A colleague and I are working on a predictive analytic model for hockey. Why? Because there is data available, and it seems a nice extension and a fun thing to do. And I really like working with numbers and analyzing data.
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.
The only difference between death and taxes is that death doesn’t get worse every time Congress meets.