Andrew doesn’t want to spend a lot of money on student loans, and does not qualify for grants. what is his best option for affording a bachelors degree

On july 1, 2016, killearn company acquired 103,000 of the outstanding shares of shaun company for $21 per share. this acquisition gave killearn a 40 percent ownership of shaun and allowed killearn to significantly influence the investee's decisions. as of july 1, 2016, the investee had assets with a book value of $6 million and liabilities of $1,468,500. at the time, shaun held equipment appraised at $140,000 above book value; it was considered to have a seven-year remaining life with no salvage value. shaun also held a copyright with a five-year remaining life on its books that was undervalued by $562,500. any remaining excess cost was attributable to goodwill. depreciation and amortization are computed using the straight-line method. killearn applies the equity method for its investment in shaun. shaun's policy is to declare and pay a $1 per share cash dividend every april 1 and october 1. shaun's income, earned evenly throughout each year, was $580,000 in 2016, $606,600 in 2017, and $649,200 in 2018. in addition, killearn sold inventory costing $93,000 to shaun for $155,000 during 2017. shaun resold $97,500 of this inventory during 2017 and the remaining $57,500 during 2018.a. determine the equity income to be recognized by killearn during each of these years. 2016 2017 2018b. compute killearn’s investment in shaun company’s balance as of december 31, 2018.

Gary becker's controversial the economics of discrimination concludes that price discrimination has no effect on final profits. price discrimination benefits monopolies. labor discrimination in hiring results in more efficient allocations of production. discrimination in hiring practices has no effect on final profits. labor discrimination harms firms that practice it due to increased labor costs. price discrimination harms monopolies, which refutes over two centuries of economic theory.

Recently, verizon wireless ran a pricing trial in order to estimate the elasticity of demand for its services. the manager selected three states that were representative of its entire service area and increased prices by 5 percent to customers in those areas. one week later, the number of customers enrolled in verizon's cellular plans declined 4 percent in those states, while enrollments in states where prices were not increased remained flat. the manager used this information to estimate the own-price elasticity of demand and, based on her findings, immediately increased prices in all market areas by 5 percent in an attempt to boost the company's 2016 annual revenues. one year later, the manager was perplexed because verizon's 2016 annual revenues were 10 percent lower than those in 2015"the price increase apparently led to a reduction in the company's revenues. did the manager make an error? yes - the one-week measures show demand is inelastic, so a price increase will decrease revenues. yes - the one-week measures show demand is elastic, so a price increase will reduce revenues. yes - cell phone elasticity is likely much larger in the long-run than the short-run. no - the cell phone market must have changed between 2011 and 2012 for this price increase to lower revenues.