Thursday, May 29, 2014
Wednesday, April 23, 2014
Gapminder Screencast & Analysis
Variable set 1:
www.bit.ly/1iczbOm
Variable set 2:
www.bit.ly/1mzXdKZ
Part 1:
a. Births attended by skilled staff (% of total): The percentage of births attended by a skilled staff (ex: midwives). Expressed in percentage.
Income per person (GDP per capita): The average amount of income per person. (GDP/population) GDP = the market value of all officially recognized goods produced within a country. Expressed in numbers.
Malnutrition: Lack of proper nutrition; which is caused by not having enough to eat or not eating the right things. Expressed in percentage.
Life expectancy: The average and expected age that you are going to live to. Expressed in years.
b. As the country develops economically the people will have a higher income and more people will be able to afford having a midwife when they give birth. Countries that have not developed as much economically may not afford to hire a midwife and will have to give birth using unskilled staff. Countries that have not developed economically will have more people suffering malnutrition as well. People may not be able to afford better foods or they might live in a food desert. Countries developed economically will have a better life expectancy. There is medication that they can be treated with if they are sick. The people are most likely living in better living conditions than before. Also, less people are suffering from malnutrition which will probably bring the life expectancy up.
Part 2:
a. The USA, Australia, and Western Europe developed earlier than most of the other countries. Qatar and Singapore developed very quickly as well. Most of the African countries have high malnutrition, low percentages of births attended by skilled staff, and a low GDP per capita. India has the highest percentage of malnutrition. The US and western Europe have low malnutrition percentages. China’s malnutrition percentage is pretty low as well. Chad has the lowest percentage of births attended by skilled staff and the US and western Europe have a high percentage. Australia has a high percentage of births attended by skilled staff as well. Congo has the lowest GDP per capita.
b. Indonesia was low on percentage of births attended by skilled staff at first but recently the percentage quickly went up to 82%. This probably happened because Indonesia had its industrial revolution. Bangladesh has a low GDP per capita and percent of births attended by skilled staff. It is probably because they are involved in things like making the tee shirts with very little pay. The country is probably being held back because of things like poverty. India has a very high percentage of malnutrition. It is probably because the country is very populated. India’s life expectancy and GDP per capita is not the lowest because there is a big gap between the rich and poor. The southern part of the country is developed. and the north is still developing. China’s GDP per capita raised a lot recently because it has industrialized.
Monday, February 24, 2014
Crossing the Line GIS Activity
Map analysis
Where is it?
Syria:
For the country splitting apart, I chose Syria. Syria is located in the middle east. The new state would be called the Alawite state. The location of the possible new state is on the western side of Syria.
Korea:
For the countries merging, I chose North Korea and South Korea. The two countries are both located in north-east Asia. North Korea is just north of South Korea. The new state would be called Korea.
WHY is it there?
Syria:
The Alawites want to break away from Syria because of religious disputes. The Alawites also fear that Assad regime wants to ethnically cleanse the Alawite heartland. They are concerned with Syria's third city called Homs. They believe it is likely to fall to the regime military and Hezbollah. It would be the most striking gain by the pro-Assad forces in the civil war. They are having political issues as well.
Korea: The Koreas have religious similarities. They have a history together as well. They would have that feeling that they have "been through so much together". Both the countries speak the same language, Korean. Also they are not far apart. The two countries are right next to each other. If they combine as a country it will mean more land which generally means more power.
Why are they THERE?
Syria: Syria and the Alawite state are separated culturally. The French justified the separation and the Alawites are trying to separate themselves from the mainstream nationalist culture. The Alawite state borders Lebanon on the south.
Korea: North Korea and South Korea are right next to each other so it would be easier to merge than if they were a few countries away. They are pretty similar culturally. They originally borrowd their culture from China.
What difference does it make:
Syria: If Syria splits up it's another country in the world. The Alawites would probably have a hard time starting off as a new country and they might need a lot of help from other countries. There could also be a lot of conflict between the Alawite state and Syria because they just split up.
Korea: If Korea combines then there is one less country in the world. Hopefully they would get along pretty smoothly but there could still be some disputes starting off. They may have a better economy and more power with the two states combined.
View Larger Map
Where is it?
Syria:
For the country splitting apart, I chose Syria. Syria is located in the middle east. The new state would be called the Alawite state. The location of the possible new state is on the western side of Syria.
Korea:
For the countries merging, I chose North Korea and South Korea. The two countries are both located in north-east Asia. North Korea is just north of South Korea. The new state would be called Korea.
WHY is it there?
Syria:
The Alawites want to break away from Syria because of religious disputes. The Alawites also fear that Assad regime wants to ethnically cleanse the Alawite heartland. They are concerned with Syria's third city called Homs. They believe it is likely to fall to the regime military and Hezbollah. It would be the most striking gain by the pro-Assad forces in the civil war. They are having political issues as well.
Korea: The Koreas have religious similarities. They have a history together as well. They would have that feeling that they have "been through so much together". Both the countries speak the same language, Korean. Also they are not far apart. The two countries are right next to each other. If they combine as a country it will mean more land which generally means more power.
Why are they THERE?
Syria: Syria and the Alawite state are separated culturally. The French justified the separation and the Alawites are trying to separate themselves from the mainstream nationalist culture. The Alawite state borders Lebanon on the south.
Korea: North Korea and South Korea are right next to each other so it would be easier to merge than if they were a few countries away. They are pretty similar culturally. They originally borrowd their culture from China.
What difference does it make:
Syria: If Syria splits up it's another country in the world. The Alawites would probably have a hard time starting off as a new country and they might need a lot of help from other countries. There could also be a lot of conflict between the Alawite state and Syria because they just split up.
Korea: If Korea combines then there is one less country in the world. Hopefully they would get along pretty smoothly but there could still be some disputes starting off. They may have a better economy and more power with the two states combined.
View Larger Map
Wednesday, January 8, 2014
Sunday, October 27, 2013
Census Data Mapper Map & Analysis - October 2013.
LINK to this map on Google Drive.
There seems to be regions in the western part of the United States with big patches of old people. But there is also a lot of patches of not so many old people in the western part of the United States as well. There is particularly a lot of old people in Florida and some of the other southern regions of the US like Texas and Nevada.. There is quite a bit of old people in the mid-western part of the United States. I noticed a lot of old people in the northwest too. Hawaii and Alaska have hardly any old people.
I would assume that a lot of old people would live in the Southern area because it is warmer there. The warm weather is probably easier on them. A lot of results probably came up in Nevada and not in the states by it because the neighboring areas are a lot less populated. The little-to-none results probably came up in Alaska and Hawaii because Alaska is so cold and those areas are not as populated. There were probably a lot of results in the mid-west compared to the west because it is generally more populated. It is probably easier to live in the mid-west than some of the other states.
It makes a difference if more old people live in one place than another. A place with a lot of old people and fewer young people would be a lot different than a place with a lot of young people and few old people. In the places with a lot of old people the younger people will have to work to take care of the older ones since they can’t work and pay for the nursing homes. It puts much more of a burden on the younger people of the society. The society itself would be different with more old people or young people. If you live in a place with a lot more old people you may be talking with a lot more people older than you than with people younger than you. Most of your friends may be people that are older than you. The benefits of a society with older people may be that so you can learn from your older friends because they most likely have a lot more experience than you. The challenges may be the economic burden for the young people. Since old people can’t really work the younger people would have to work harder than in some other places.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)