Chickasaw vs British Community Comparison

COMPARE

Chickasaw
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta 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
British
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

British

Fair
Good
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
8,012
SOCIAL INDEX
77.6/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
92nd/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

British Integration in Chickasaw Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 145,403,514 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of British within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.275. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.139% in British. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to an increase of 138.6 British.
Chickasaw Integration in British Communities

Chickasaw vs British Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and British communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($82,193 compared to $106,264, a difference of 29.3%), per capita income ($36,475 compared to $46,571, a difference of 27.7%), and median family income ($85,356 compared to $108,705, a difference of 27.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 28.9%, a difference of 6.4%), householder income under 25 years ($44,763 compared to $51,477, a difference of 15.0%), and median female earnings ($34,414 compared to $39,772, a difference of 15.6%).
Chickasaw vs British Income
Income MetricChickasawBritish
Per Capita Income
Tragic
$36,475
Exceptional
$46,571
Median Family Income
Tragic
$85,356
Exceptional
$108,705
Median Household Income
Tragic
$70,005
Exceptional
$88,914
Median Earnings
Tragic
$40,672
Exceptional
$48,189
Median Male Earnings
Tragic
$47,832
Exceptional
$57,890
Median Female Earnings
Tragic
$34,414
Average
$39,772
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Tragic
$44,763
Poor
$51,477
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Tragic
$77,929
Excellent
$98,359
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Tragic
$82,193
Exceptional
$106,264
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Tragic
$53,732
Exceptional
$63,940
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
27.2%
Tragic
28.9%

Chickasaw vs British Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and British communities in the United States are seen in family poverty (10.8% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 36.9%), married-couple family poverty (5.8% compared to 4.3%, a difference of 34.5%), and receiving food stamps (13.1% compared to 9.7%, a difference of 34.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.6% compared to 10.7%, a difference of 8.3%), single father poverty (19.0% compared to 16.8%, a difference of 12.8%), and seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.7% compared to 9.4%, a difference of 13.5%).
Chickasaw vs British Poverty
Poverty MetricChickasawBritish
Poverty
Tragic
14.7%
Exceptional
11.4%
Families
Tragic
10.8%
Exceptional
7.9%
Males
Tragic
13.5%
Exceptional
10.4%
Females
Tragic
15.9%
Exceptional
12.5%
Females 18 to 24 years
Tragic
24.5%
Tragic
20.7%
Females 25 to 34 years
Tragic
17.0%
Good
13.4%
Children Under 5 years
Tragic
21.8%
Excellent
16.3%
Children Under 16 years
Tragic
19.5%
Exceptional
14.7%
Boys Under 16 years
Tragic
19.8%
Exceptional
15.0%
Girls Under 16 years
Tragic
19.6%
Exceptional
15.0%
Single Males
Tragic
16.3%
Tragic
13.3%
Single Females
Tragic
26.3%
Average
21.1%
Single Fathers
Tragic
19.0%
Tragic
16.8%
Single Mothers
Tragic
34.4%
Average
29.2%
Married Couples
Tragic
5.8%
Exceptional
4.3%
Seniors Over 65 years
Good
10.7%
Exceptional
9.4%
Seniors Over 75 years
Exceptional
11.6%
Exceptional
10.7%
Receiving Food Stamps
Tragic
13.1%
Exceptional
9.7%

Chickasaw vs British Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and British communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.3% compared to 9.6%, a difference of 30.4%), unemployment among women with children under 6 years (9.0% compared to 7.6%, a difference of 18.6%), and unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (6.2% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 17.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (9.9% compared to 9.8%, a difference of 0.94%), unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (16.7% compared to 16.5%, a difference of 1.3%), and unemployment among youth under 25 years (11.2% compared to 10.9%, a difference of 2.2%).
Chickasaw vs British Unemployment
Unemployment MetricChickasawBritish
Unemployment
Exceptional
5.0%
Exceptional
4.7%
Males
Excellent
5.2%
Exceptional
4.8%
Females
Excellent
5.1%
Exceptional
4.7%
Youth < 25
Exceptional
11.2%
Exceptional
10.9%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Exceptional
16.7%
Exceptional
16.5%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
9.9%
Exceptional
9.8%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Fair
6.7%
Exceptional
6.4%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Tragic
6.2%
Excellent
5.3%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Tragic
4.9%
Exceptional
4.4%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.2%
Exceptional
4.1%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Good
4.8%
Exceptional
4.5%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Exceptional
4.6%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
4.7%
Exceptional
5.2%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
4.4%
Exceptional
4.9%
Seniors > 75
Exceptional
7.3%
Tragic
9.6%
Women w/ Children < 6
Tragic
9.0%
Good
7.6%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
8.6%
Average
8.9%
Women w/ Children < 18
Good
5.4%
Exceptional
5.0%

