Communities apply nims principles to integrate response plans and resources across jurisdictions and departments, as well as with the private sector and ngos.
true / false.

marginal cost is a microeconomic measure that us to evaluate the extent to which the level of production of a good is sustainable in accounting, that is, to how many quantities the company plans to profit from the production of the good.

the concept of marginal cost is simple, it means the cost of producing one more item. for example, in the case of pies, the marginal cost is the cost of producing one more pie than those that have already been produced.

it is important to understand that productive activity influences marginal cost. the marginal cost of some goods can be very high, while others may be insignificant. for example, the marginal cost of producing an extra plane is very high. already the marginal cost of a water company to provide 1l more water is derisory.

in the case of pies, the cost involves the inputs, the labor and the fixed cost, which involves the fixed space of the bakery. the level of production initially has the marginal cost decreasing because there is space and manpower available. however, to produce more you have to hire more workers and buy more inputs. if physical space is limited, workers will conflict with places, inputs and their productivity will decrease, meaning there is an optimum point of production for each level of space and manpower. from this point on, the productivity of the workers will be getting smaller because of lack of space, so that the marginal cost of producing one more pie will be increasing. so, although you have not posted the chart, but if you have the answer, you can see that my explanation goes according to the marginal cost curve that will increase from the 4th pie, answer (c).

question - in 1827, john walker, a druggist in a small english town, tipped a splint with sulphur, chlorate of potash, and sulphid of antimony, and rubbed it on sandpaper, and it burst into flame. the druggist had discovered the first friction-chemical match, the kind we use to-day. it is called friction-chemical because it is made by mixing certain chemicals together and rubbing them. although walker's match did not require the bottle of acid, nevertheless it was not a good one. it could be lighted only by hard rubbing, and it sputtered and threw fire in all directions. in a few years, however, phosphorus was substituted on the tip for antimony, and the change worked wonders. the match could now be lighted with very little rubbing, and it was no longer necessary to have sandpaper upon which to rub it. it would ignite when rubbed on any dry surface, and there was no longer any sputtering. this was the phosphorus match, the match with which we are so familiar. according the paragraph what was the benefit of the new phosphorus match? it burst into flame when rubbed on sandpaper. it was made by mixing chemicals. it could be ignited on any dry surface. it threw fire in all directions.

answer - matches required natural chemicals

well this isn't a question but if you are asking if it is true or false it is, true.