakeven stock price at expiration, the maximum profit, and the maximum loss. Discuss any special considerations associated with this strategy. Note: use the OptionStrategyAnalyzer10e.xlsm to obtain the required payoff diagram.
  8. Construct an options strategy by going long one October 165 put and long one October 165 call using Lannister Ltd options. Hold the position until expiration. Determine the profits and graph the results. Identify the strategy, breakeven stock price at expiration, the maximum profit, and the maximum loss. Discuss any special considerations associated with this strategy. Note: use the OptionStrategyAnalyzer10e.xlsm to obtain the required payoff diagram

In: Finance

outline essay “Why the Pledge of Allegiance Should Be Revised” By Gwen Wilde ​All Americans are...

outline essay

“Why the Pledge of Allegiance Should Be Revised”
By Gwen Wilde
​All Americans are familiar with the Pledge of Allegiance, even if they cannot always recite it perfectly, but probably relatively few know that the original Pledge did not include the words “under God.” The original Pledge of Allegiance, published in the September 8, 1892, issue of the Youth’s Companion, ran thus:
I pledge allegiance to my flag, and to the Republic for which it stands: one Nation indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all. (Djupe 329)
In 1923, at the first National Flag Conference in Washington, DC, it was argued that immigrants might be confused by the words “my Flag,” and it was proposed that the words be changed to “the Flag of the United States.” The following year it was changed again, to “the Flag of the United States of America,” and this wording became the official—or, rather, unofficial—wording, unofficial because no wording had ever been nationally adopted (Djupe 329).
​In 1942, the United States Congress included the Pledge in the United States Flag Code, thus for the first time officially sanctioning the Pledge. In 1954, President Dwight D. Eisenhower approved adding the words “under God.” Thus, since 1954 the Pledge reads:
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the Republic for which it stands: one nation, under God, indivisible, with Liberty and Justice for all. (Djupe 329)
In my view, the addition of the words “under God is inappropriate, and they are needlessly divisive—an odd addition indeed to a Nation that is said to be “indivisible.”
​Very simply put, the Pledge in its latest form requires all Americans to say something that some Americans do not believe. I say “requires” because, although the courts have ruled that students may not be compelled to recite the Pledge, in effect peer pressure does compel all but the bravest to join in the recitation. When President Eisenhower authorized the change, he said,
In this way we are reaffirming the transcendence of religious faith in America’s heritage and future; in this way we shall constantly strengthen those spiritual weapons which forever will be our country’s most powerful resource in peace and war. (Sterner)
​Exactly what did Eisenhower mean when he spoke of “the transcendence of faith in America’s heritage,” and when he spoke of “spiritual weapons”? I am not sure what “the transcendence of faith in America’s heritage” means. Of course many Americans have been and are deeply religious—no one doubts it—but the phrase certainly goes far beyond saying that many Americans have been devout. In any case, many Americans have not been devout, and many Americans have not believed in “spiritual weapons,” but they have nevertheless been patriotic Americans. Some of them have fought and died to keep America free.
​In short, the words “under God” cannot be uttered in good faith by many Americans. True, something like 70 or even 80% of Americans say they are affiliated with some form of Christianity, and approximately another 3% say they are Jewish. I don’t have the figures for persons of other faiths, but in any case we can surely all agree that although a majority of Americans say they have a religious affiliation, nevertheless several million Americans do not believe in God.
​If one remains silent while others are reciting the Pledge, or even if one remains silent only while others are speaking the words “under God,” one is open to the charge that one is unpatriotic, is “unwilling to recite the Pledge of Allegiance.” In the Pledge, patriotism is connected with religious belief, and it is this connection that makes it divisive and (to be blunt) un-American. Admittedly the belief is not very specific: one is not required to say that one believes in the divinity of Jesus, or in the power of Jehovah, but the fact remains, one is required to express belief in a divine power, and, if one doesn’t express this belief, one is—according to the Pledge—somehow not fully an American, maybe even un-American.
​Please notice that I am not arguing that the Pledge is unconstitutional. I understand that the First Amendment to the Constitution says that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” I am not arguing that the words “under God” in the Pledge add up to the “establishment of religion,” but they certainly do assert a religious doctrine. Like the words “In God we trust,” found on all American money, the words “under God” express an idea that many Americans do not hold, and there is no reason why these Americans—loyal people who may be called upon to defend the country with their lives—should be required to say that America is a nation “under God.”
​It has been argued, even by members of the Supreme Court, that the words “under God” are not to be taken terribly seriously, not to be taken to say what they seem to say. For instance, Chief Justice Rehnquist wrote,
To give the parent of such a child a sort of “heckler’s veto” over a patriotic ceremony willingly participated in by other students, simply because the Pledge of Allegiance contains the descriptive phrase “under God,” is an unwarranted extension of the establishment clause, an extension which would have the unfortunate effect of prohibiting a commendable patriotic observance. (qtd. in Mears)
Chief Justice Rehnquist here calls “under God” a descriptive phrase,” but descriptive of what? If a phrase is a “descriptive phrase,” it describes something, real or imagined. For many Americans, this phrase does not describe a reality. These Americans may perhaps be mistaken—if so, they may learn of their error at Judgment Day—but the fact is, millions of intelligent Americans do not believe in God.
​Notice, too, that Chief Justice Rehnquist goes on to say that reciting the Pledge is “a commendable patriotic observance.” Exactly. That is my point. It is a patriotic observance, and it should not be connected with religion. When we announce that we respect the flag—that we are loyal Americans—we should not also have to announce that we hold a particular religious belief, in this case a belief in monotheism, a belief that there is a God and that God rules.
​One other argument defending the words “under God” is often heard: the words “In God We Trust” appear on our money. It is claimed that these words on American money are analagous to the words “under God” in the Pledge. But the situation really is very different. When we hand over some coins, or some paper money, we are concentrating on the business transaction, and we are not making any affirmation about God or our country. But when we recite the Pledge—even if we remain silent at the point when we are supposed to say “under God”—we are very conscious that we are supposed to make this affirmation, an affirmation that many Americans cannot in good faith make, even though they certainly can unthinkingly hand over (or accept) money with the words “In God We Trust.”
​Because I believe that reciting the Pledge is to be taken seriously, with a full awareness of the words that is quite different from when we hand over some money, I cannot understand the recent comment of Supreme Court Justice Souter, who in a case said that the phrase “under God” is “so tepid, so diluted, so far from compulsory prayer, that it should, in effect, be beneath the constitutional radar” (qtd. in “Guide”). I don’t follow his reasoning that the phrase should be “beneath the constitutional radar,” but in any case I am willing to put aside the issue of constitutionality. I am willing to grant that this phrase does not in any significant sense signify the “establishment of religion” (prohibitied by the First Amendment) in the United States. I insist, nevertheless, that the phrase is neither “tepid” nor “diluted. It means what it says—it must and should mean what it says, to everyone who utters it—and, since millions of loyal Americans cannot say it, it should not be included in a statement in which Americans affirm their loyalty to our great country.
​In short, the Pledge, which ought to unite all of us, is divisive; it includes a phrase that many patriotic Americans cannot bring themselves to utter. Yes, they can remain silent when others recite those two words, but, again, why should they have to remain silent? The Pledge of Allegiance should be something that everyone can say, say out loud, and say with pride. We hear much talk of returning to the ideas of the Founding Fathers. The Founding Fathers did not create the Pledge of Allegiance, but we do know that they never mentioned God in the Constitution. Indeed the only reference to religion, in the so-called establishment clause of the First Amendment, says, again, that “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” Those who wish to exercise religion are indeed free to do so, but the place to do so is not in a pledge that is required of all school children and of all new citizens.

