I JUST WANT AN EXAMPLE ANSWER SO I CAN MAKE MY OWN. THANK YOU!!
Conduct research on New York City's large soda ban. Pretend you work at the Paradise City attorney's office. Draft a law that restricts the sale of large sugary drinks in Paradise City. Make sure to define the types of drinks and types of sellers restricted by the law.
Example Statute:
|
In: Operations Management
Pete is an employee in Chris' small golf store. Pete likes to practice his swing and likes to hit balls off a wall at the back of the store. Several times, golf balls have hit customers and other employees. Chris knows he should ask Pete to stop, but he thinks it's funny. One day, Pete "chips" a ball and hits a customer in the eye, causing severe damage. If Chris is the principal and Pete is the agent, Chris is:
Multiple Choice
immune from liability because Pete committed the wrongful act, and Chris did not directly order him to do so.
protected by respondeat superior.
immune from liability because no one had previously been seriously injured.
directly liable.
14.
Which of the following was the result in Roberts v. Danner, the case in the text in which an employee driving his personal vehicle to see a physician for a non-work related injury struck and injured the plaintiff on a road leased by the employer, and the issue was whether the employer was liable for the plaintiff’s injuries?
Multiple Choice
The employer was not held liable because the employee was in his personal vehicle which negates liability based on an agency theory.
The employer was held liable under the theory of strict liability based on the accident occurring on a road leased by the employer.
The employer was not held liable because the employee was not acting within the course and scope of his employment.
The employer was held liable under the theory of respondeat superior.
The following is false regarding the bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) permitted by Title VII.
Multiple Choice
An employer may refuse to hire a man with an Asian heritage as a bouncer in a bar because he believes people with such a heritage are not aggressive enough.
A Christian church would not have to consider a Muslim as an applicant for choir director.
No BFOQ exception is permitted with respect to discrimination based on color.
A gym may refuse to hire a male attendant for a women’s locker room.
In: Operations Management
The attached WorldSeriesWinners.txt ( since I cannot share it directly I will send the information for the text file ) file contains the name of the winner of the World Series (duh) and the year in which they won. 1904 and 1994 did not have World Series played, so "No Winner" is displayed for those years. Your job is to write a program that lets the user enter the name of a team (or "No Winner") and then display the number of times the team won and a list of the years in which they won. Some hints/tips:
