3 ms·
"Australia" has a low population density because most of it has close to no population; it's easy to be mislead by this if you're not aware of how the populatio
by elyobo 6y ago
"Australia" has a low population density because most of it has close to no population; it's easy to be mislead by this if you're not aware of how the population is distributed within a huge area, but the areas where most people live do not have low population density. It's heavily urbanised (more so than the UK), with the vast majority of the population living in reasonably dense metropolitan areas.
It's the willingness and ability to take effective measures, not the geography, that matters.
- lend000 6y agoIf geography and population density have nothing to do with it, then I suppose California isn't one of the world epicenters right now. Australia has a lower population than California, by the way. Obviously, its pop is mostly spread over the east coast, but compared to the UK it's extremely sparse, with no tunnels connecting it to the mainland. It's disingenuous (at best) to think that the island nations that had successful lockdowns were all doing something magically better than other places with significant restrictions to daily life like France, Italy, California, etc. because they couldn't realistically close their borders to ground traffic.
- elyobo 6y agoPopulation density has something to do with it, you're just mistaken about the population density of Australia where people actually live. And obviously you can close a land border as well, it's just a matter of whether you're willing to do it. Australia also imposed tight restrictions on most of the land borders between states.