Consider a hypothetical economy where there are no taxes and no international trade. Households spend $0.60 of each additional dollar they earn and save the remaining $0.40. If there are no taxes and no international trade, the oversimplified multiplier for this economy is .
Suppose investment spending in this economy increases by $300 billion. The increase in investment will lead to an increase in income, generating an increase in consumption that increases income yet again, and so on.
Fill in the following table to show the impact of the change in investment spending on the first two rounds of consumption spending and eventually on total output and income.

Change in Investment Spending = $250 billion.
First Change in Consumption = $___ billion.
Second Change in Consumption = $___ billion.
Total Change in Output = $___ billion.

Now consider a more realistic case. Specifically, assume that the government in our hypothetical economy collects income taxes. In this case, the multiplier will be the oversimplified multiplier you found earlier. Suppose that the price level in our economy remains the same and that there is still no international trade. Now, however, the government decides to Implement an income tax of 5% on each dollar of income. The MPC and MPS, however, remain the same as before. In this case, after accounting for the impact of taxes, the multiplier in this economy is and a $250 billion increase in investment spending will lead to a billion increase in output.

Which of the following is not a consideration when determining your asset allocation

After much consideration, you have chosen cancun over ft. lauderdale as your spring break destination this year. however, spring break is still months away, and you may reverse this decision. which of the following events would prompt you to reverse this decision? a. the marginal cost of going to cancun decreases. b. the marginal cost of going to ft. lauderdale decreases. c. the marginal benefit of going to cancun increases. d. the marginal benefit of going to ft. lauderdale decreases.

Cooper sues company a in state court in south carolina, where he lives, for negligence alleging personal injury and property damage of $100,000 after a truck driven by an employee of company a rear-ended his pickup truck. company a is incorporated in delaware, has its headquarters in new york, but does a substantial amount of business in south carolina. claiming diversity of citizenship, company a seeks removal to federal district court, but cooper opposes the motion. which of the following is true regarding whether the case may be properly removed to federal district court? the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements; and if company a's nerve center is in a state other than south carolina, then the case may be properly removed to federal court. the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements; and because company a is incorporated and has its headquarters in a state other than south carolina, the case may be properly removed to federal court. because the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements and company a is incorporated in a state other than south carolina, the case may be properly removed to federal court regardless of where company a's headquarters, nerve center, or principal place of business is located. because the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements and company a is headquartered in a state other than south carolina, the case may be properly removed to federal court regardless of where company a is incorporated and regardless of the location of its nerve center. because the amount in controversy fails to satisfy jurisdictional requirements, regardless of the location of company a, the case may not be removed to federal court.