Boston Americans 1903 No Winner 1904 New York Giants 1905 Chicago White Sox 1906 Chicago Cubs 1907 Chicago Cubs 1908 Pittsburgh Pirates 1909 Philadelphia Athletics 1910 Philadelphia Athletics 1911 Boston Red Sox 1912 Philadelphia Athletics 1913 Boston Braves 1914 Boston Red Sox 1915 Boston Red Sox 1916 Chicago White Sox 1917 Boston Red Sox 1918 Cincinnati Reds 1919 Cleveland Indians 1920 New York Giants 1921 New York Giants 1922 New York Yankees 1923 Washington Senators 1924 Pittsburgh Pirates 1925 St. Louis Cardinals 1926 New York Yankees 1927 New York Yankees 1928 Philadelphia Athletics 1929 Philadelphia Athletics 1930 St. Louis Cardinals 1931 New York Yankees 1932 New York Giants 1933 St. Louis Cardinals 1934 Detroit Tigers 1935 New York Yankees 1936 New York Yankees 1937 New York Yankees 1938 New York Yankees 1939 Cincinnati Reds 1940 New York Yankees 1941 St. Louis Cardinals 1942 New York Yankees 1943 St. Louis Cardinals 1944 Detroit Tigers 1945 St. Louis Cardinals 1946 New York Yankees 1947 Cleveland Indians 1948 New York Yankees 1949 New York Yankees 1950 New York Yankees 1951 New York Yankees 1952 New York Yankees 1953 New York Giants 1954 Brooklyn Dodgers 1955 New York Yankees 1956 Milwaukee Braves 1957 New York Yankees 1958 Los Angeles Dodgers 1959 Pittsburgh Pirates 1960 New York Yankees 1961 New York Yankees 1962 Los Angeles Dodgers 1963 St. Louis Cardinals 1964 Los Angeles Dodgers 1965 Baltimore Orioles 1966 St. Louis Cardinals 1967 Detroit Tigers 1968 New York Mets 1969 Baltimore Orioles 1970 Pittsburgh Pirates 1971 Oakland Athletics 1972 Oakland Athletics 1973 Oakland Athletics 1974 Cincinnati Reds 1975 Cincinnati Reds 1976 New York Yankees 1977 New York Yankees 1978 Pittsburgh Pirates 1979 Philadelphia Phillies 1980 Los Angeles Dodgers 1981 St. Louis Cardinals 1982 Baltimore Orioles 1983 Detroit Tigers 1984 Kansas City Royals 1985 New York Mets 1986 Minnesota Twins 1987 Los Angeles Dodgers 1988 Oakland Athletics 1989 Cincinnati Reds 1990 Minnesota Twins 1991 Toronto Blue Jays 1992 Toronto Blue Jays 1993 No Winner 1994 Atlanta Braves 1995 New York Yankees 1996 Florida Marlins 1997 New York Yankees 1998 New York Yankees 1999 New York Yankees 2000 Arizona Diamondbacks 2001 Anaheim Angels 2002 Florida Marlins 2003 Boston Red Sox 2004 Chicago White Sox 2005 St. Louis Cardinals 2006 Boston Red Sox 2007 Philadelphia Phillies 2008 New York Yankees 2009 San Francisco Giants 2010 St. Louis Cardinals 2011 San Francisco Giants 2012 Boston Red Sox 2013 San Francisco Giants 2014 Kansas City Royals 2015 Chicago Cubs 2016
In: Computer Science
Highlight Year, GDP and Consumption expenditure data including labels. Select Insert, and from Charts option, select line chart. On horizonatal axis, you should see, Years, plus GDP and Consumption expenditure trend lines AS you can see, GDP and Consumption lines lie practically on top of each other from 1929 through early 1960s before diverging. Write a short paragraph explaining why GDP (a measure of output) exceeded Consumption starting 1960s. What happened to the economy in early 60's that brought about divergence of output and consumption?
|
Nominal Gross Domestic Product and Personal Consumption Expenditure in $billions 1929-2016 |
||
|
Source: Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis |
||
|
Year |
Personal Consumption Expenditure |
Nominal GDP |
|
1929-01-01 |
77.4 |
