<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Newcastle has grown 28 percent since 2000</title>
	<atom:link href="/2009/08/13/newcastle-has-grown-43-percent-since-2000/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://newcastle-news.com/2009/08/13/newcastle-has-grown-43-percent-since-2000</link>
	<description>Newcastle News</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Wed, 09 Sep 2015 13:00:37 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=4.1.7</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: John Gordon</title>
		<link>https://newcastle-news.com/2009/08/13/newcastle-has-grown-43-percent-since-2000/comment-page-1#comment-1082</link>
		<dc:creator><![CDATA[John Gordon]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 15 Aug 2009 19:39:21 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">https://newcastle-news.com/?p=1513#comment-1082</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[I read with interest the recent article on population growth in Newcastle.  The headline was a real grabber:  &quot;Newcastle Has Grown 43 Percent Since 2000&quot;.  Quite impressive.

That is, until you actually read the article.  According to the writer, the city population increased from 7,737 to 9,925 over the nine-year interval.  As any fifth grader could tell you, this is an increase of just over 28%, or about 3% annually.  

Since the annual rate for the state as a whole was about 1%, this is still rapid growth. But by overstating the rate for our city, you leave the reader wondering what else in the article might be inaccurate, exaggerated, or flat out wrong. ]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I read with interest the recent article on population growth in Newcastle.  The headline was a real grabber:  &#8220;Newcastle Has Grown 43 Percent Since 2000&#8243;.  Quite impressive.</p>
<p>That is, until you actually read the article.  According to the writer, the city population increased from 7,737 to 9,925 over the nine-year interval.  As any fifth grader could tell you, this is an increase of just over 28%, or about 3% annually.  </p>
<p>Since the annual rate for the state as a whole was about 1%, this is still rapid growth. But by overstating the rate for our city, you leave the reader wondering what else in the article might be inaccurate, exaggerated, or flat out wrong. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
