Seja X uma variável aleatória, com função densidade de probabilidade f(x) contínua, definida sobre o espaço amostral A, do universo U:

Item 2: A probabilidade !$ P(X= x_0) !$ é dada por !$ f^{-∞} (x_0) !$.

A partir de 1990 começa uma nova fase na economia brasileira. Essa nova fase assistiu a

Item 3: alterações significativas na condução das políticas monetárias a partir da Lei de 29 de julho de 1994 que criou uma nova unidade monetária, o real;

As taxas de crescimento negativas em 1981 e 1983 e uma taxa insignificante de cerca de 1,1% em 1982 caracterizam uma recessão nesses anos e indicam uma reversão na tendência de crescimento da economia que se observava desde o fim da Segunda Guerra Mundial. O desempenho da economia nesses anos justifica as seguintes afirmativas:

Item 2 : políticas de restrição da demanda interna com o objetivo de reduzir as importações e incentivar as exportações tiveram como subproduto uma redução significativa nas taxas de inflação do período;

Sobre as demandas de consumo e de investimento, indique se a afirmação é falsa ou verdadeira:

Item 2: A abordagem Barro-Ricardo argumenta que uma redução de impostos no presente, financiada por emissão de títulos, não aumenta o consumo presente, mas sim o consumo futuro quando o governo resgatar os títulos e efetuar o pagamento dos juros.

Em relação à teoria da produção, pode-se afirmar que:

Item 4: Para a firma que trabalha com uma tecnologia do tipo F(K,L) = K + min{K,L}, as isoquantas são formadas por segmentos que formam um ângulo reto.

There is the bottom-line, spreadsheet way of doing business in quiet boardrooms. And there’s the Latin Way. Knowing the difference between the two is a big factor behind what has been dubbed the reconquista of Latin America by Spain. And this time the weapon of choice of the conquistadores is the peseta rather than the sword. In what has become the world’s hottest spot for foreign investors, Spaniards have a head start over competitors, says Sergio Aranda Moreno, CEO of Spanish-owned Gas Natural México. Explaining the Latin way of wheeling and dealing, he says, “Sometimes I come out of a meeting and a colleage says, ‘Phew, what a bloodbath!’ Yet on the the surface, everything was warm and polite. Someone from another culture would never have noticed the battle going on behind the scenes.”

But anyone who is numerate can see the fallout from those deals. Big spending by foreign companies in Latin America and the Caribbean has catapulted outside investment into the region by an estimated 33% last year, to $97 billion, surpassing that in Asia by $13 billion. And the foreigners doing the most moving and shaking come from one of the region’s old colonial powers. In telecommunications, banking, energy supply – even marketing fish and collecting trash – Spaniards are “invading” Latin America with more force and flair than anyone else. Juan Villalonga, president of Spain’s communications giant Telefónica, says Spaniards doing business in Latin America these days feel “como Pedro por su casa,” or like Pedro at home – which is about as comfortable as a Spaniard gets.

The Spanish-led push has helped Europe turn the investment tables on Latin America’s longtime financial Big Brother, the U.S. Of the 25 largest foreign companies in Latin America in 1998, on the basis of consolidated sales, 14 were European and 11 were from the U.S., with Spain’s Telefónica now the region’s biggest communications operator.

In other markets dear to the U.S. heart, Spanish firms have muscled themselves into preferred positions. Sergio Aranda says that when the Mexican government opened its natural-gas market five years ago, U.S.-based companies were expected to dominate, given their proximity. But it didn’t turn out that way. Gas Natural México, set up by an affiliate of Spain’s petroleum giant Repsol, today has about 10 times as many customers as its U.S. rivals. And in March, Aranda made another coup. Gas Natural bought from Texas utilities the right to supply gas in Mexico City, converting the Spanish company into by far the dominant force in Mexico’s gas market.

Aranda says language alone doesn’t explain the Spaniard’s surge. The affinities that give Spanish firms an edge run deeper. “American businessmen have a 9-to-5 culture,” he says. “Here, where personal contact is so important, it’s a constant round of lunches and dinners. That’s the way we do business in Spain too. The Americans are also much more direct. Like the Mexicans, we skirt around the issues, often making our point indirectly.”

Like Spaniards in Brazil, Argentina, Chile and many other Latin American countries, Aranda doesn’t sense any resentment in the region of the 21st century conquistadores. Questions do arise in some countries about concentration of ownership. But Aranda says, “I feel more than welcome here.” (“New World Conquests,” Time magazine, May 8, 2000: 22-27).

According to the text:

Item 3: There are now more large European companies operating in Latin America than American ones.

SECOND TEXT

All things considered, it must have been a crummy week to be the king of the software world. If you are Bill Gates, you’re used to being cursed by competitors, hounded by regulators and lampooned by late-night comics as the perfect – albeit perfect rich – geek. But no one, not even Gates, could be comfortable with the idea that one’s masterpiece – which happens to the biggest and most powerful software company on earth – could be taken and sliced in two.

But that’s precisely what state and federal trustbusters demanded last week. In a filing submitted to federal Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson, the Justice Department and 17 of 19 states that have brought suits against Microsoft finally agreed: Microsoft should be chopped into two companies. One would develop and sell the Windows operating system that runs 85% of the world’s desktop computers. The other business would handle everything else – most notably, the universally used “applications” software, such as Microsoft Office, which includes its dominant word processing and spreadsheet programs, and its Web-browsing Internet Explorer.

The two companies could not collude or cooperate in any way for 10 years. During that time, they would be required to strive ceaselessly against each other. Gates would have to choose which company to run and hold stock in – while competing with the other.

To antitrust chief Joel Klein, the plan strikes a perfect balance: “Neither the heavy hand of ongoing government regulation nor the self-interest of an entrenched monopolist will decide what is in the best interest of consumers,” he says. “Rather, consumers will be able to choose for themselves the products they want in a free and competitive marketplace.” Counters Gates: “We don’t believe the courts are going to uphold this kind of unprecedented and radical regulation of our activities.”

But beyond the angry words and legal documents, the proposed remedy marked the culmination of 23 months of state and federal pursuit of Microsoft and represents a clear watershed for the computer and software industries. The ruling that emerges from Judge Jackson’s court, and from an appeals process that could last two more years, will do much to determine the course of software development for decades to come – and with it the programs that countless companies and consumers use.

For now, Microsoft attorney William Neukom plans to push for an extension of the company’s May 10 deadline for responding to last Friday’s Justice Department proposal. Microsoft will want “months and months” of additional hearings in front of Jackson, who ruled on April 3 that the company had illegally and repeatedly used its monopoly power to stifle innovation. A final decision by Jackson might not come until the end of summer. Even then, any breakup that the judge might call for would be on hold until the appeals process is done. That’s why Klein and the states want Jackson’s ruling to include immediate restrictions on Microsoft’s conduct, including a measure that would bar it from retaliating against computer makers that load rivals’ software on their machines. In addition, prosecutors want Microsoft to publish a price list that would apply to all its largest customers. (“Carving up Gates,” Time magazine, May 8, 2000: 28-31).

According to the text:

Item 0: Microsoft is the biggest software company on earth.