Frequencies for city variable in ime_gme2552_96_2011 dataset : City | Freq. Percent Cum. ----------------------------------------+----------------------------------- ACKERMAN .. | 1 2.94 2.94 ALABASTER .. | 1 2.94 5.88 ARCADIA .. | 1 2.94 8.82 ARLINGTON .. | 1 2.94 11.76 BROKEN ARROW .. | 1 2.94 14.71 CREIGHTON .. | 1 2.94 17.65 FRISCO .. | 1 2.94 20.59 GARDENA .. | 1 2.94 23.53 HOUSTON .. | 1 2.94 26.47 LONG BEACH .. | 1 2.94 29.41 MEMPHIS .. | 1 2.94 32.35 MESQUITE .. | 1 2.94 35.29 MISHAWAKA .. | 1 2.94 38.24 MUNSTER .. | 1 2.94 41.18 NEWTON .. | 1 2.94 44.12 NORWAY .. | 1 2.94 47.06 PARKERSBURG .. | 1 2.94 50.00 PASADENA .. | 1 2.94 52.94 PERRIS .. | 1 2.94 55.88 PHILADELPHIA .. | 1 2.94 58.82 PINE CITY .. | 1 2.94 61.76 PLANO .. | 1 2.94 64.71 POPLARVILLE .. | 1 2.94 67.65 PUYALLUP .. | 1 2.94 70.59 RANCHO CUCAMONGA .. | 1 2.94 73.53 SALT LAKE CITY .. | 1 2.94 76.47 SAN ANTONIO .. | 1 2.94 79.41 SAN TAN VALLEY .. | 1 2.94 82.35 STILLWATER .. | 1 2.94 85.29 TEXAS CITY .. | 1 2.94 88.24 TISHOMINGO .. | 1 2.94 91.18 WARREN .. | 2 5.88 97.06 YOUNGSTOWN .. | 1 2.94 100.00 ----------------------------------------+----------------------------------- Total | 34 100.00 by Jean Roth , jroth@nber.org , 21 Apr 2018