View Single Post
Old Posted May 4, 2012, 3:52 PM
bunt_q's Avatar
bunt_q bunt_q is offline
Provincial Bumpkin
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Denver, CO
Posts: 12,664
More importantly, why is Forbes cherry picking a 2005 number to create a story about "comebacks" when they have real 2010 Census numbers to work with now? If you want to have a story about urban comebacks, why not use the numbers everyone else uses with the same 10-year increments. Comparing a 1-year change in 2005 to a 1-year change in 2010 seems completely arbitrary. Not to mention, 1-year numbers could be skewed by any number of factors that don't really represent statistical trends and may very well vanish over a multi-year window. Just an odd methodology.