From Statement I: We know that at present, P1’s price is twice P2’s price. However, since P1 is non-increasing (could remain constant or decrease) and P2 is decreasing, this alone does not tell us their relative rates of change. Even if P2 decreases faster, P1 may still be costlier in 5 years, or if P1 decreases faster, the positions may reverse. Hence, insufficient.
From Statement II: We know that 5 years ago, P2’s price was twice P1’s price. But again, without knowing the exact rate of decrease or whether P1’s price changed in that period, we cannot determine the present scenario or the situation 5 years ahead. Hence, insufficient.
Combining both: Even though we know relative prices now and 5 years ago, without knowing exact rates of change for the future 5 years, we cannot conclude which will be costlier. Many possibilities exist — for example, if P2 decreases sharply in the next 5 years, P1 could still be costlier; but if P1 drops drastically and P2 decreases slowly, P2 might become costlier. Therefore, the answer cannot be determined even with both statements.