104.6 |
|
1930-01-01 |
70.1 |
92.2 |
|
1931-01-01 |
60.7 |
77.4 |
|
1932-01-01 |
48.7 |
59.5 |
|
1933-01-01 |
45.9 |
57.2 |
|
1934-01-01 |
51.5 |
66.8 |
|
1935-01-01 |
55.9 |
74.3 |
|
1936-01-01 |
62.2 |
84.9 |
|
1937-01-01 |
66.8 |
93.0 |
|
1938-01-01 |
64.3 |
87.4 |
|
1939-01-01 |
67.2 |
93.5 |
|
1940-01-01 |
71.3 |
102.9 |
|
1941-01-01 |
81.1 |
129.4 |
|
1942-01-01 |
89.0 |
166.0 |
|
1943-01-01 |
99.9 |
203.1 |
|
1944-01-01 |
108.6 |
224.6 |
|
1945-01-01 |
120.0 |
228.2 |
|
1946-01-01 |
144.3 |
227.8 |
|
1947-01-01 |
162.0 |
249.9 |
|
1948-01-01 |
175.0 |
274.8 |
|
1949-01-01 |
178.5 |
272.8 |
|
1950-01-01 |
192.2 |
300.2 |
|
1951-01-01 |
208.5 |
347.3 |
|
1952-01-01 |
219.5 |
367.7 |
|
1953-01-01 |
233.0 |
389.7 |
|
1954-01-01 |
239.9 |
391.1 |
|
1955-01-01 |
258.7 |
426.2 |
|
1956-01-01 |
271.6 |
450.1 |
|
1957-01-01 |
286.7 |
474.9 |
|
1958-01-01 |
296.0 |
482.0 |
|
1959-01-01 |
317.5 |
522.5 |
|
1960-01-01 |
331.6 |
543.3 |
|
1961-01-01 |
342.0 |
563.3 |
|
1962-01-01 |
363.1 |
605.1 |
|
1963-01-01 |
382.5 |
638.6 |
|
1964-01-01 |
411.2 |
685.8 |
|
1965-01-01 |
443.6 |
743.7 |
|
1966-01-01 |
480.6 |
815.0 |
|
1967-01-01 |
507.4 |
861.7 |
|
1968-01-01 |
557.4 |
942.5 |
|
1969-01-01 |
604.5 |
1019.9 |
|
1970-01-01 |
647.7 |
1075.9 |
|
1971-01-01 |
701.0 |
1167.8 |
|
1972-01-01 |
769.4 |
1282.4 |
|
1973-01-01 |
851.1 |
1428.5 |
|
1974-01-01 |
932.0 |
1548.8 |
|
1975-01-01 |
1032.8 |
1688.9 |
|
1976-01-01 |
1150.2 |
1877.6 |
|
1977-01-01 |
1276.7 |
2086.0 |
|
1978-01-01 |
1426.2 |
2356.6 |
|
1979-01-01 |
1589.5 |
2632.1 |
|
1980-01-01 |
1754.6 |
2862.5 |
|
1981-01-01 |
1937.5 |
3211.0 |
|
1982-01-01 |
2073.9 |
3345.0 |
|
1983-01-01 |
2286.5 |
3638.1 |
|
1984-01-01 |
2498.2 |
4040.7 |
|
1985-01-01 |
2722.7 |
4346.7 |
|
1986-01-01 |
2898.4 |
4590.2 |
|
1987-01-01 |
3092.1 |
4870.2 |
|
1988-01-01 |
3346.9 |
5252.6 |
|
1989-01-01 |
3592.8 |
5657.7 |
|
1990-01-01 |
3825.6 |
5979.6 |
|
1991-01-01 |
3960.2 |
6174.0 |
|
1992-01-01 |
4215.7 |
6539.3 |
|
1993-01-01 |
4471.0 |
6878.7 |
|
1994-01-01 |
4741.0 |
7308.8 |
|
1995-01-01 |
4984.2 |
7664.1 |
|
1996-01-01 |
5268.1 |
8100.2 |
|
1997-01-01 |
5560.7 |
8608.5 |
|
1998-01-01 |
5903.0 |
9089.2 |
|
1999-01-01 |
6307.0 |
9660.6 |
|
2000-01-01 |
6792.4 |
10284.8 |
|
2001-01-01 |
7103.1 |
10621.8 |
|
2002-01-01 |
7384.1 |
10977.5 |
|
2003-01-01 |
7765.5 |
11510.7 |
|
2004-01-01 |
8260.0 |
12274.9 |
|
2005-01-01 |
8794.1 |
13093.7 |
|
2006-01-01 |
9304.0 |
13855.9 |
|
2007-01-01 |
9750.5 |
14477.6 |
|
2008-01-01 |
10013.6 |
14718.6 |
|
2009-01-01 |
9847.0 |
14418.7 |
|
2010-01-01 |
10202.2 |
14964.4 |
|
2011-01-01 |
10689.3 |
15517.9 |
|
2012-01-01 |
11050.6 |
16155.3 |
|
2013-01-01 |
11361.2 |
16691.5 |
|
2014-01-01 |
11863.4 |
17393.1 |
|
2015-01-01 |
12283.7 |
18036.6 |
|
2016-01-01 |
12757.9 |
18569.1 |
In: Economics
|
Nominal Gross Domestic Product and Personal Consumption Expenditure in $billions 1929-2016 |
||
|
Source: Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis |
||
|
Year |
Personal Consumption Expenditure |
Nominal GDP |
|
1929-01-01 |
77.4 |
104.6 |
|
1930-01-01 |
70.1 |
92.2 |
|
1931-01-01 |
60.7 |
77.4 |
|
1932-01-01 |
48.7 |
