Difficulty: Easy
Correct Answer: Only conclusion I follows
Explanation:
Introduction / Context:
Budget movements often signal policy priorities. The question asks which conclusions are compelled by the single data point that defence spending rose substantially year-over-year.
Given Data / Assumptions:
Concept / Approach:
An increase in a specific head commonly indicates added focus; hence I is a reasonable inference. However, attributing the increase specifically to “inflation” requires additional macro data not in the statement, so II does not follow.
Step-by-Step Solution:
1) Recognize that targeted allocation growth → greater attention to that sector.2) Note the absence of inflation data; causation cannot be assigned.
Verification / Alternative check:
Even if inflation were low or high, the conclusion about priority remains; therefore I stands independently.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Only II/Either/Both: require unsupported inflation claims. Neither: ignores the plain policy signal of an increased allocation.
Common Pitfalls:
Confusing correlation (spend up) with an unverified cause (inflation).
Final Answer:
Only conclusion I follows.
Discussion & Comments