413047-Underground-Commercial-Sex-Economy

Example
The tables below (Table 3.12 Cross-City Sex Proxy Ratios) list the cross-city ratios of the sex proxy , in 2003
and 2007. The table tells us, for example, that in 2003 the proxy for the underground cash-based sex economy in
Miami ( was 2.10 times what it was in Dallas ( . This single ratio entry would give rise to two linear
constraints:
In other words, although the data we have available suggests that the 2003 Miami underground cash-based sex
economy is 110 percent larger than that in Dallas, we recognize that there may be some imprecision, and allow for
it to be between 68 percent and152 percent larger. The next table (Table 3.13 Cross-Year Sex Proxy Ratios) lists
the cross-year ratios of the sex proxy S^* (value in 2007 over the value in 2003). The table tells us, for example,
that the underground cash-based sex economy in Miami (c_3) in 2007 was 81 percent of what it was in 2003. This
single ratio entry would give rise to two linear constraints:
Note that the entries in the tables below are derived directly from the values on the sex proxy as listed in
Table 3.7 Final Values of Proxy
Table 3.12 Cross-City Sex Proxy Ratios
2003 Atlanta Dallas Denver Miami San Diego Seattle DC
Atlanta 1.00 0.58 0.20 1.07 0.52 0.18 0.65
Dallas 1.86 1.00 0.48 2.10 1.25 0.42 1.29
Denver 5.04 2.11 1.00 4.20 1.82 0.89 2.73
Miami 0.98 0.60 0.33 1.00 0.53 0.37 0.71
San Diego 1.92 0.80 0.69 2.03 1.00 0.54 1.14
Seattle 5.68 2.37 1.13 4.44 2.15 1.00 2.37
DC 1.59 0.79 0.37 1.70 0.88 0.46 1.00
39