Please, explain this question to me.

[mariselaclovis]

P: In 1950, the majority of Americans lived outside of urban areas. Today, the majority of Americans live in urban areas.

(A): (The proportion of Americans living in urban areas is greater today than it has been in the past.) I chose that answer. Please, explain why it is wrong.

(A): (The proportional rise of urban populations represents the fact that non-urban populations have decreased.) THIS IS THE RIGHT ANSWER

C: Since any shrinkage of population requires a reorganization of societal structure, non-urban American communities have had to go through such a reorganization.

Thank you.

Michela

[maryadkins]

So our core is:

A greater proportion of Americans live in urban areas than used to

-->

Since any shrinkage of population requires a reorganization of societal structure, non-urban American communities have had to go through such a reorganization

But maybe the overall population has increased? Think about it this way. Say it used to be that we had a population of 10, and 6 lived OUTSIDE urban areas but 4 lived in urban areas. Then, the population grew to 100 and things switched. Now, 60 people live in urban areas and 40 live in non-urban. The PROPORTION of people living in non-urban has gone down (from 60% to 40%) but the total number has gone up (from 6 to 40).

In other words, we don't know that there has been an overall "shrinkage" in population of people non-urban areas. That's assumed. That's what the correct assumption gives us.

The first assumption is restating what we already know—that a greater percentage (proportion/majority...) of Americans are living in urban areas.

Hope this helps...