Chickasaw vs Bahamian Community Comparison

COMPARE

Chickasaw
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNepaleseNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPaiutePakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPimaPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuebloPuerto RicanPuget Sound SalishRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSeminoleSenegaleseSerbianSierra LeoneanSiouxSlavicSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSoviet UnionSpaniardSpanishSpanish AmericanSpanish American IndianSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSudaneseSwedishSwissSyrianTaiwaneseThaiTlingit-HaidaTohono O'OdhamTonganTrinidadian and TobagonianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUgandanUkrainianUruguayanVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYup'ikZimbabwean
Immigration
NonimmigrantsImmigrantsAfghanistanAfricaAlbaniaArgentinaArmeniaAsiaAustraliaAustriaBahamasBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBoliviaBosnia and HerzegovinaBrazilBulgariaBurma/MyanmarCabo VerdeCambodiaCameroonCanadaCaribbeanCentral AmericaChileChinaColombiaCongoCosta RicaCroatiaCubaCzechoslovakiaDenmarkDominicaDominican RepublicEastern AfricaEastern AsiaEastern EuropeEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEnglandEritreaEthiopiaEuropeFijiFranceGermanyGhanaGreeceGrenadaGuatemalaGuyanaHaitiHondurasHong KongHungaryIndiaIndonesiaIranIraqIrelandIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJordanKazakhstanKenyaKoreaKuwaitLaosLatin AmericaLatviaLebanonLiberiaLithuaniaMalaysiaMexicoMicronesiaMiddle AfricaMoldovaMoroccoNepalNetherlandsNicaraguaNigeriaNorth AmericaNorth MacedoniaNorthern AfricaNorthern EuropeNorwayOceaniaPakistanPanamaPeruPhilippinesPolandPortugalRomaniaRussiaSaudi ArabiaScotlandSenegalSerbiaSierra LeoneSingaporeSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth AmericaSouth Central AsiaSouth Eastern AsiaSouthern EuropeSpainSri LankaSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudanSwedenSwitzerlandSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUruguayUzbekistanVenezuelaVietnamWest IndiesWestern AfricaWestern AsiaWestern EuropeYemenZaireZimbabweAzores
Bahamian
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNepaleseNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPaiutePakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPimaPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuebloPuerto RicanPuget Sound SalishRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSeminoleSenegaleseSerbianShoshoneSierra LeoneanSiouxSlavicSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSoviet UnionSpaniardSpanishSpanish AmericanSpanish American IndianSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSudaneseSwedishSwissSyrianTaiwaneseThaiTlingit-HaidaTohono O'OdhamTonganTrinidadian and TobagonianTsimshianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUgandanUkrainianUruguayanUteVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYumanYup'ikZimbabwean
Immigration
NonimmigrantsImmigrantsAfghanistanAfricaAlbaniaArgentinaArmeniaAsiaAustraliaAustriaBahamasBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBoliviaBosnia and HerzegovinaBrazilBulgariaBurma/MyanmarCabo VerdeCambodiaCameroonCanadaCaribbeanCentral AmericaChileChinaColombiaCongoCosta RicaCroatiaCubaCzechoslovakiaDenmarkDominicaDominican RepublicEastern AfricaEastern AsiaEastern EuropeEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEnglandEritreaEthiopiaEuropeFijiFranceGermanyGhanaGreeceGrenadaGuatemalaGuyanaHaitiHondurasHong KongHungaryIndiaIndonesiaIranIraqIrelandIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJordanKazakhstanKenyaKoreaKuwaitLaosLatin AmericaLatviaLebanonLiberiaLithuaniaMalaysiaMexicoMicronesiaMiddle AfricaMoldovaMoroccoNepalNetherlandsNicaraguaNigeriaNorth AmericaNorth MacedoniaNorthern AfricaNorthern EuropeNorwayOceaniaPakistanPanamaPeruPhilippinesPolandPortugalRomaniaRussiaSaudi ArabiaScotlandSenegalSerbiaSierra LeoneSingaporeSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth AmericaSouth Central AsiaSouth Eastern AsiaSouthern EuropeSpainSri LankaSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudanSwedenSwitzerlandSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUruguayUzbekistanVenezuelaVietnamWest IndiesWestern AfricaWestern AsiaWestern EuropeYemenZaireZimbabweAzores
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Income
Poverty
Unemployment
Labor Participation
Family Structure
Vehicle Availability
Education Level
Disability

Social Comparison

Chickasaw

Bahamians

Fair
Tragic
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
919
SOCIAL INDEX
6.7/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
334th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Bahamian Integration in Chickasaw Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 60,060,637 people shows a very strong positive correlation between the proportion of Bahamians within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.880. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.142% in Bahamians. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to an increase of 142.2 Bahamians.
Chickasaw Integration in Bahamian Communities

