Question

Which statement is true? Inexhaustible resources are limited. Only tangible goods are scarce. Exhaustible resources are abundantly available. Exhaustible resources are scarce. Governments have unlimited money.

Answer 1

Hey there!

Let's go through the answers you've been given:

"Inexhaustible resources are limited." An inexhaustible resource is essentially a resource that cannot be used up due to its abundance, or the large amount of it there is. Since it can't be used up, this statement doesn't make sense. 

"Only tangible goods are scarce." Tangible goods can be defined as a physical merchandise or something that you use. This includes anything that you can find at a market, amongst many other tangible goods. Obviously, not every last thing you can find in a market will be scarce, so this statement doesn't make sense either. Also, on a side note, this statement may also be pointing out that only tangible resources are scarce as opposed to intangible resources, which is also not true. An intangible resource is can be a trade or a job that someone does for you. There are trades and jobs that fewer people do these days than in the past. These trades include jobs that have been replaced with modern machinery and no longer require people to do them. 

"Exhaustible resources are abundantly available." This is the opposite of the first statement. Since the resources will be exhaustible, they can be used up, and therefore aren't necessarily abundantly available. Even if they are at this moment, they will eventually become scarce. That means that this statement doesn't make sense either. 

"Exhaustible resources are scarce." This statement does make sense, based on the logic in the explanation from the last statement. I think this is your answer. 

"Governments have unlimited money." Not sure how this one got thrown in the mix, but it's not true at all. At least in America and many other countries, there are laws that explicitly state that the government isn't allowed to just make a bunch of money. If we could, we wouldn't be in such debt, and budget cuts wouldn't have to be made like they are now. 

Based on all of that, I think your answer is the fourth statement. Hope this helped you out! :-)