59.5 |
|
1933-01-01 |
45.9 |
57.2 |
|
1934-01-01 |
51.5 |
66.8 |
|
1935-01-01 |
55.9 |
74.3 |
|
1936-01-01 |
62.2 |
84.9 |
|
1937-01-01 |
66.8 |
93.0 |
|
1938-01-01 |
64.3 |
87.4 |
|
1939-01-01 |
67.2 |
93.5 |
|
1940-01-01 |
71.3 |
102.9 |
|
1941-01-01 |
81.1 |
129.4 |
|
1942-01-01 |
89.0 |
166.0 |
|
1943-01-01 |
99.9 |
203.1 |
|
1944-01-01 |
108.6 |
224.6 |
|
1945-01-01 |
120.0 |
228.2 |
|
1946-01-01 |
144.3 |
227.8 |
|
1947-01-01 |
162.0 |
249.9 |
|
1948-01-01 |
175.0 |
274.8 |
|
1949-01-01 |
178.5 |
272.8 |
|
1950-01-01 |
192.2 |
300.2 |
|
1951-01-01 |
208.5 |
347.3 |
|
1952-01-01 |
219.5 |
367.7 |
|
1953-01-01 |
233.0 |
389.7 |
|
1954-01-01 |
239.9 |
391.1 |
|
1955-01-01 |
258.7 |
426.2 |
|
1956-01-01 |
271.6 |
450.1 |
|
1957-01-01 |
286.7 |
474.9 |
|
1958-01-01 |
296.0 |
482.0 |
|
1959-01-01 |
317.5 |
522.5 |
|
1960-01-01 |
331.6 |
543.3 |
|
1961-01-01 |
342.0 |
563.3 |
|
1962-01-01 |
363.1 |
605.1 |
|
1963-01-01 |
382.5 |
638.6 |
|
1964-01-01 |
411.2 |
685.8 |
|
1965-01-01 |
443.6 |
743.7 |
|
1966-01-01 |
480.6 |
815.0 |
|
1967-01-01 |
507.4 |
861.7 |
|
1968-01-01 |
557.4 |
942.5 |
|
1969-01-01 |
604.5 |
1019.9 |
|
1970-01-01 |
647.7 |
1075.9 |
|
1971-01-01 |
701.0 |
1167.8 |
|
1972-01-01 |
769.4 |
1282.4 |
|
1973-01-01 |
851.1 |
1428.5 |
|
1974-01-01 |
932.0 |
1548.8 |
|
1975-01-01 |
1032.8 |
1688.9 |
|
1976-01-01 |
1150.2 |
1877.6 |
|
1977-01-01 |
1276.7 |
2086.0 |
|
1978-01-01 |
1426.2 |
2356.6 |
|
1979-01-01 |
1589.5 |
2632.1 |
|
1980-01-01 |
1754.6 |
2862.5 |
|
1981-01-01 |
1937.5 |
3211.0 |
|
1982-01-01 |
2073.9 |
3345.0 |
|
1983-01-01 |
2286.5 |
3638.1 |
|
1984-01-01 |
2498.2 |
4040.7 |
|
1985-01-01 |
2722.7 |
4346.7 |
|
1986-01-01 |
2898.4 |
4590.2 |
|
1987-01-01 |
3092.1 |
4870.2 |
|
1988-01-01 |
3346.9 |
5252.6 |
|
1989-01-01 |
3592.8 |
5657.7 |
|
1990-01-01 |
3825.6 |
5979.6 |
|
1991-01-01 |
3960.2 |
6174.0 |
|
1992-01-01 |
4215.7 |
6539.3 |
|
1993-01-01 |
4471.0 |
6878.7 |
|
1994-01-01 |
4741.0 |
7308.8 |
|
1995-01-01 |
4984.2 |
7664.1 |
|
1996-01-01 |
5268.1 |
8100.2 |
|
1997-01-01 |
5560.7 |
8608.5 |
|
1998-01-01 |
5903.0 |
9089.2 |
|
1999-01-01 |
6307.0 |
9660.6 |
|
2000-01-01 |
6792.4 |
10284.8 |
|
2001-01-01 |
7103.1 |
10621.8 |
|
2002-01-01 |
7384.1 |
10977.5 |
|
2003-01-01 |
7765.5 |
11510.7 |
|
2004-01-01 |
8260.0 |
12274.9 |
|
2005-01-01 |
8794.1 |
13093.7 |
|
2006-01-01 |
9304.0 |
13855.9 |
|
2007-01-01 |
9750.5 |
14477.6 |
|
2008-01-01 |
10013.6 |
14718.6 |
|
2009-01-01 |
9847.0 |
14418.7 |
|
2010-01-01 |
10202.2 |
14964.4 |
|
2011-01-01 |
10689.3 |
15517.9 |
|
2012-01-01 |
11050.6 |
16155.3 |
|
2013-01-01 |
11361.2 |
16691.5 |
|
2014-01-01 |
11863.4 |
17393.1 |
|
2015-01-01 |
12283.7 |
18036.6 |
|
2016-01-01 |
12757.9 |
18569.1 |
Regress Consumption against the GDP from the data sheet. Include the Excel ANOVA table.Although irrelevant run a "F" test as well as individual coefficient test . Write a short paragraph discussing the results. For example, how this information can be used to forecast future consumption or any other interesting conclusions you can draw Material in your textbook as well as outside reading can be very helpful
In: Economics