Chickasaw vs Bahamian Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Bahamian communities in the United States are seen in wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 20.2%, a difference of 34.2%), median male earnings ($47,832 compared to $44,756, a difference of 6.9%), and householder income over 65 years ($53,732 compared to $51,000, a difference of 5.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of per capita income ($36,475 compared to $36,427, a difference of 0.13%), median household income ($70,005 compared to $69,726, a difference of 0.40%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($82,193 compared to $81,369, a difference of 1.0%).
Chickasaw vs Bahamian Income
Income MetricChickasawBahamian
Per Capita Income
Tragic
$36,475
Tragic
$36,427
Median Family Income
Tragic
$85,356
Tragic
$82,631
Median Household Income
Tragic
$70,005
Tragic
$69,726
Median Earnings
Tragic
$40,672
Tragic
$39,735
Median Male Earnings
Tragic
$47,832
Tragic
$44,756
Median Female Earnings
Tragic
$34,414
Tragic
$35,125
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Tragic
$44,763
Tragic
$45,743
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Tragic
$77,929
Tragic
$75,395
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Tragic
$82,193
Tragic
$81,369
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Tragic
$53,732
Tragic
$51,000
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
27.2%
Exceptional
20.2%

Chickasaw vs Bahamian Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Bahamian communities in the United States are seen in seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.6% compared to 15.5%, a difference of 33.3%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.7% compared to 14.2%, a difference of 33.2%), and receiving food stamps (13.1% compared to 17.0%, a difference of 29.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of male poverty (13.5% compared to 14.1%, a difference of 4.2%), poverty (14.7% compared to 15.4%, a difference of 4.9%), and female poverty (15.9% compared to 16.6%, a difference of 5.0%).
Chickasaw vs Bahamian Poverty
Poverty MetricChickasawBahamian
Poverty
Tragic
14.7%
Tragic
15.4%
Families
Tragic
10.8%
Tragic
11.7%
Males
Tragic
13.5%
Tragic
14.1%
Females
Tragic
15.9%
Tragic
16.6%
Females 18 to 24 years
Tragic
24.5%
Tragic
21.8%
Females 25 to 34 years
Tragic
17.0%
Tragic
16.1%
Children Under 5 years
Tragic
21.8%
Tragic
23.0%
Children Under 16 years
Tragic
19.5%
Tragic
21.5%
Boys Under 16 years
Tragic
19.8%
Tragic
21.6%
Girls Under 16 years
Tragic
19.6%
Tragic
21.5%
Single Males
Tragic
16.3%
Tragic
14.6%
Single Females
Tragic
26.3%
Tragic
22.7%
Single Fathers
Tragic
19.0%
Tragic
18.0%
Single Mothers
Tragic
34.4%
Tragic
31.3%
Married Couples
Tragic
5.8%
Tragic
6.6%
Seniors Over 65 years
Good
10.7%
Tragic
14.2%
Seniors Over 75 years
Exceptional
11.6%
Tragic
15.5%
Receiving Food Stamps
Tragic
13.1%
Tragic
17.0%

Chickasaw vs Bahamian Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Bahamian communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.3% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 24.7%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.6% compared to 10.4%, a difference of 21.3%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.4% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 21.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.8% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 0.16%), unemployment among women with children under 6 years (9.0% compared to 8.7%, a difference of 2.6%), and unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.9% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 4.7%).
Chickasaw vs Bahamian Unemployment
Unemployment MetricChickasawBahamian
Unemployment
Exceptional
5.0%
Tragic
5.9%
Males
Excellent
5.2%
Tragic
5.9%
Females
Excellent
5.1%
Tragic
6.0%
Youth < 25
Exceptional
11.2%
Tragic
13.1%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Exceptional
16.7%
Tragic
19.8%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
9.9%
Tragic
11.6%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Fair
6.7%
Tragic
7.5%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Tragic
6.2%
Tragic
6.6%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Tragic
4.9%
Tragic
5.2%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.2%
Tragic
4.9%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Good
4.8%
Good
4.8%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Tragic
5.4%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
4.7%
Tragic
5.7%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
4.4%
Tragic
5.3%
Seniors > 75
Exceptional
7.3%
Exceptional
7.8%
Women w/ Children < 6
Tragic
9.0%
Tragic
8.7%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
8.6%
Tragic
10.4%
Women w/ Children < 18
Good
5.4%
Tragic
6.3%

Chickasaw vs Bahamian Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Bahamian communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (38.3% compared to 34.6%, a difference of 10.7%), in labor force | age 35-44 (80.9% compared to 84.7%, a difference of 4.7%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (79.0% compared to 82.2%, a difference of 4.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 73.3%, a difference of 1.6%), in labor force | age 25-29 (81.9% compared to 83.7%, a difference of 2.2%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (81.9% compared to 83.9%, a difference of 2.5%).
Chickasaw vs Bahamian Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricChickasawBahamian
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Tragic
62.3%
Tragic
64.2%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Tragic
76.2%
Tragic
78.4%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
38.3%
Tragic
34.6%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Poor
74.5%
Tragic
73.3%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Tragic
81.9%
Tragic
83.7%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Tragic
81.9%
Tragic
83.9%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Tragic
80.9%
Exceptional
84.7%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Tragic
79.0%
Tragic
82.2%

