Statement: The percentage of the national income shared by the top 10 percent…

Concept: In statement-and-conclusion reasoning, a conclusion follows only if it is a definite inference obtainable strictly from the facts given in the statement — never from outside assumptions, general real-world claims, or causal relationships that the statement itself does not state.

Application:

• Conclusion I claims that fast economic growth causes concentration of wealth. The statement provides only a single income-share figure and says nothing about a growth rate or about any causal mechanism, so this conclusion imports information the statement never supplies — it is not a definite inference from the given facts.

• Conclusion II claims the national income is unevenly distributed. Compare the given figure with a fully even distribution: if income were spread evenly across all households, any group holding 10 percent of the households would also hold exactly 10 percent of the income. Here, the top 10 percent of households hold 35 percent of the income — far more than an even split would give them — so unequal distribution follows directly from the stated numbers alone.

Cross-check:

Testing the negation confirms this: if the income were evenly distributed, no 10 percent slice of households could hold more than 10 percent of the income, contradicting the given 35 percent figure — so 'evenly distributed' is false, confirming the inference of uneven distribution independently. Conclusion I, by contrast, cannot be tested for truth or falsity from the statement at all, since the statement carries no growth-rate information — so it fails the definite-inference test regardless of what might be true in reality.

Only conclusion II follows from the statement.