Why do you think there is oftentimes a mismatch between dynamic cities and dynamic economies?

I have a lot of family that lives in the Dallas-Fort Worth Area. No offense to the good people of North Texas, but DFW is not exactly the most livable place in America. The summers there are very hot and humid and the winters are cold and rainy but without snow. It's spread out, hard to navigate, and poor public transport. Houston, San Antonio, and Austin are all more culturally vibrant cities within the state of Texas. Sports in that city consist of talking so much about the 90s Cowboys that you wouldn't know they had four other sports teams that are fairly successful. There's some fun things to do, Six Flags and the Texas State Fair are a good time, but ask yourself, when you think of iconic American cities, does Dallas ever come to mind.

Despite this, DFW is one of the richest cities on earth. They have more millionaires than New York and have been one of the biggest hubs of innovation, finance, petroleum, transportation, and several other industries not just in the US, but worldwide for the past 40 years.

As mentioned in Chapter Six of New Geography of Jobs, there's oftentimes a mismatch between cities that are live-able and culturally vibrant, and those that become major hubs of innovation. Moretti sights Berlin as one of Europe's most interesting cities, but also as one with few jobs and high unemployment. Here in the US, cities such as Albuquerque, New Orleans, and Baltimore are far more interesting than Dallas, but struggle economically.

Why does this occur? Shouldn't firm be more interested in locating in more interesting places that workers would be attracted to, or are the dynamics of labor geography simply too multi varied and unpredictable to explain why Dallas is an economic hub and New Orleans is not.

PART I

Researchers in the corporate office of an airline wonder if there is a significant difference between the cost of a flight on Priceline.com vs. the airline's own website. A random sample of 16 flights were tracked on Priceline and the airline's website and the average difference between the vendors was $4.251 with a standard deviation of $9.2763. The 99% confidence paired-t interval for price (Priceline - Airline Site) was (-2.5826, 11.0846). Which of the following is the appropriate interpretation?

PART II

A survey conducted by General Motors of 38 drivers in America, 33 indicated that they would prefer a car with a sunroof over one without. When estimating the proportion of all Americans who would prefer a car with a sunroof over one without with 90% confidence, what is the margin of error?

PART III

A U.S. census bureau pollster noted that in 379 random households surveyed, 218 occupants owned their own home. What is the 99% confidence interval estimate of the proportion of American households who own their own home?

What impact do lower fuel cost and other changes have on airlines net income? American Airlines group ( AAL ), the world's biggest Airline, has been reporting record profits in recent quarters. United Continental Holdings and Southwest Airlines also reported record profits. Part of what has contributed to the record it profits has been the decline in the cost of oil. the price of oil has fallen during 2014; we are spending much less at the gas pump to fill out cars. The airlines are also experiencing the effects of low oil prices; the price of jet fuel is down 18% since August 2014. Increased revenues have also contributed to the high profits in the airline industry. Overall, Airfares are up 3% for 2014. according to airlines for America, an Industry trade group. In addition, planes have been about 85% full in 2014, which is a record high for the airline industry. On the other hand, Airline spent more on fuel in 2014 than in 2010. Airlines also spent more on labor due to higher renegotiated labor contracts. Questions: A. what each of the following changes Increase or Decrease an Airlines net income (consider each item independently)? B. What income statement account would be impacted by each item? 1. The 3% increase in airfare (ticket prices). 2. The 18% decrease in the price of per gallon of jet fuel. 3. The increase in the number of seats sold. 4. The increase in the total spent on Jet fuel. 5. The increase in the cost of Labor contracts. 6. Have you experienced hirer or lower ticket prices over the last 2 years? 7. What are other ways that Airlines use to increase Revenue? 8. What are other causes for decline in the revenue of airlines? What are other factors that increase or decrease expenses of Airlines?

Major health studies try very hard to select a sample that is representative of the various ethnic groups making up the U.S. population. Here is the breakdown, by ethnicity, of subjects enrolled in a major study of sleep apnea:

The known ethnic distribution in the United States, according to census data, is as follows:

a. We want to know if the data from the sleep apnea study support the claim that the ethnicity of the subjects fits the ethnic composition of the U.S. population. What does the null hypothesis for this test state?

1. All five counts are equal.
2. All five sample proportions are equal.
3. All five population proportions are equal.
4. All five population proportions are equal to their respective U.S. census proportions.

b. What is the expected count of Hispanics under the null hypothesis (show calculation)?

a. 277

b. 25.207

c. 572.754

d. 152.72

c. At significance level alpha = 1%, what should you conclude

1. a. composition of the U.S. population.
2. b. The data are consistent with a uniform distribution of ethnicities.
3. c. The data prove that the population studied matches the ethnic composition of the U.S. population.
4. e. We are unable to conclude anything because the test assumptions are not met.

