Hmm, your fun fact (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_the_number_of_billionaires http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_the_numb.

Hmm, your fun fact (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_the_number_of_billionaires http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_U.S._states_by_the_numb...) is fun, I agree, but also misleading. According to the above link, Oklahoma has 5 billionaires, Oregon has 2, Ohio has 4. New York, at #4 per capita, has 88; California has 111. The "surprise" is mostly due to low counts. For any process (like wealth) with large extremes, if you subdivide it into bins, you are going to get local extrema just due to low counts. The only mildly informative thing is Oklahoma (oil and gas). Ohio is a few elderly (ages 77, 74, 70) manufacturing folks -- their count seems to have dipped to 3, according to http://www.forbes.com/billionaires/list/#version:static_search:ohio http://www.forbes.com/billionaires/list/#version:static_sear..., which would remove Ohio from the top 3 per capita.