Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 09-05-2015, 05:07 PM
 
Location: Brooklyn, NYC
1,405 posts, read 2,438,031 times
Reputation: 887

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Country Gentleman View Post
Would you rather be in a jail cell with 500 killers or 20 killers?

I would take the 20 killer jail cell.

More acts of crime means more criminals which means less safe.
You can't be serious.

Please brush up on your percentage/math skills and then come back to us. . .




(if you're too lazy to do it yourself) In the example above (from Eddy) you'd have a higher change of being killed in the smaller town than in the larger city.

2% vs 0.05%
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-05-2015, 06:21 PM
 
2,491 posts, read 2,663,807 times
Reputation: 3388
Like I said, Math and logic aren't for everyone

This discussion reminds me of that show "Are you smarter than a 5th grader"!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2015, 06:24 PM
 
Location: Brooklyn, NYC
1,405 posts, read 2,438,031 times
Reputation: 887
Quote:
Originally Posted by Country Gentleman View Post
you are randomly deciding to divide by number of people. That is meaningless.

You don't care about many non-killers are in the jail cell. Your chance of getting murdered are greater if there are more killers in the jail cell. I don't see how you can deny this.

500 is a lot more than 20.
If only you could just hear how hard I'm laughing right now. . . . LMFAO! ! !

I'm literally in tears.

I can't. I'm losing brain cells conversing with you. Nice trolling though.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2015, 06:53 PM
 
3,615 posts, read 2,305,976 times
Reputation: 2239
Actually compiling and especially crime data has tons of variables including the fact that some communities are much more vigilant in their policing and neighborhood watch and reporting crimes and some communities do a very poor job of policing their areas and how crime is reported.

I used to work for a company that compiled crime data and we also did some traffic data for montgomery county in maryland. Compiling crime data is one thing but analyzing that data is filled with variables you have to take into account. If you want a good listing of how crime data is compiled and calculating crime rate, bait analytics site has a web site that shows examples. This is a basic formula

BAIR Analytics | Analytical Software and Services for Public Safety and Defense.

Community A has a population of 50,000. Last year they had 5 murders.
Community B has a population of 5,000. Last year they had 2 murders.

Crime rates are normally written out as number of crimes per 100,000.

a formula would look like this

(Number of Crimes / Population) x 100,000 = Crime Rate Per 100,000

Community A
(5 / 50,000) x 100,000 = 10 murders per 100,000 population

Community B
(2 / 5,000) x 100,000 = 40 murders per 100,000 population

In analytics you normalize populations with actual calculations, and that is just the beginning if you ever want to analyze crime data in any meaningful way. You have to look at the areas rates of reporting crimes and how localized the crime data is

I posted a thread about the 25 most dangerous neighborhood in the US and Pittsburgh had two neighborhoods in the top 10, but just saying two neighborhoods in pittsburgh have high crime rates doesnt mean the majority of pittsburgh is any way a dangerous place to be.

Moderator cut: link removed, linking to competitor sites is not allowed

Last edited by Yac; 09-09-2015 at 08:20 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2015, 06:55 PM
 
10,275 posts, read 10,232,984 times
Reputation: 10644
Quote:
Originally Posted by Country Gentleman View Post
you are randomly deciding to divide by number of people. That is meaningless.

You don't care about many non-killers are in the jail cell. Your chance of getting murdered are greater if there are more killers in the jail cell. I don't see how you can deny this.

500 is a lot more than 20.

A higher chance of being a victim of a crime is based on number of criminals in the area. It is like electrons that revolve around the nucleus, if you have more electrons, you have more collisions. If we pretend innocents and criminals are electrons, more criminal electrons means more collisions with innocent electrons. it is probability
Wow. You really aren't a fan of math or logic, are you?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2015, 07:11 PM
 
Location: Houston
151 posts, read 166,581 times
Reputation: 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Country Gentleman View Post
Let's say there are two lakes of the same size.

There is a narrow bridge pedestrian bridge over the lake. No more than 6 inches wide. Falling from the bridge is a real possibility.

In lake A, there are 80 killer sharks.

In the lake B, there are 400 killer sharks.

Everybody in the little city next to each lake is forced to cross that lake everyday on the narrow pedestrian bridge.

