In discussing the pros and cons of monetary union among several European nations, some politicians have claimed that living standards in the countries concerned would first have to converge if monetary union is not to lead to economic chaos. This claim is plainly false, as is demonstrated by the fact that living standards diverge widely between regions within countries that nevertheless have stable economies. In attempting to refute the politicians' claim, the author does which one of the following? ['presents an earlier instance of the action being considered in which the predicted consequences did not occur', 'gives an example of a state of affairs, assumed to be relevantly similar, in which the allegedly incompatible elements coexist', 'argues that the feared consequence would occur regardless of what course of action was followed', 'argues that those making the claim are mistaken about a temporal relationship that has been observed']