Difficulty: Easy
Correct Answer: Only argument II is strong
Explanation:
Introduction / Context:The issue is strategic petroleum reserves (SPR) for energy security. We must weigh fiscal concerns against resilience to supply/price shocks.
Given Data / Assumptions:
Concept / Approach:A strong argument recognizes risk management and national security. A weak argument mischaracterizes reserves as dead capital without acknowledging benefits.
Step-by-Step Solution:
Argument I: Weak. It treats reserves as “idle,” ignoring their insurance value and the fact they can be monetized or rotated.Argument II: Strong. It highlights shock absorption during geopolitical or market turmoil.Verification / Alternative check:Many nations maintain SPRs precisely for volatility and embargo scenarios; this validates II.
Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Common Pitfalls:Confusing liquidity preference with strategic insurance; risk mitigation has a measurable economic value.
Final Answer:Only argument II is strong
Discussion & Comments