Shootings Gun control and the Virginia Tech massacre By Adam Gopnik The cell phones in the pockets of the dead students were still ringing when we were told that it was wrong to ask why. As the police cleared the bodies from the Virginia Tech engineering building, the cell phones rang, in the eccentric varieties of ring tones, as parents kept trying to see if their children were O.K. To imagine the feelings of the police as they carried the bodies and heard the ringing is heartrending; to imagine the feelings of the parents who were calling—dread, desperate hope for a sudden answer and the bliss of reassurance, dawning grief—is unbearable. But the parents, and the rest of us, were told that it was not the right moment to ask how the shooting had happened—specifically, why an obviously disturbed student, with a history of mental illness, was able to buy guns whose essential purpose is to kill people—and why it happens over and over again in America. At a press conference, Virginia’s governor, Tim Kaine, said, “People who want to . . . make it their political hobby horse to ride, I’ve got nothing but loathing for them. . . . At this point, what it’s about is comforting family members . . . and helping this community heal. And so to those who want to try to make this into some little crusade, I say take that elsewhere.” If the facts weren’t so horrible, there might be something touching in the Governor’s deeply American belief that “healing” can take place magically, without the intervening practice called “treating.” The logic is unusual but striking: the aftermath of a terrorist attack is the wrong time to talk about security, the aftermath of a death from lung cancer is the wrong time to talk about smoking and the tobacco industry, and the aftermath of a car crash is the wrong time to talk about seat belts. People talked about the shooting, of course, but much of the conversation was devoted to musings on the treatment of mental illness in universities, the problem of “narcissism,” violence in the media and in popular culture, copycat killings, the alienation of immigrant students, and the question of Evil. Some people, however—especially people outside America—were eager to talk about it in another way, and even to embark on a little crusade. The whole world saw that the United States has more gun violence than other countries because we have more guns and are willing to sell them to madmen who want to kill people. Every nation has violent loners, and they tend to have remarkably similar profiles from one country and culture to the next. And every country has known the horror of having a lunatic get his hands on a gun and kill innocent people. But on a recent list of the fourteen worst mass shootings in Western democracies since the nineteen-sixties the United States claimed seven, and, just as important, no other country on the list has had a repeat performance as severe as the first. In Dunblane, Scotland, in 1996, a gunman killed sixteen children and a teacher at their school. Afterward, the British gun laws, already restrictive, were tightened—it’s now against the law for any private citizen in the United Kingdom to own the kinds of guns that Cho Seung-Hui used at Virginia Tech—and nothing like Dunblane has occurred there since. In Quebec, after a school shooting took the lives of fourteen women in 1989, the survivors helped begin a gun-control movement that resulted in legislation bringing stronger, though far from sufficient, gun laws to Canada. (There have been a couple of subsequent shooting sprees, but on a smaller scale, and with far fewer dead.) In the Paris suburb of Nanterre, in 2002, a man killed eight people at a municipal meeting. Gun control became a key issue in the Presidential election that year, and there has been no repeat incident. So there is no American particularity about loners, disenfranchised immigrants, narcissism, alienated youth, complex moral agency, or Evil. There is an American particularity about guns. The arc is apparent. Forty years ago, a man killed fourteen people on a college campus in Austin, Texas; this year, a man killed thirty-two in Blacksburg, Virginia. Not enough was done between those two massacres to make weapons of mass killing harder to obtain. In fact, while campus killings continued—Columbine being the most notorious, the shooting in the one-room Amish schoolhouse among the most recent—weapons have got more lethal, and, in states like Virginia, where the N.R.A. is powerful, no harder to buy. Reducing the number of guns available to crazy people will neither relieve them of their insanity nor stop them from killing. Making it more difficult to buy guns that kill people is, however, a rational way to reduce the number of people killed by guns. Nations with tight gun laws have, on the whole, less gun violence; countries with somewhat restrictive gun laws have some gun violence; countries with essentially no gun laws have a lot of gun violence. (If you work hard, you can find a statistical exception hiding in a corner, but exceptions are just that. Some people who smoke their whole lives don’t get lung cancer, while some people who never smoke do; still, the best way not to get lung cancer is not to smoke.) It’s true that in renewing the expired ban on assault weapons we can’t guarantee that someone won’t shoot people with a semi-automatic pistol, and that by controlling semi-automatic pistols we can’t reduce the chances of someone killing people with a rifle. But the point of lawmaking is not to act as precisely as possible, in order to punish the latest crime; it is to act as comprehensively as possible, in order to prevent the next one. Semi-automatic Glocks and Walthers, Cho’s weapons, are for killing people. They are not made for hunting, and it’s not easy to protect yourself with them. (If having a loaded semi-automatic on hand kept you safe, cops would not be shot as often as they are.) Rural America is hunting country, and hunters need rifles and shotguns—with proper licensing, we’ll live with the risk. There is no reason that any private citizen in a democracy should own a handgun. At some point, that simple truth will register. Until it does, phones will ring for dead children, and parents will be told not to ask why. Question: Can you help me to with possible outline for critical review essay on the above essay?

A bullet will hit a target which is a circle with radius of 20 meter. If the bullet assumed hit the circle and the probabilty of it to hit all points in the circle is the same. What is the probability of the bullet to hit the target at the area with the distance of 2 meter from the center of the circle to the west and east AND 3 meter from the center of the circle to the north and south?

What velocity would a proton need to circle Earth 1,325 km above the magnetic equator, where Earth's magnetic field is directed horizontally north and has a magnitude of 4.00 ✕ 10⁻⁸ T? (Assume the raduis of the Earth is 6,380 km.)

____ magnitude in m/s

____ direction (either to the east, to the north, to the west, or to the south)

When the flat open side of a charged coil was brought near the flat open side of the coil connected to a galvanometer (both coils parallel to each other), the galvanometer deflects very little. How do you know they need to be parallel and why is this the case? Where is north and south if the coil is acting like a bar magnet?

Environmental Impact on Avocados exported from Mexico and Imported from USA. Please cite sources only journal article or books.

Discuss the significance of each of the countries’ locations:

Is the importer/exporter located in the North or the South? Why is this significant?

How has the environment changed due to the globalization processes associated with the exportation/importation of the food?

Two radio antennas are 140 m apart on a north-south line. The two antennas radiate in phase at a frequency of 5.2 MHz. All radio measurements are made far from the antennas. The smallest angle, reckoned east of north from the antennas, at which constructive interference of two radio waves occurs, is closest to:

28