1. Provide two reasons why Latin America did not actively engage in institutions that were fostering trade liberalization as soon as these institutions were created.
2. How could international trade have improved the income distribution within Latin America during the 20^th century?
3. Comparative and absolute advantage theories are concerned about the costs related to the production of goods in different countries. Nevertheless, there is a key conceptual difference between the relevant type of cost. What is it?
4. Why Import Substitution Industrialization strategy contradicts 200 years of economic theory?

Identify a historical event that you feel, contributed the most to a country's economy in Latin American, and then engage in the discussion.

• Identify the event, when it occurred,
• Explain why you feel it contributed the most to the Latin American economy.
  • Did it impact the country's main economic resources, average income, GDP, Per capital GDP, health care situation, exchange rate, literacy rate, etc?
• Discuss the future impact that you feel this historical event may continue to have.
• Explore whether the influence was positive or negative, and explain why

Founded in 1837, Cincinnati-based Procter & Gamble has long been one of the world's most international companies. Today P&G is a global colossus in the consumer products business with annual sales in excess of $50 billion, some 54 percent of which are generated outside of the United States. P&G sells more than 300 brandsincluding Ivory soap, Tide, Pampers, IAM pet food, Crisco, and Folgers-to consumers in 160 countries. Historically the strategy at P&G was well established. The company developed new products in Cincinnati and then relied on semiautonomous foreign subsidiaries to manufacture, market, and distribute those products in different nations. In many cases, foreign subsidiaries had their own production facilities and tailored the packaging, brand name, and marketing message to local tastes and preferences. For years this strategy delivered a steady stream of new products and reliable growth in sales and profits. By the 1990s, however, profit growth at P&G was slowing. The essence of the problem was simple; P&G's costs were too high because of extensive duplication of manufacturing, marketing, and administrative facilities in different national subsidiaries. The duplication of assets made sense in the world of the 1960s, when national markets were segmented from each other by barriers to crossborder trade. Products produced in Great Britain, for example, could not be sold economically in Germany due to high tariff duties levied on imports into Germany. By the 1980s, however, barriers to cross-border trade were falling rapidly worldwide and fragmented national markets were merging into larger regional or global markets. Also, the retailers through which P&G distributed its products were growing larger and more global, such as Wal-Mart, Tesco from the United Kingdom, and Carrefour from France. These emerging global retailers were demanding price discounts from P&G. In the 1990s P&G embarked on a major reorganization in an attempt to control its cost structure and recognize the new reality of emerging global markets. The company shut down some 30 manufacturing plants around the globe, laid off 13,000 employees, and concentrated production in fewer plants that could better realize economies of scale and serve regional markets. It wasn't enough! Profit growth remained sluggish so in 1999 P&G launched its second reorganization of the decade. Named "Organization 2005;' the goal was to transform P&G into a truly global company. The company tore up its old organization, which was based on countries and regions, and replaced it with one based on seven self-contained global business units, ranging from baby care to food products. Each business unit was given complete responsibility for generating profits from its products, and for manufacturing, marketing, and product development. Each business unit was told to rationalize production, concentrating it in fewer larger facilities; to try to build global brands wherever possible, thereby eliminating marketing difference between countries; and to accelerate the development and launch of new products. P&G announced that as a result of this initiative, it would close another 10 factories and lay off 15,000 employees, mostly in Europe where there was still extensive duplication of assets. The annual cost savings were estimated to be about $800 million. P&G planned to use the savings to cut prices and increase marketing spending in an effort to gain market share, and thus further lower costs through the attainment of scale economies. This time the strategy seemed to be working. For most of the 2000s P&G reported strong growth in both sales and profits. Significantly, P&G's global competitors, such as Unilever, Kimberly-Clark, and Colgate-Palmolive, were struggling during the same time period. 1. What strategy was Procter & Gamble pursuing when it first entered foreign markets in the period up until the 1980s? 2. Why do you think this strategy became less viable in the 1990s? 3. What strategy does P&G appear to be moving toward? What are the benefits of this strategy? What are the potential risks associated with it?