In: Economics

You want to know the opinions of dog owners across America on the issue of establishing...

You want to know the opinions of dog owners across America on the issue of establishing a law requiring individuals who own pit bulls to obtain insurance for their dog. You obtain a list of all registered dog owners and mail a survey to a random sample of 5,000 owners. Of those, 2,389 responded and 22% say that they favor the law. Which of the following statements is true? (3 points)

       
Because random sampling is used, we can feel confident the percentage of all dog owners who say they favor insurance for pit bulls is close to 22%.

       
Because less than half of those who were mailed the survey actually responded, we can feel fairly confident that the actual percentage of all dog owners who say they favor pit bull owners getting insurance for their dog is close to 22%.

       
We cannot trust these results because the survey was mailed. Only survey results from face-to-face interviews are considered valid.

       
The results of this survey may be affected by nonresponse bias.

       
The results of this survey cannot be trusted because of convenience response bias.


In: Statistics and Probability

Ocean Traders of North America is a company based in Mobile, Alabama, that specializes in seafood...

Ocean Traders of North America is a company based in Mobile, Alabama, that specializes in seafood exports and commonly uses letters of credit (L/Cs) to ensure payment. It recently experienced a problem, however, Ocean Traders had an irrevocable L/C issued by a Russian bank to ensure that it would receive payment upon shipment of 16,000 tons of fish to a Russian firm. This bank backed out of its obligation, however, stating that it was not authorized to guarantee commercial transactions. Explain the function of irrevocable L/C for the case above.

In: Finance

You are working at Bank of America Merrill Lynch as a Portfolio Manager. You are thinking...

You are working at Bank of America Merrill Lynch as a Portfolio Manager. You are thinking about rebalancing clients portfolio position and researching on various industries, i.e., housing construction, health care, energy, technology, financials, coal mining, and steel production. Choose one or two industry that you would expect to perform best in future. Write a brief summary and explain why you client would be convinced by your decision.

In: Finance

In the United States of America, there is wide spread inequality among the people. Rich becomes...

In the United States of America, there is wide spread inequality among the people. Rich becomes richer and poor becomes poorer. The reason for this inequality is the economic system that they follows. What economic system do you think United States is following? Identify and explain. Also, evaluate four advantages and disadvantages of this economic system in detail.                             [Answer in 300 – 400 words]

pls your own words, dont copy from anywhere

In: Economics

Which statements about the CDS market are true? a. The North America CDX is an index...

Which statements about the CDS market are true?

a. The North America CDX is an index of credit default swap contracts on investment grade names.

b. The ITRAXX is an index of European references.

c. The fixed rates paid by the buyers of credit default swaps are the points plotted on the swap curve, which like the yield curve, plots interest rates against maturity.

d. The ISDA creates the templates for CDS contracts, which may differ in their definitions of a restructuring event.

In: Finance