Some people think a rise in the standard of living in a country only seems to benefit cities more than rural areas. What problems may those differences cause? How to reduce this problem?

When standards of living increase, it is primarily urban

residents

, not those in the countryside, who benefit. In my opinion,

this

can lead to opposite problems related to

population

density and is best mitigated by governmental action. Inequality in terms of standard of living engenders

population

problems for

cities

and rural regions.

Cities

have become over-populated in the

last

century as they offer a wider range of educational, occupational, and recreational options. Elevated

population

density means that

although

residents

can enjoy a higher standard of living generally, they must

also

overcome concomitant effects from overcrowding

such

as more traffic, less sanitary conditions, and higher crime rates. The inverse problem exists outside

cities

as

residents

leave and locals struggle to earn a living in sparsely populated towns and villages. These related problems can best be countered by the authorities. There are various initiatives that could be implemented. One real-world example of

this

would be in Japan where the government in recent years has addressed dwindling

population

numbers in the countryside by auctioning off country homes cheaply. Prospective home-owners are often able to buy houses nearly for free if they agree to live and work in a town with few

residents

. Another possible measure would be for governments to invest more in urban infrastructure. Since migrations to

cities

are likely inevitable,

this

is a more pragmatic tactic. In conclusion, the inverse issues created for rural and urban areas by rising standards of living can be effectively controlled if governments intervene.

This

issue will only become more pressing as the global middle class continues to grow.