Chickasaw vs Bahamian Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Bahamian communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (7.0% compared to 8.3%, a difference of 17.2%), married-couple households (45.9% compared to 40.5%, a difference of 13.3%), and currently married (46.6% compared to 41.2%, a difference of 13.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of divorced or separated (14.2% compared to 14.2%, a difference of 0.20%), family households (64.4% compared to 63.3%, a difference of 1.7%), and average family size (3.19 compared to 3.28, a difference of 2.8%).
Chickasaw vs Bahamian Family Structure
Family Structure MetricChickasawBahamian
Family Households
Good
64.4%
Tragic
63.3%
Family Households with Children
Exceptional
28.2%
Tragic
26.5%
Married-couple Households
Fair
45.9%
Tragic
40.5%
Average Family Size
Tragic
3.19
Exceptional
3.28
Single Father Households
Tragic
2.8%
Tragic
2.5%
Single Mother Households
Tragic
7.0%
Tragic
8.3%
Currently Married
Average
46.6%
Tragic
41.2%
Divorced or Separated
Tragic
14.2%
Tragic
14.2%
Births to Unmarried Women
Tragic
36.3%
Tragic
40.8%

Chickasaw vs Bahamian Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Bahamian communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 46.5%), 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 16.9%, a difference of 31.1%), and no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 9.9%, a difference of 25.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 90.2%, a difference of 2.3%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 51.5%, a difference of 14.5%), and no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 9.9%, a difference of 25.9%).
Chickasaw vs Bahamian Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricChickasawBahamian
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.9%
Excellent
9.9%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
92.3%
Excellent
90.2%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
59.0%
Tragic
51.5%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
22.2%
Tragic
16.9%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.4%
Tragic
5.1%

Chickasaw vs Bahamian Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Bahamian communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.7% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 31.9%), professional degree (3.4% compared to 3.7%, a difference of 9.5%), and master's degree (11.4% compared to 12.4%, a difference of 8.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of ged/equivalency (83.8% compared to 83.6%, a difference of 0.22%), college, under 1 year (60.4% compared to 60.3%, a difference of 0.30%), and 12th grade, no diploma (90.3% compared to 89.9%, a difference of 0.53%).
Chickasaw vs Bahamian Education Level
Education Level MetricChickasawBahamian
No Schooling Completed
Exceptional
1.7%
Poor
2.2%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.4%
Tragic
97.8%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.4%
Tragic
97.8%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Tragic
97.7%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Tragic
97.7%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.2%
Tragic
97.5%
4th Grade
Exceptional
98.0%
Tragic
97.2%
5th Grade
Exceptional
97.9%
Tragic
97.0%
6th Grade
Exceptional
97.6%
Tragic
96.7%
7th Grade
Exceptional
96.7%
Poor
95.7%
8th Grade
Exceptional
96.4%
Tragic
95.3%
9th Grade
Exceptional
95.5%
Tragic
94.4%
10th Grade
Excellent
94.1%
Tragic
93.1%
11th Grade
Fair
92.3%
Tragic
91.6%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Tragic
90.3%
Tragic
89.9%
High School Diploma
Poor
88.4%
Tragic
87.5%
GED/Equivalency
Tragic
83.8%
Tragic
83.6%
College, Under 1 year
Tragic
60.4%
Tragic
60.3%
College, 1 year or more
Tragic
53.3%
Tragic
54.5%
Associate's Degree
Tragic
38.6%
Tragic
41.5%
Bachelor's Degree
Tragic
30.4%
Tragic
32.5%
Master's Degree
Tragic
11.4%
Tragic
12.4%
Professional Degree
Tragic
3.4%
Tragic
3.7%
Doctorate Degree
Tragic
1.5%
Tragic
1.5%

Chickasaw vs Bahamian Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Bahamian communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (4.5% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 57.0%), disability age 35 to 64 (16.1% compared to 11.8%, a difference of 37.1%), and disability age 18 to 34 (9.0% compared to 6.6%, a difference of 36.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 17.9%, a difference of 3.3%), disability age over 75 (51.2% compared to 48.0%, a difference of 6.6%), and disability age 5 to 17 (6.8% compared to 6.3%, a difference of 8.2%).
Chickasaw vs Bahamian Disability
Disability MetricChickasawBahamian
Disability
Tragic
15.2%
Tragic
12.2%
Males
Tragic
15.1%
Tragic
11.9%
Females
Tragic
15.2%
Poor
12.4%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
1.7%
Tragic
1.3%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Tragic
6.8%
Tragic
6.3%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
9.0%
Average
6.6%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Tragic
16.1%
Poor
11.8%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
30.2%
Tragic
24.4%
Age | Over 75 years
Tragic
51.2%
Tragic
48.0%
Vision
Tragic
3.2%
Tragic
2.4%
Hearing
Tragic
4.5%
Excellent
2.9%
Cognitive
Tragic
18.5%
Tragic
17.9%
Ambulatory
Tragic
8.0%
Tragic
6.6%
Self-Care
Tragic
2.9%
Tragic
2.6%