Develop a macro that will calculate the monthly payment for a loan given the following:
The loan amount i.e. principal (dollars)
The annual interest rate (%/yr)
The number of years to pay off the loan (yrs)
Use the InputBox command to give default input values based on the last case you ran.
Base the monthly payment according to the formula:
a = p(i)(1+i) n / ( (1+i) n – 1 )
Generate a table with headings showing the month number, the monthly payment, the
monthly interest, the amount applied to the principal, and the new balance.
Generate the tables for the following cases:
- p=$25,000, I=5%, N=5 yrs
- p=$25,000, I=6%, N=6 yrs
- p=$400,000, I=5%, N=30 yrs
- p=$400,000, I=5%, N=10 yrs
- p=$400,000, I=6%, N=30 yrs
- p=$400,000, I=5%, N=30 yrs, round monthly payments and interest
to the nearest penny
In your report, show an abbreviated payment schedule of the first six and the last 6
payments for each case. Discuss your findings.
This page of the article has 613 words. Download the full form above. As indicated by George E. Moore, moral cases all worry human lead while philosophical morals at last worries about information on what "great" is. Moore likewise accepts philosophical morals should worry about what is acceptable instrumentally, or great as a methods as opposed to great as an end, as a property. As per Moore, what is characteristically acceptable, or the property of "goodness" isn't an analyzable property. For Moore, what "great" is, or "goodness", as an individual property, is "unanalyzable", or, undefinable. Along these lines, any case which gives a meaning of "goodness" is ascribing goodness to an option that is, as opposed to recognizing what goodness itself, as a property, is. Moore blames the individuals who make this blunder for submitting the "naturalistic misrepresentation". He accepts that ethical naturalists — savants who keep up that ethical properties exist and can be impartially examined, through science and sciences — are basically answerable for this error. Moore thought thinkers submitted the naturalistic error when endeavoring to characterize "great" by moving from one case that a thing is "acceptable" to the case that "great" is that thing. Moore figured one couldn't recognize "great" with a thing one accepts is "acceptable". So as to test and decide if an endeavor at characterizing "great" is right and not a hid task is the thing that Moore called the "open inquiry contention." Moore suggested that in the event that "integrity" is a characteristic property, at that point there is some right clarification of which normal property it is. For instance, possibly "goodness" is a similar property as "enjoyableness", or a similar property as being "alluring". Further, a right property must be recognized to fill in a personality explanation of the structure "goodness = __________", or, "what is acceptable is _________". >GET ANSWER