The Evangelical Private School follows FASB standards of accounting and reporting.

1. Cash contributions were received as follows: (a) $1,113,000 for any purpose desired by the school, (b) $305,000 for salary supplements for school faculty, (c) $421,000 to be used during the next fiscal year in any manner desired by the school, (d) $610,000 for the construction of a new auditorium, and (e) $408,000 to be invested permanently, with the income to be used as desired by the school. The school’s policy is to record all restricted gifts as temporarily restricted and then reclassify when the restriction is lifted.

2. The school expended $400,000 of the $1,113,000 mentioned in 1(a) for school furniture. Record the plant as unrestricted.

3. The school expended $284,500 for salary supplements as directed by the donor in 1(b).

4. The $421,000 in 1(c) was retained for use next year, as directed by the donor.

5. $790,000 was expended for the construction of the new auditorium. School policy is to record all plant as unrestricted.

6. The $408,000 mentioned in 1(e) was invested permanently, as directed by the donor, and in the year ended June 30, 2017, the school received interest of $19,380, none of which was expended.

Required:
Record journal entries for the above transactions during the year ended June 30, 2017. (If no entry is required for a transaction/event, select "No Journal Entry Required" in the first account field.)

a. Record the entry for cash contributions for unrestricted fund.

b. Record the entry for cash contributions for salary payment to school faculty.

c. Record the entry for cash contributions for temporarily restricted fund.

d. Record the entry for cash contributions for construction of new auditorium.

e. Record the entry for cash contributions for permanently restricted fund.

f. Record the entry for cash purchase of school furniture.

g. Record the entry for payment salary.

h. Record the entry for expiration of program restrictions.

i. Record $421,000 that will be reclassified at the beginning of next year as the expiration of time restrictions.

j. Record $790,000 that was expended for the construction of the new auditorium.

k. Record the entry for expiration of fixed asset acquisition restrictions.

l. Record the entry for cash investments.

m. Record the entry for receipt of interest income.

What companies do you think would be good merged or one acquired by the other? What do you think would be the worst possible mergers/acquisitions that have not happened and could? Why?

Discuss the role of crony capitalism in the economic crisis of the 1990s in this region.

(Use Excel or SPSS to complete this Assignment).

A random sample of respondents was drawn from three Latin American countries: Nicaragua, Guatemala, and Costa Rica. The variable if interest is the duration (in months) of stay in the United States during a respondent’s first migration to the United States.

Nicaragua: 4, 6, 6, 6, 12, 36, 36, 36, 36, 60, 72, 78, 96, 120, 126, 156, 162, 162, 186, 540
Guatemala: 1, 1, 12, 24, 24, 24, 36, 36, 42, 60, 78, 84, 102, 102, 102, 102,132, 144
Costa Rica: 12, 12, 12, 12, 14, 15, 15, 18, 18, 24, 36, 48, 66, 120, 150, 150, 174, 282, 288

1. Specify the level of measure for the variable of interest here. That is, what is the level of measurement of duration of stay during first U.S. migration?
2. Explain why the values of 12, 24, and 36 are so common in the data? What do these three values have in common?
3. Calculate the mode for Costa Rica.
4. How does the mode for Guatemala compare to that of Costa Rica?
5. In light of your answers to Questions #3 and #4, one explanation is that respondents from Latin American countries closer to the United States have a higher modal duration of stay during their first U.S. migration than respondents from Latin American countries that are further away. Does the evidence from Nicaragua support this idea? (Hint: examine a map of Latin America to see whether you would expect the mode for Nicaragua to be greater than or less than that for Costa Rica and Guatemala.)
6. Given your answer to Question #5, you are interested in extending this idea to the value of the median. Which country would you expect to have the highest median duration of stay in the United States during first U.S. migration?

Which of the three countries above has the highest median value? Does this support your idea that respondents from Latin American countries that are closer to the United States have a higher median duration of stay in the United States during their first migration than respondents from Latin American countries that are further away?