Suppose someone offered you your choice of two equally risky annuities, each paying $5,000 per year for 5 years. one is an annuity due, while the other is a regular (or deferred) annuity. if you are a rational wealth-maximizinginvestor which annuity would you choose? a. the annuity due. b. the deferred annuity. c. either one, because as the problem is set up, they have the same present value. d. without information about the appropriate interest rate, we cannot find the values of the two annuities, hence we cannot tell which is better. e. the annuity due; however, if the payments on both were doubled to $10,000, the deferred annuity wouldbe preferred.

Kendra knight took part in a friendly game of touch football. she had played before and was familiar with football. michael jewett was on her team. in the course of play, michael bumped into kendra and knocked her to the ground. he stepped on her hand, causing injury to a little finger that later required its amputation. she sued michael for damages. he defended on the ground that she had assumed the risk. kendra claimed that assumption of risk could not be raised as a defense because the state legislature had adopted the standard of comparative negligence. what happens if contributory negligence applies? what happens if the defense of comparative negligence applies?