Marge maintains that there is no direct correlation between population density and poverty. Mason argues that population density is normally associated with poverty and political instability. Who is correct?
A. Marge and Mason are both incorrect.
B. Marge and Mason are both partially correct.
C. Marge is correct.
D. Mason is correct.
An C
I'm a bit confused because my notes say:
Population density is the number of people per square mile (or square kilometer, depending on the source). Very high density may result in extreme poverty and political turbulence. This is the case in many areas of the Mideast and Africa. However, there is no direct correlation between population density and poverty. For example, Western Europe is among the world’s most robust economies, even though the population density of the Eurozone is more than double that of the United States.
I think what your notes indicate (probably accurately) is that poverty rates may be high in high density areas, there is no cause and effect correlation. You can't say that people are poor BECAUSE they live in a high-density area. There also may be more (relatively) wealthy people in a high density area, too. There are just more people in a high density population, period, both rich and poor. One must ask if the people afflicted by poverty would still be poor in a less dense, more rural, area. When it comes to political turbulence, where people can band together to resist established political power might that result in more turbulence than where people are more isolated in less densely populated areas? More study may be required to find a direct cause and effect between poverty levels and population density as it relates to political turbulence. So, both may be partially correct or, if there is no direct correlation, Marge is correct, although political turbulence may be more common in high density areas where poverty is predominant, as in Africa and the Mideast, as opposed to Europe, where people are generally more affluent.
To determine who is correct, let's break down the arguments made by Marge and Mason.
Marge argues that there is no direct correlation between population density and poverty. This is supported by the fact that Western Europe, despite having a higher population density than the United States, has a robust economy. In this case, higher population density does not result in poverty.
On the other hand, Mason argues that population density is normally associated with poverty and political instability. This is true in many areas of the Mideast and Africa. In these regions, high population density has indeed led to extreme poverty and political turbulence.
Based on the information provided, Marge's argument that there is no direct correlation between population density and poverty appears more accurate. While there are cases where high population density is associated with poverty and political instability, there are also cases where it is not. The example of Western Europe supports Marge's claim that population density alone does not determine the level of poverty or political stability.
Therefore, the correct answer is C. Marge is correct.