you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 67 points 2 months ago (2 children)

Either there is an extra zero or a missing decimal point?

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 72 points 2 months ago* (3 children)

    Both of the % signs in the reply should be removed as well.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 83 points 2 months ago (4 children)

    "% per 100k" caused physical pain in my head.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 child)

    don't you know 07% out of 100k is lower than 05.7k out of 100%

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    If it’s 5.7% per 100k, what percent is it per 200k?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    I'm also annoyed that they did the homicide rate as per-capita, but the homelessness numbers are given without comparison to total population

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 2 months ago

    Then going on to cite a specific food security stat on one hand, and leave it vague on the other.

    I totally believe the numbers favor them, but that's all the more reason to get them right ..

  • source
  • parent