Kim is the risk manager for a large organization. She is evaluating whether the organization should purchase a fire suppression system. She consulted a variety of subject matter experts and determined that there is a 1 percent chance that a fire will occur in a given year. If a fire occurred, it would likely cause $2 million in damage to the facility, which has a $10 million value. Given this scenario, what is the annualized loss expectancy (ALE)?A. 2,000.
B. 20,000.
C. 200,000.
D. 2,000,000.

Ming chen began a professional practice on june 1 and plans to prepare financial statements at the end of each month. during june, ming chen (the owner) completed these transactions. a. owner invested $61,000 cash in the company along with equipment that had a $25,000 market value. b. the company paid $1,900 cash for rent of office space for the month. c. the company purchased $15,000 of additional equipment on credit (payment due within 30 days). d. the company completed work for a client and immediately collected the $2,100 cash earned. e. the company completed work for a client and sent a bill for $7,000 to be received within 30 days. f. the company purchased additional equipment for $5,500 cash. g. the company paid an assistant $3,000 cash as wages for the month. h. the company collected $5,200 cash as a partial payment for the amount owed by the client in transaction e. i. the company paid $15,000 cash to settle the liability created in transaction c. j. owner withdrew $1,500 cash from the company for personal use. required: enter the impact of each transaction on individual items of the accounting equation. (enter decreases to account balances with a minus sign.)

If springfield is operating at full employment who is working a. everyone b. about 96% of the workforce c. the entire work force d. the robots

David paid $975,000 for two beachfront lots in coastal south carolina, with the intention of building residential homes on each. two years later, the south carolina legislature passed the beachfront management act, barring any further development of the coast, including david's lots. when david files a complaint to seek compensation for his property, south carolina refuses, pointing to a passage in david's own complaint that states "the beachfront management act [was] properly and validly designed to south carolina's " is south carolina required to compensate david under the takings clause?