Nike was founded in 1964 by Bill Bowerman and Phil Knight in Beaverton, Oregon. It began as Blue Ribbon Sports (BRS). In 1972, BRS introduced a new brand of athletic footwear called Nike, named for the Greek winged goddess of victory.
The company employs 26,000 staff around the world with revenues in fiscal year 2005 of $13.7 billion. It has facilities in Oregon, Tennessee, North Carolina, and the Netherlands with more than 200 factory stores, a dozen Nike women stores, and more than 100 sales and administrative offices.
Its subsidiaries include Cole Haan Holdings, Inc., Bauer Nike Hockey, Hurley International LLC, Nike IHM, Inc., Converse Inc., and Execter Brands Group LLC. As of May 31, 2004, manufacturing plants included Nike brand, with 137 factories in the Americas (including the United States), 104 in EMEA, 252 in North Asia, and 238 in South Asia, providing more than 650,000 jobs to local communities.
Objective
Nike grew from a sneaker manufacturer in the early 1970s to a global company selling a large number of products throughout the world. Nike’s sneaker supply chain was historically highly centralized. The product designs, factory contracts, and delivery are managed through the headquarters in Beaverton, Oregon. By 1998, there were 27 different and highly customized order management systems that did not talk well to the home office in Beaverton, Oregon. At that time Nike decided to purchase and implement a single-instance ERP system along with supply chain and customer relationship management systems to control the nine-month manufacturing cycle better, with the goal being to cut it down to six months.
Plan
The company developed a business plan to implement the systems over a six-year period, with multiple ERP rollouts over that time. The plan called for the implementation of the demand planning system first while working through the ERP system and supply chain implementation.
Implementation
The demand planning system was implemented first for reasons that made a lot of sense. The total number of users was small in comparison to the ERP system and was thought to be relatively easy to implement; however, this turned out not to be the case. When the system went live, there were a number of problems related to the software, response time, and data. In addition, training was not adequately addressed, causing the relatively small number of end users to use the system ineffectively. The single-instance ERP system and supply chain implementation plan differed from the demand planning system and called instead for a phased rollout over a number of years.
The ERP system implementation went much more smoothly. Nike started in 2000 with the implementation of the Canadian region, a relatively small one, and ended with the Asia-Pacific and Latin America regions in 2006, with the United States and Europe, Middle East, and Africa in 2002. This included implementing a single instance of the system, with the exception of Asia-Pacific, and training more than 6,300 users.
The total cost of the project as of 2006 was at $500 million—about $100 million more than the original project budget.
Conclusion: What was Learned?