Chickasaw vs British Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and British communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (38.3% compared to 40.5%, a difference of 5.6%), in labor force | age 45-54 (79.0% compared to 82.6%, a difference of 4.5%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (76.2% compared to 79.3%, a difference of 4.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 76.7%, a difference of 3.0%), in labor force | age 30-34 (81.9% compared to 84.5%, a difference of 3.2%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (81.9% compared to 84.7%, a difference of 3.5%).
Chickasaw vs British Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricChickasawBritish
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Tragic
62.3%
Tragic
64.7%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Tragic
76.2%
Poor
79.3%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
38.3%
Exceptional
40.5%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Poor
74.5%
Exceptional
76.7%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Tragic
81.9%
Good
84.7%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Tragic
81.9%
Fair
84.5%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Tragic
80.9%
Fair
84.2%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Tragic
79.0%
Fair
82.6%

Chickasaw vs British Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and British communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.8% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 23.5%), single mother households (7.0% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 21.8%), and births to unmarried women (36.3% compared to 30.8%, a difference of 17.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (64.4% compared to 64.4%, a difference of 0.0%), average family size (3.19 compared to 3.13, a difference of 1.7%), and family households with children (28.2% compared to 27.4%, a difference of 2.8%).
Chickasaw vs British Family Structure
Family Structure MetricChickasawBritish
Family Households
Good
64.4%
Good
64.4%
Family Households with Children
Exceptional
28.2%
Average
27.4%
Married-couple Households
Fair
45.9%
Exceptional
48.7%
Average Family Size
Tragic
3.19
Tragic
3.13
Single Father Households
Tragic
2.8%
Exceptional
2.2%
Single Mother Households
Tragic
7.0%
Exceptional
5.8%
Currently Married
Average
46.6%
Exceptional
48.8%
Divorced or Separated
Tragic
14.2%
Poor
12.3%
Births to Unmarried Women
Tragic
36.3%
Good
30.8%

Chickasaw vs British Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and British communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 7.6%, a difference of 3.5%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 7.2%, a difference of 3.3%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 60.0%, a difference of 1.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 92.5%, a difference of 0.28%), 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 21.9%, a difference of 1.3%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 60.0%, a difference of 1.8%).
Chickasaw vs British Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricChickasawBritish
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.9%
Exceptional
7.6%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
92.3%
Exceptional
92.5%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
59.0%
Exceptional
60.0%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
22.2%
Exceptional
21.9%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.4%
Exceptional
7.2%

Chickasaw vs British Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and British communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (3.4% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 49.7%), doctorate degree (1.5% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 43.6%), and master's degree (11.4% compared to 16.4%, a difference of 43.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (98.4% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.16%), kindergarten (98.4% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.16%), and 1st grade (98.3% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.16%).
Chickasaw vs British Education Level
Education Level MetricChickasawBritish
No Schooling Completed
Exceptional
1.7%
Exceptional
1.5%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.4%
Exceptional
98.5%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.4%
Exceptional
98.5%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Exceptional
98.5%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Exceptional
98.5%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.2%
Exceptional
98.4%
4th Grade
Exceptional
98.0%
Exceptional
98.2%
5th Grade
Exceptional
97.9%
Exceptional
98.1%
6th Grade
Exceptional
97.6%
Exceptional
97.9%
7th Grade
Exceptional
96.7%
Exceptional
97.2%
8th Grade
Exceptional
96.4%
Exceptional
97.0%
9th Grade
Exceptional
95.5%
Exceptional
96.3%
10th Grade
Excellent
94.1%
Exceptional
95.3%
11th Grade
Fair
92.3%
Exceptional
94.2%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Tragic
90.3%
Exceptional
92.9%
High School Diploma
Poor
88.4%
Exceptional
91.3%
GED/Equivalency
Tragic
83.8%
Exceptional
87.8%
College, Under 1 year
Tragic
60.4%
Exceptional
68.5%
College, 1 year or more
Tragic
53.3%
Exceptional
62.3%
Associate's Degree
Tragic
38.6%
Exceptional
48.9%
Bachelor's Degree
Tragic
30.4%
Exceptional
40.4%
Master's Degree
Tragic
11.4%
Exceptional
16.4%
Professional Degree
Tragic
3.4%
Exceptional
5.0%
Doctorate Degree
Tragic
1.5%
Exceptional
2.2%

Chickasaw vs British Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and British communities in the United States are seen in vision disability (3.2% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 44.3%), disability age 35 to 64 (16.1% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 38.5%), and disability age 65 to 74 (30.2% compared to 23.0%, a difference of 31.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 17.0%, a difference of 8.7%), disability age over 75 (51.2% compared to 46.5%, a difference of 10.1%), and disability age 5 to 17 (6.8% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 16.3%).
Chickasaw vs British Disability
Disability MetricChickasawBritish
Disability
Tragic
15.2%
Tragic
12.2%
Males
Tragic
15.1%
Tragic
12.1%
Females
Tragic
15.2%
Poor
12.4%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
1.7%
Tragic
1.5%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Tragic
6.8%
Tragic
5.9%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
9.0%
Tragic
7.3%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Tragic
16.1%
Poor
11.6%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
30.2%
Good
23.0%
Age | Over 75 years
Tragic
51.2%
Exceptional
46.5%
Vision
Tragic
3.2%
Fair
2.2%
Hearing
Tragic
4.5%
Tragic
3.5%
Cognitive
Tragic
18.5%
Excellent
17.0%
Ambulatory
Tragic
8.0%
Fair
6.2%
Self-Care
Tragic
2.9%
Exceptional
2.4%