Syd wrote:
QFT wrote:
Still, though, what I said about ratios is true regardless. They should have written ratios instead of just total numbers.
Some states with lesser numbers have higher ratios. Look at District of Columbia for example. It has one of the smaller numbers yet one of the largest ratios. So if you think its dangerous, then why lure people there?
I like your idea of including the ratios. The more details, the better. I think they should also show the data of the individual cities. I'm sure that Seattle has many more cases than Spokane, but if they only lump the cases into the category of "Washington," it makes the whole state look bad.
Yeah, I agree with you about the cities. I think being in a "dangerous" state far away from major cities is better than being in a "safe" state in the middle of a big city -- since the cities is where it is probably concentrated.
That, plus also different states have different sizes. Same goes for cities by the way. But at least within a city you can say that people travel back and forth. But as far as state goes, there is no reason to assume they are any more likely to travel to the opposite side of a huge state then make a short trip across the border to the other state.
Last week, I sent an email to Lauren Gardner asking them to include the information about cities.
When you open the map now, they're showing the towns and cities in the United States.
16 Mar 2020, 7:55 pm
