Statement:\nUnemployment is one of the main reasons for the country's poverty.\nConclusions:\nI. To end poverty, creating employment opportunities is required.\nII. All the people in the country are unemployed.

Introduction / Context:
The statement identifies unemployment as one of the principal contributors to poverty. We must infer what necessarily follows from this causal framing.

Given Data / Assumptions:

• Unemployment significantly contributes to poverty (among other factors).
• The statement does not quantify “main” nor deny other causes (e.g., low wages, inflation, access issues).

Concept / Approach:
If X is one of the main reasons for Y, then addressing X is a necessary component of any serious strategy to end Y (even if not sufficient by itself). By contrast, claiming that “all people are unemployed” grossly overgeneralizes beyond the premise.

Step-by-Step Solution:
1) Conclusion I: Since unemployment is a main driver of poverty, generating jobs is required to tackle poverty. This is a necessary (though not necessarily sufficient) inference → follows.2) Conclusion II: “All people are unemployed” contradicts common sense and is not implied by “one of the main reasons.” → does not follow.

Verification / Alternative check:
Even if other measures (education, healthcare, price stability) are also needed, removing a main cause is still required to end the effect—thus I stands.

Why Other Options Are Wrong:
Only II: baseless. Either: wrongly admits II. Neither: ignores the necessity of employment creation implied by the premise.

Common Pitfalls:
Confusing “necessary” with “sufficient”; assuming the statement denies other causes.

Final Answer:
If only Conclusion I follows