Question 2: Imagine three are only alternatives to watching a hockey game. Assume all 3 alternatives require the same amount of time and that they are all affordable. Also assume that the benefits and explicit costs of each alternative can be accurately expressed in dollars. The 3 alternatives are described as follows: 1. Attend live, which has a benefit valued at $250 and explicit costs of $225 2. Watch at a restaurant, which has a benefit measured at $100 and explicit costs of $80. 3. Watch at home, which has a benefit of $40 and explicit costs of $10. Part A: Which of the 3 alternatives is the best use of your time? Provide support for your answer (your support most likely will involve numbers). Simply choosing one alternative is not acceptable. Part B: What is the opportunity cost of your time spent watching the game at a restaurant? Provide support for your answer (your support most likely will involve numbers). Part C: Is it true that the alternative with the highest benefit is always the best choice? Why or why not?