Statement: Should the retirement age be brought down? Arguments: I. Yes. Lowering it opens job opportunities for younger candidates. II. No. People often marry late and their children settle late. Choose the option that best identifies the strong argument(s).

Introduction / Context:Retirement age policy influences labour market turnover and fiscal burdens. Strong arguments must relate to employment and productivity, not private family timelines.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Youth unemployment and promotion stagnation are considerations.
• Pension costs and experience loss are counter considerations.

Concept / Approach:Check which argument is public interest oriented and causally linked.

Step-by-Step Solution:Argument I: Opening vacancies for youth is a policy relevant effect. Though trade offs exist, it is a legitimate consideration. Strong.Argument II: Family timing is private and not a policy criterion for retirement age. Weak.

Verification / Alternative check:Governments balance intake of youth with retention of expertise, sometimes via phased retirement. That does not negate I as a strong reason.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:Only II, either, both, or neither misclassify strengths.

Common Pitfalls:Using private convenience as policy basis; ignoring wider labour effects.

Final Answer:Only Argument I is strong.