If the sales outlook for the coming three years was only 20,000,000 and B.E. continued producing at the rate of 30,000,000 units, a total of 10,000,000 units would be dumped into ending inventory at the end of each year once again reducing costs of goods sold and falsely increasing income. By the end of year 2013, B.E. Company would have 35,000,000 units sitting in ending inventory taking up space and costing money to store. Once again if the president’s bonus is based off of net income, this situation is the most favorable for a high paying bonus and encourages stockpiling inventory to inflate net income.
A dollar today is worth more than a dollar to be received in the future because-the dollar can be invested today and earn interes If you were to put $1,000 in the bank at 6% interest each year for the next 10 years, which table would you use to find the ending balance in your account? - compound sum of an annuity of $1 The FVIFA for the future value of an annuity is 4.5 at 10% for 4 years. If we wish to accumulate $8,000 by the end of 4 years, how much should the annual payments be?-. $1,778 Under what conditions must a distinction be made between money to be received today andmoney to be received in the future?- when idle money can earn a positive return An annuity may be defined as-a series of consecutive payments of equal An annuity may be defined as-a series of consecutive payments of equal amounts. You are to receive $12,000 at the end of 5 years.
How will the state deal with future budget cuts to high education in California? Sure this will solve the budget cuts in 7 years, what about after? How will the university system cope with handling more students entering each and every year? The tax increase targets the a group of people who makes over $250,000 a year in California. With the way the College and University system is suffering there won’t be any one making over $250,000 in the future if the proposition didn’t pass.
The legislation establishing the payroll tax reduction also provided for transfers of revenues from the general fund to the trust funds in order to "replicate to the extent possible" payments that would have occurred if the payroll tax reduction had not been enacted. Those general fund reimbursements comprise about 15 percent of the program's non-interest income in 2011 and 2012. Under current projections, the annual cost of Social Security benefits expressed as a share of workers’ taxable earnings will grow rapidly from 11.3 percent in 2007, the last pre-recession year, to roughly 17.4 percent in 2035, and will then decline slightly before slowly increasing after 2050. Costs display a slightly different pattern when expressed as a share of GDP. Program costs equaled 4.2 percent of GDP in 2007, and the Trustees project these costs will increase gradually to 6.4 percent of GDP in 2035 before declining to about 6.1 percent of GDP by 2050 and then remaining at about that
Employees will see more money being deducted for Social Security Tax but other benefits will increase. According to Business Week, employees will begin to see smaller paychecks, “a worker making $50,000 in 2013 will take home $38.46 less per two-week paycheck or $1,000 per year”. Persons who are self-employed will be hit even harder. Their deductions will be 12.4% as compared to the 6.2 wage earners will have taken from their pay checks (employers also match 6.2%). There will be a permanent extension of the employer provided education assistance and this is important to employees.
People have to look at the current health care arena before we go on criticizing the health care reform. The health care reform might be a little pricy, but it out wait the current one that we have. In the long run, the health care reform will eliminate $2.5 trillion of federal spending, enough to boost the GDP by 18%. On top of that, everyone would be insured through the health care reform. It would basically fund itself, because everyone would be participating, it would cost less, due to the mass resources combined.
Dre Anderson Mr. Fallon Macroeconomics 11/2/12 Obama HealthCare Plan An ongoing problem in the United States of America today is health care. There has been many attempts to change healthcare plans and insurance so everyone can be covered and have healthcare available to them and their families. Obamas Healthcare plan is an attempt to make health care affordable for all Americans so that they have full coverage. Some believe that Obamas plan could possibly be efficient while some think it will not. Obama Healthcare expresses dramatic effects to people who already have health insurance, people who don’t have health insurance, those who can’t afford it, and older people who are on Medicare.
| PRO: The health reform includes the largest health care tax cut in history for middle class families, helping to make insurance much more affordable for millions of families. | | PRO: Tax credits up to 35% are offered to small business to make employee coverage more affordable. | | PRO: Bans health plans from dropping people from coverage when they get sick. | | PRO: Restricts new plans’ use of annual limits to ensure access to needed care. |
This fact is due to the increasing population of the aged in the American economy. The rise in the number of the aged population has led to a spontaneous rise in the demand for the Medicare program. The rise in demand of Medicare has triggered a subsequent rise in the cost of health care in the USA. According to statistics disclosed by Bozic (2011), the consumers of Medicare will rise up to 76 million by the end of 2030. Going by the contemporary crisis in the Medicare program of America, Bozic (2011) dictates that the solution to the crisis will demand increase in the tax margin on the employees.
Mostly because it forces people to have health insurance even when most of us cannot afford it; if president Obama wanted it to help the community I think he should have kept in mind that he shouldn’t require the citizens do things they do not want to do and/or cannot afford to do. The individual mandate states that any person who works and earns a salary will be force to buy new health insurance. That’s where the Supreme Court intervenes and clarifies the law by saying that instead of a mandate, it would be classified as taxes. From which is something that the government can establish and regulate according to the individual’s income. But taxes?