Marlene gets an offer to rake her neighbor’s lawn. it would take her three hours to rake the lawn and she would be paid $10. what would be a cost-benefit analysis of raking the lawn? select the best answer from the choices provided.
a. comparing the cost of raking the lawn, three hours, with the benefit of raking the lawn, $10b). comparing the cost of raking the lawn, $0, with the benefit of raking the lawn, $10c). comparing the benefit of raking the lawn, $10, with the benefit of not raking the lawn, $0d). comparing the cost of raking the lawn, three hours, with the cost of not raking the lawn, no hours

Hey there!

For this problem, I would take a look at which answers you can get rid of based on the situation and some common sense:

A. comparing the cost of raking the lawn, three hours, with the benefit of raking the lawn, $10: This one seems to make the most sense to me, given the situation. Even though she may have the tools to rake the lawn, you would also have to count the time that it would take to complete the task, since it would still be using up a resource. Cost–benefits analysis looks at a lot of aspects, such as money, time, risks, imperfections, uncertainties, etc. 

B. comparing the cost of raking the lawn, $0, with the benefit of raking the lawn, $10: This doesn't apply given the information in my last point, since cost–benefit analysis looks at more than just money.  

C. comparing the benefit of raking the lawn, $10, with the benefit of not raking the lawn, $0: This one doesn't have a cost, and earning no money for not doing something doesn't sound like a benefit to me. 

D. comparing the cost of raking the lawn, three hours, with the cost of not raking the lawn, no hours: This one just doesn't make sense to me. Spending no hours doing something isn't a cost. Again, it's missing half of the equation, which is the benefit this time. 

I would say your answer is A. 

Hope this helped you out! :-)