Critical reasoning — closing loss-making public sector enterprises (PSEs): Should the Government shut down PSEs that incur losses, balancing the concern about employees losing jobs and security against the argument that in a competitive world only the fittest should survive?

Given data

• Statement: Close down loss-making PSEs?
• Argument I (No): Employees will lose jobs/security and earnings.
• Argument II (Yes): 'Survival of the fittest' in a competitive world.

Concept/Approach (avoid emotive or sloganistic reasoning)Strong arguments must provide policy-relevant, balanced reasoning (e.g., restructuring, social safety nets, strategic value) rather than purely emotive claims or slogans.

Step-by-Step evaluation1) Argument I: Job loss is a concern but not a decisive reason; alternatives (retraining, redeployment) exist. On its own it is insufficient ⇒ weak.2) Argument II: 'Survival of the fittest' is a slogan, not a policy analysis; it ignores public-interest enterprises, essential services, or reform options ⇒ weak.

Verification/AlternativeA compelling case would analyse efficiency, fiscal impacts, market failures, and transition support—none appear in either argument.

Common pitfallsEquating complex reform to job fears or natural-selection rhetoric; both extremes lack substance.

Final AnswerNeither I nor II is strong.