ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 2681|回复: 3
打印 上一主题 下一主题

看的时候没有一个觉得对的!大牛们!

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2011-8-24 00:34:34 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
The price the government pays for standard weapons purchased from military contractors is determined by a pricing method called “historical costing.” Historical costing allows contractors to protect their profits by adding a percentage increase, based on the current rate of inflation, to the previous year’s contractual price.
Which of the following statements, if true, is the best basis for a criticism of historical costing as an economically sound pricing method for military contracts?
(A) The government might continue to pay for past inefficient use of funds.
(B) The rate of inflation has varied considerably over the past twenty years.
(C) The contractual price will be greatly affected by the cost of materials used for the products.
(D) Many taxpayers question the amount of money the government spends on military contracts.
(E) The pricing method based on historical costing might not encourage the development of innovative weapons.
收藏收藏 收藏收藏
沙发
发表于 2011-8-24 00:42:56 | 只看该作者
A...不知道对不对。

我的思路是因为inflation对应的是现在的货币购买力,如果用之前的fund来买,相当于多付了。。。
板凳
发表于 2011-8-24 00:50:06 | 只看该作者
AAAAAAAAAAAAAAA
地板
发表于 2011-8-24 00:51:44 | 只看该作者
The key is to realize that the future payouts of the contract depend on the VERY first contract. If the government overpaid the contractor in the very first year, the government has no way of re-negotiate a better deal.
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2024-11-10 11:59
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2023 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部