The demand planning system interfacing to legacy data from a large number of systems that already did not talk well with each other was a root cause for misinformation and resulted in inadequate supply planning.
The demand planning system was complex, and end users were not trained well enough to use the system effectively.
System testing was not well planned and “real” enough to find issues with legacy system interfaces.
The overall business plan for all the systems and reasons for taking on such a highly complex implementation were well understood throughout the company. Thus, Nike had exceptional “buy-in” for the project and was able to make adjustment in its demand planning system and continue with the implementation. The goal was to ensure business goals were achieved through the implementation, and not so much to get the systems up and running.
Nike exhibited patience in the implementation and learned from mistakes made early in the process.
Training was substantially increased for the ERP implementation. Customer service representatives received 140–180 hours of training from Nike, and users were locked out of the system until they completed the full training course.
Business process reengineering was used effectively to clarify performance-based goals for the implementation.
Case Questions
1. How could OPM3 have helped to identify the problems with implementing the demand planning system?
2. What were the three primary reasons Nike was successful with the ongoing ERP implementation?
3. Why was a phased rollout the correct decision for Nike?
In: Operations Management
|
Steiner College’s statement of financial position for the year ended June 30, 2016, is presented here. Steiner is a private college. |
| STEINER COLLEGE | ||||||
| Statement of Financial Position | ||||||
| June 30, 2016 | ||||||
| (amounts in thousands) | ||||||
| Assets | ||||||
| Cash and cash equivalents | $ | 731 | ||||
| Short-term investments | 7,665 | |||||
| Tuition and fees receivable (net of doubtful accounts of $11) | 228 | |||||
| Pledges receivable (net of doubtful accounts of $278) | 5,870 | |||||
| Prepaid assets | 1,361 | |||||
| Property, plant and equipment (net of accumulated depreciation of $104,200) | 281,403 | |||||
| Investments (at fair value, cost of $164,200) | 158,200 | |||||
| Total assets | $ | 455,458 | ||||
| Liabilities and Net Assets | ||||||
| Liabilities: | ||||||
| Accounts payable and accrued liabilities | $ | 21,090 | ||||
| Deposits held in custody for others | 698 | |||||
| Unearned revenue | 897 | |||||
| Bonds payable | 99,000 | |||||
| Total liabilities | 121,685 | |||||
| Net Assets: | ||||||
| Unrestricted | $ | 103,950 | ||||
| Temporarily restricted | 33,010 | |||||
| Permanently restricted | 196,813 | |||||
| Total net assets | 333,773 | |||||
| Total liabilities and net assets | $ | 455,458 | ||||
|
The following transaction information (amounts in thousands) pertains to the year ended June 30, 2017. |
| 1. |
During the year charges for tuition and fees were $244,460; scholarships were $16,280; And tuition waivers for scholastic achievement were $5,070. After payment was received tuition refunds of $11,160 were given. Tuition waiver of $17,250 for students serving as teaching assistants for instruction were accrued. |
| 2. |
The college received unrestricted cash contributions of $2,040, pledges to be collected in 2018 of $559, and cash contributions to the endowments of $332. It also collected $817 of Pledges Receivable that were unrestricted. |
| 3. | Collections on Tuition and Fees Receivable totaled $222,570. |
| 4. | Net deposits returned to students totaled $20. |
| 5. | Expenses were incurred for: |
| Instruction | $ | 86,080. | |
| Academic support | 23,250. | ||
| Student services | 37,670. | ||
| Institutional support | 28,450. | ||
|
Related to the expenses incurred: prepaid assets of $532 were used, $4,775 of the expenses were accrued, and the remaining expenses were paid. Expenses incurred resulted in the release of $7,300 in temporarily restricted net assets. |
|
| 6. | The ending balance in Accounts Payable and Accrued Liabilities was 1,905. |
| 7. | Investment earnings received for the period were $3,920, of which $2,040 was temporarily restricted. |
| 8. |
Adjusting entries for the period were made to increase Allowance for Doubtful Accounts by $13, to record depreciation expense of $26,370 (charged 70 percent to instruction and 30 percent to academic support), to adjust tuition revenue for an increase in unearned revenue of $16, and to recognize an increase in fair value of investments of $4,650 ($770 was related to temporarily restricted net assets, $1,560 was related to permanently restricted net assets, the remainder was related to unrestricted net assets). |
| 9. | Nominal accounts were closed. |
| a-1. |
Prepare journal entries to record the foregoing transactions for 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. Enter your answers in thousands.) |
| a-2. |
Prepare closing entry for 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. Enter your answers in thousands.) |
| b. |
Prepare a statement of activities for the year ended June 30, 2017. (Enter your answers in thousands. Negative amounts should be indicated by a minus sign.) |
| c. |
Prepare a statement of financial position for the year ended June 30, 2017. (Enter your answers in thousands.) |
In: Accounting
Situational Reactions
Read the following three situations. Describe what you would do in EACH situation. Integrate the elements of reasoning and intellectual standards in your writing to show an understanding of the material behind your personal example
Your essay should be 500-750 words in length and include the use of at least two (2) elements of reasoning and two (2) intellectual standards for EACH of the three (3) scenarios you will be discussing.
