Statement: The increasing population of our nation will lead to depletion of many essential resources.\nConclusions:\nI) The population of our nation can be controlled.\nII) The nation will not be able to provide a decent living to its citizens.

Introduction / Context:
The premise warns that rising population leads to depletion of essential resources. The conclusions attempt to infer (a) controllability of population and (b) an inevitable failure to provide decent living. We must check necessity, not plausibility.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Population increase → resource depletion (causal link asserted).
• No claim about policy feasibility of population control.
• No deterministic statement that decent living cannot be achieved.

Concept / Approach:
From the premise alone, we cannot infer that population can be controlled (I)—that is a policy possibility, not a logical entailment. Nor does resource pressure inevitably mean “no decent living” (II); technology, efficiency, imports, conservation, and substitution could mitigate effects. Hence neither conclusion is necessary.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) Keep within scope: only depletion pressure is asserted.2) Recognize that control (I) and inevitability of indecency (II) are additional claims.3) Therefore reject I and II.

Verification / Alternative check:
Counterexamples exist where nations sustain living standards via productivity and policy even amid population growth.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Affirming I or II adds new assumptions about capability or inevitability.

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing risk with certainty; importing policy judgments not in the premise.

Final Answer:
Neither conclusion follows.