Let's say 40 people live near the Lake A with 80 killer sharks. Thus, 2 killer sharks per person.

Let's say 400 people live next to the Lake B with 400 killer sharks. Thus, only 1 killer shark per person.

Now it appears some of you are saying that you would prefer to go over Lake B, based on per capita stat being lower.

I would prefer to go over Lake A, because 5 times as many sharks are in Lake B.

I believe anybody would choose to go over the lake with less sharks, if their life was going to be at risk. They wouldn't take the time to calculate the number of sharks per person in the nearby city.

Thusly and therefore, I submit per capita is a worthless stat.
Question: Do the Sharks have laser beams on their heads?

Dude, you need to stop now and cut your losses. This has reached the point of absurdity.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2015, 07:19 PM
 
Location: Brooklyn, NYC
1,405 posts, read 2,438,031 times
Reputation: 887
When you can't tell the difference between someone being serious or just really good at trolling. . . .



Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2015, 07:22 PM
 
Location: Houston
151 posts, read 166,581 times
Reputation: 146
Quote:
Originally Posted by StuddedLeather View Post
When you can't tell the difference between someone being serious or just really good at trolling. . . .



Tragically I think he is serious. This might be the only time ever it would be preferable if he were a troll.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2015, 07:47 PM
 
Location: WA Desert, Seattle native
9,398 posts, read 8,730,687 times
Reputation: 8807
How about "the most beautiful women...what metro are they in?". Give me a break, can anything be more subjective than that?

As for the CSA argument, I can definitely see both sides, but I tend to think this an important measurement because a CSA is a good marketing tool for media and business. Most, not all, CSA's share the same local tv channels, and to some extent radio stations, and this is helpful for business to target customers. Think about it, most will drive a ways to get in on a perceived good deal. Plus how many times have you asked where someone lives and they might give you their specific city, but they usually follow with "it's near (fill in your CSA)."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-05-2015, 08:50 PM
 
Location: Watching half my country turn into Gilead
3,530 posts, read 4,135,345 times
Reputation: 2919
Quote:
Originally Posted by NOLA101 View Post
Not really. The biggest concentration of wealth on the planet is in Manhattan, which is also the densest place in the Americas.

In Europe, the biggest concentrations of wealth are in London and Paris. London has medium density, Paris has extreme density.

In Asia, the biggest concentration of wealth is in Hong Kong, which also is the densest first world city.
The fact that you had to preface "First World" for Hong Kong lets me know that high density coincides more with poverty than wealth. Wealthy places can be extremely dense, sure, I'm not arguing that. But in reality, the Hong Kong's, Paris', Barcelona's and Manhattan's of the world tend to be the exceptions to the rule. The truly most dense places on Earth are not wealthy. Any list will have whole South Asian and South East Asian cities dominating, with small pockets of First World metros making the list.

Furthermore, I'm not so sure the densest residential parts of dense First World cities are truly the wealthiest. Before they knocked it down, Kowloon Walled City was Hong Kong's densest area--and it was a hellhole. Sure, skyscrapers and office buildings will drive up density during the day for the First World dense cities. But residentially? The Upper East Side is the densest part of Manhattan today, and it's loaded, but again, that's the exception to the rule. The rest of the dense listing is Morningside Heights, the LES, Stuyvesant Town and Central Harlem--aka areas with tons of low income projects. The rest of the city probably follows suit (LIC vs Forest Hills, etc). Wealth spreads people apart residentially.

"Although Manhattan has gotten taller in the last hundred years, it has (like nearly every city in the developed world) gotten much less dense. Why? One major factor is wealth: Manhattan is richer than ever and rich people take up more space. (Between 1974 and 1996, as Madrid grew wealthy, the built area of the city expanded by 50 percent, though population hardly budged.)"

2015 - Stats and the City | Crain's New York Business

Megacities And The Density Delusion: Why More People Doesn't Equal More Wealth

Manhattan Is Actually Less Dense Today Than 100 Years Ago - Cool Graphic Thing - Curbed NY

The emptying of New York City - Salon.com

Last edited by qworldorder; 09-05-2015 at 09:11 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > General U.S. > City vs. City

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top