anonymous
  • anonymous
A legislative committee is weighing the pros and cons of a clean-air program. If it spends $1 million on the program, the air will be cleaner by 20 percent. If it spends $2 million, the air will be cleaner by 30 percent. If it spends $3 million, the air will be cleaner by 35 percent. After comparing opportunity costs and benefits at the margin, the committee agrees to fund the program with $2 million. Why did it not choose to appropriate $3 million? a. At $3 million, the air is not improved as much as the committee would like. b. At $3 million, the costs are no longer worth the benefits. c. It
Economics - Financial Markets
  • Stacey Warren - Expert brainly.com
Hey! We 've verified this expert answer for you, click below to unlock the details :)
SOLVED
At vero eos et accusamus et iusto odio dignissimos ducimus qui blanditiis praesentium voluptatum deleniti atque corrupti quos dolores et quas molestias excepturi sint occaecati cupiditate non provident, similique sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollitia animi, id est laborum et dolorum fuga. Et harum quidem rerum facilis est et expedita distinctio. Nam libero tempore, cum soluta nobis est eligendi optio cumque nihil impedit quo minus id quod maxime placeat facere possimus, omnis voluptas assumenda est, omnis dolor repellendus. Itaque earum rerum hic tenetur a sapiente delectus, ut aut reiciendis voluptatibus maiores alias consequatur aut perferendis doloribus asperiores repellat.
jamiebookeater
  • jamiebookeater
I got my questions answered at brainly.com in under 10 minutes. Go to brainly.com now for free help!
anonymous
  • anonymous
a. At $3 million, the air is not improved as much as the committee would like. All the other millions Spent improved air by 10% This on only went up 5%.
anonymous
  • anonymous
I don't see options 3 & 4. It is based on extent decision. Additional 1 million gets only 5% With just a & b, i'm more inclined to b

Looking for something else?

Not the answer you are looking for? Search for more explanations.