As most readers know, I think population is one of the most important variables when discussing the economic growth, development, and history of North Dakota. Well, of probably any region really. There are many different aspects to a discussion of population though. It can be a count of people, birth measures, mortality, migration, and so on. Today I focus on age. Why?
I am getting into the weeds a bit for this post. I hear more questions regarding an urban-rural split in the state, and it is not always easy to parse this out. For one thing, the definitions of rural and urban are not universally decided and are relative to some degree. I am originally from Chicago, so no city in North Dakota appears urban to me. As a result I will need to define some terms in order to advance the analysis.
Sorry for the lack of blogging but I was a speaker at the Minneapolis Fed Regional Economic Conditions Conference this Tuesday (link to presentations here). My slides are available from the Fed site as well. I thought I would highlight a few things that got the attention of the audience.
It was a busy week with a visit by the Minneapolis Federal Reserve President, Neel Kashkari. I will post about that later probably. With the other economic news coming out about the shelving of another vote on healthcare overhaul and the release of a tax plan, wages and income seem to be as relevant now as they were in the last few weeks.
In a recent post I discussed the level of annual salary in several categories for North Dakota and some of the implications. I also discussed the rank for the overall average salary. As many of my students would likely think, there is a need to make a correction to those numbers. There are two things that can vary for those annual salary numbers, the distribution of the workforce and the compensation by occupational category. Continue reading More on North Dakota Wages—Standardized Comparisons