Some Startling Data on American Cities

By -
Commented on by Scott Sumner.

The fact that really was news to me: Cities NOT in the top 50 in population include New Orleans, St. Louis, Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, and Buffalo.

But they have NFL football teams! How could this be?

Comments

  1. jeremy h.5:50 PM

    Because the cities mentioned *are* in the Top 50 Metro areas:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Table_of_United_States_Metropolitan_Statistical_Areas

    Sumner is using central city data, which can be misleading in a number of ways (including ability to support a pro football team). For example, as a city, San Francisco and Columbus, OH are roughly the same size, but SF MSA is almost 2.5x larger. Or Omaha is slightly larger than Minneapolis as a city, but the Twin Cities MSA is over 3.5x larger.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Bob Murphy12:35 AM

    Gene, there aren't that many people on a football team. Even high schools can field them.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Libertarians, My Libertarians!

By -
Cruel to be kind means that I love you . Because, while I think you are mistaken, your hearts are in the right place -- yes, even you, Silas --  unlike some people . This Breitbart fellow (discussed in the link above), by all appearances, deliberately doctored a video of Shirley Sherrod to make her remarks appear virulently racist, when they had, in fact, the opposite import. I heard that at a recent Austrian conference, some folks were talking about "Callahan's conservative turn." While that description is not entirely inaccurate, I must say that a lot of these people who today call themselves conservative give me the heebie-jeebies.
Read more

"Pre-Galilean" Foolishness

By -
 I am currently reading The Master and His Emissary , which appears to be an excellent book. ("Appears" because I don't know the neuroscience literature well enough to say for sure, yet.) But then on page 186 I find: "Asking cognition, however, to give a perspective on the relationship between cognition and affect is like asking astronomer in the pre-Galilean geocentric world, whether, in his opinion, the sun moves round the earth of the earth around the sun. To ask a question alone would be enough to label one as mad." OK, this is garbage. First of all, it should be pre-Copernican, not pre-Galilean. But much worse is that people have seriously been considering heliocentrism for many centuries before Copernicus. Aristarchus had proposed a heliocentric model in the 4th-century BC. It had generally been considered wrong, but not "mad." (And wrong for scientific reasons: Why, for instance, did we not observe stellar parallax?) And when Copernicus propose...
Read more