Exercise 5: Insurance Consider two individuals, Dave and Eva. Both Dave and Eva have initial wealth 810; 000 and face a 40% chance of losing L = 450; 000. Dave has von Neumann-Morgenstern utility function uD(x) = x and Eva has von Neumann-Morgenstern utility function uE(x) = p x. 1. What do you know about Dave's and Eva's risk preferences? 2. What is the most Dave would be willing to pay for complete insurance against the loss? 3. What is the most Eva would be willing to pay for complete insurance against the loss? Suppose they are each able to choose insurance with any coverage level z 2 [0; 1] (i. e. 0 z 1). If an individual buys insurance coverage at level z, they will get reimbursed 450; 000z if the loss occurs. Insurance coverage at level z costs c(z) = z 200; 000. 4. What coverage level zD would Dave choose? Explain. 5. Based on your previous results, try to explain that Eva chooses a strictly positive coverage zE > 0. 6. Is Eva's optimal choice full insurance, i. e. zE = 1? ECON

Cooper sues company a in state court in south carolina, where he lives, for negligence alleging personal injury and property damage of $100,000 after a truck driven by an employee of company a rear-ended his pickup truck. company a is incorporated in delaware, has its headquarters in new york, but does a substantial amount of business in south carolina. claiming diversity of citizenship, company a seeks removal to federal district court, but cooper opposes the motion. which of the following is true regarding whether the case may be properly removed to federal district court? the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements; and if company a's nerve center is in a state other than south carolina, then the case may be properly removed to federal court.the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements; and because company a is incorporated and has its headquarters in a state other than south carolina, the case may be properly removed to federal court.because the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements and company a is incorporated in a state other than south carolina, the case may be properly removed to federal court regardless of where company a's headquarters, nerve center, or principal place of business is located.because the amount in controversy satisfies diversity requirements and company a is headquartered in a state other than south carolina, the case may be properly removed to federal court regardless of where company a is incorporated and regardless of the location of its nerve center.because the amount in controversy fails to satisfy jurisdictional requirements, regardless of the location of company a, the case may not be removed to federal court.