In this task, you are given a passage and a question regarding that passage. You must determine whether or not the question is answerable from the given passage. If a question is answerable, output should be 'True', otherwise 'False'. You must not consider any other information that is not provided in the passage while labelling True or False.

Example input: Passage: Madonna released the Material Girl clothing line, which she designed with her daughter, Lourdes. The 1980s inspired clothing line, borrowed from Madonna's punk-girl style when she rose to fame in the 1980s, was released under the Macy's label. Madonna also opened a series of fitness centers around the world named Hard Candy Fitness. In November 2011, Madonna and MG Icon announced the release of a second fashion brand called Truth or Dare by Madonna to include footwear, underclothing, and accessories. She also directed her second feature film, W.E., a biographic about the affair between King Edward VIII and Wallis Simpson; it was co-written with Alek Keshishian. Critical and commercial response to the film was negative. Madonna contributed the ballad "Masterpiece" for the film's soundtrack, which won her a Golden Globe Award for Best Original Song. Question: Material Girl clothing line is released under which brand?
Example output: True
Example explanation: The answer to given question is 'Macy's', which can be determined from the second sentence of the paragraph "The 1980s inspired clothing line, borrowed from Madonna's punk-girl style when she rose to fame in the 1980s, was released under the Macy's label". Since this question is answerable, the output is True.
Q: Passage: The smaller the economic inequality, the more waste and pollution is created, resulting in many cases, in more environmental degradation. This can be explained by the fact that as the poor people in the society become more wealthy, it increases their yearly carbon emissions. This relation is expressed by the Environmental Kuznets Curve (EKC).[not in citation given] It should be noted here however that in certain cases, with great economic inequality, there is nonetheless not more waste and pollution created as the waste/pollution is cleaned up better afterwards (water treatment, filtering, ...).... Also note that the whole of the increase in environmental degradation is the result of the increase of emissions per person being multiplied by a multiplier. If there were fewer people however, this multiplier would be lower, and thus the amount of environmental degradation would be lower as well. As such, the current high level of population has a large impact on this as well. If (as WWF argued), population levels would start to drop to a sustainable level (1/3 of current levels, so about 2 billion people), human inequality can be addressed/corrected, while still not resulting in an increase of environmental damage. Question: How could human inequality be addressed without resulting in an decrease of environmental damage?
A:
False