Answered

Find the best solutions to your problems with the help of IDNLearn.com's expert users. Join our interactive community and access reliable, detailed answers from experienced professionals across a variety of topics.

Select the correct locations in the table.

The table shows the federal government's budgeted revenue and expenditures from 2001 through 2010. Identify the years in which there was a budget surplus.

\begin{tabular}{|r|l|l|}
\hline Year & Revenue & Expenditure \\
\hline 2001 & \[tex]$8 trillion & \$[/tex]6 trillion \\
\hline 2002 & \[tex]$5 trillion & \$[/tex]7 trillion \\
\hline 2003 & \[tex]$8 trillion & \$[/tex]10 trillion \\
\hline 2004 & \[tex]$9 trillion & \$[/tex]7 trillion \\
\hline 2005 & \[tex]$15 trillion & \$[/tex]18 trillion \\
\hline 2006 & \[tex]$8 trillion & \$[/tex]10 trillion \\
\hline 2007 & \[tex]$6 trillion & \$[/tex]4 trillion \\
\hline 2008 & \[tex]$2 trillion & \$[/tex]4 trillion \\
\hline 2009 & \[tex]$7 trillion & \$[/tex]4 trillion \\
\hline 2010 & \[tex]$5 trillion & \$[/tex]9 trillion \\
\hline
\end{tabular}

Sagot :

GinnyAnsweridn
To identify the years in which there was a budget surplus, we need to compare the budgeted revenue to the expenditures for each year. A budget surplus occurs when the revenue is greater than the expenditures. Let's go through each year one by one to determine if there was a surplus.

- 2001:
- Revenue: \[tex]$8 trillion - Expenditure: \$[/tex]6 trillion
- Since \[tex]$8 trillion (revenue) > \$[/tex]6 trillion (expenditure), there is a surplus in 2001.

- 2002:
- Revenue: \[tex]$5 trillion - Expenditure: \$[/tex]7 trillion
- Since \[tex]$5 trillion (revenue) < \$[/tex]7 trillion (expenditure), there is no surplus in 2002.

- 2003:
- Revenue: \[tex]$8 trillion - Expenditure: \$[/tex]10 trillion
- Since \[tex]$8 trillion (revenue) < \$[/tex]10 trillion (expenditure), there is no surplus in 2003.

- 2004:
- Revenue: \[tex]$9 trillion - Expenditure: \$[/tex]7 trillion
- Since \[tex]$9 trillion (revenue) > \$[/tex]7 trillion (expenditure), there is a surplus in 2004.

- 2005:
- Revenue: \[tex]$15 trillion - Expenditure: \$[/tex]18 trillion
- Since \[tex]$15 trillion (revenue) < \$[/tex]18 trillion (expenditure), there is no surplus in 2005.

- 2006:
- Revenue: \[tex]$8 trillion - Expenditure: \$[/tex]10 trillion
- Since \[tex]$8 trillion (revenue) < \$[/tex]10 trillion (expenditure), there is no surplus in 2006.

- 2007:
- Revenue: \[tex]$6 trillion - Expenditure: \$[/tex]4 trillion
- Since \[tex]$6 trillion (revenue) > \$[/tex]4 trillion (expenditure), there is a surplus in 2007.

- 2008:
- Revenue: \[tex]$2 trillion - Expenditure: \$[/tex]4 trillion
- Since \[tex]$2 trillion (revenue) < \$[/tex]4 trillion (expenditure), there is no surplus in 2008.

- 2009:
- Revenue: \[tex]$7 trillion - Expenditure: \$[/tex]4 trillion
- Since \[tex]$7 trillion (revenue) > \$[/tex]4 trillion (expenditure), there is a surplus in 2009.

- 2010:
- Revenue: \[tex]$5 trillion - Expenditure: \$[/tex]9 trillion
- Since \[tex]$5 trillion (revenue) < \$[/tex]9 trillion (expenditure), there is no surplus in 2010.

Thus, there were budget surpluses in the years:
- 2001
- 2004
- 2007
- 2009
We value your presence here. Keep sharing knowledge and helping others find the answers they need. This community is the perfect place to learn together. IDNLearn.com is your reliable source for answers. We appreciate your visit and look forward to assisting you again soon.