Do not worry about your answers being right or wrong – your work will be evaluated on its connection to the material – not the behavior you would engage in if you found yourself in these situations.
Scenario A: You are a soldier in the U.S. Military and are deployed in a foreign country during a war. A raid on a suspected military target went wrong, and your squad opened fire on several innocent people. Your commander asks you and the rest of the squad to make it look like they opened fire up on you first.
How would you respond?
How might your response change (or would it change) if the rest of your squad didn’t agree with you?
Scenario B: As a new police officer, you pull someone over for speeding. You note some suspicious behavior and feel it is justified for you to search the offender’s vehicle. After searching the vehicle, you confiscate several ounces of marijuana, which is still illegal in the state you serve.
You realize that the computer system is down, so you cannot chronicle this bust until you return to the station. After learning this, your partner, who is a decorated officer with more than 15 years on the force, pulls you aside and tells you that his wife is sick and he could really use that marijuana at home for medicinal purposes to help her with her pain.
How would you respond to your partner?
Does it make a difference that he is a much more experienced officer?
Scenario C: Your child, Johnny, is a senior in high school, and has, up until this year, earned very good grades in his coursework. Because of his academic achievement, he has been awarded a full academic scholarship to a good university.
Now, Johnny has a first-year teacher who assigns work that seems inappropriately difficult, and Johnny is struggling. Though his grades in his other classes are exceptional, he will need to earn a C or better for this class if he hopes to keep his scholarship, and it all hinges on his score on the last assignment in this difficult class.
The assignment is on a topic that your professor did her graduate work on, so you know there’s no way a high schooler should be expected to do well in this assignment. Still, if Johnny doesn’t ace this assignment, he will not earn a good enough course grade to keep his scholarship.
Do you actively help him complete the assignment, or do you let him do it himself, knowing that without your help he will fail the assignment, not because he isn’t smart enough or dedicated enough, but because the assignment is inappropriately difficult?
Your completed assignment should be written primarily in first person and should be 500-750 words in length. If you use sources in your writing, be sure to identify them. If you use any direct language from a source, be sure to place those words in quotation marks.
PLEASE NO PLAGIARISM!!!!!! IN YOUR OWN WORDS PLEASE!!!!!
In: Psychology
Historically firm financial managers predominately feel that:
a. dividends should be increased annually no matter what
b. the personal taxes of their shareholders must be their primary consideration when setting dividend policy
c. once a dividend is increased, it should not be decreased
d. dividends should be flexible and adjusted annually in response to changes in the firms earnings
e. dividend smoothing is talked about but rarely affects dividend decisions
In: Finance
A cell phone tower manufacturer more than doubled its EPS by changing depreciation methods. In justifying the change, management supported the change as follows: In comparison to direct competitors, the previous depreciation method was more conservative and thus had a negative impact on earnings.
Comment on the appropriateness of making accounting changes to fulfill financial reporting objectives, Consider relevant ethical issues as well as GAAP in your response.
In: Accounting