On June 20, 2007, John Authers, investment editor of the Financial Times, wrote the following in his column "The Short View": The Bank of England published minutes showing that only the narrowest possible margin, 5–4, voted down [an interest] rate hike last month. Nobody foresaw this. . . . The news took sterling back above $1.99, and to a 15-year high against the yen. Can you explain the logic of this statement? Interest rates in the United Kingdom had remained unchanged in the weeks since the vote and were still unchanged after the minutes were released. What news was contained in the minutes that caused traders to react? Explain using the asset approach.

hi,

henry is an economist and wants to understand the relationship between inflation and consumer spending habits. for his research, he needs the consumer price index for 2014 and the inflation rate. based on the prices of goods given, what will he find to be the cpi and inflation rate for 2014? assume that a consumer’s basket for three consecutive years consists of the following:

you dont privide answer choices.

answer - 15% of a inflatation rate is 15% less in cpi

there's 11 people for the 1st position. then, no matter who gets it, there's only 10 left for the second, and then 9 left for the third. 11 x 10 x 9 = 990.   the answer is there are 990 different ways the positions can be filled by these applicants

being suspected of supplying drugs means you are much more likely to be charged. the amount of drugs found on you, and whether you have a criminal record, will be taken into account when a punishment is being decided.

decisions to prosecute are taken by the public prosecution service. the maximum sentences for intent to supply drugs are:

answer; empowerment and collaboration;