Chickasaw vs Hungarian Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 139,077,383 people shows a slight negative correlation between the proportion of Hungarians within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.055. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.004% in Hungarians. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to a decrease of 4.0 Hungarians.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Hungarian communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($82,193 compared to $103,913, a difference of 26.4%), householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($77,929 compared to $97,544, a difference of 25.2%), and per capita income ($36,475 compared to $45,426, a difference of 24.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 29.0%, a difference of 6.9%), householder income under 25 years ($44,763 compared to $50,247, a difference of 12.2%), and householder income over 65 years ($53,732 compared to $61,673, a difference of 14.8%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Hungarian communities in the United States are seen in single female poverty (26.3% compared to 21.1%, a difference of 24.2%), female poverty among 18-24 year olds (24.5% compared to 19.8%, a difference of 23.6%), and family poverty (10.8% compared to 8.8%, a difference of 23.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single father poverty (19.0% compared to 18.5%, a difference of 2.7%), seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.6% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 3.9%), and married-couple family poverty (5.8% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 8.9%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Hungarian communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.3% compared to 10.1%, a difference of 37.3%), unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.4% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 19.8%), and unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (4.7% compared to 5.5%, a difference of 16.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.7% compared to 6.8%, a difference of 0.15%), male unemployment (5.2% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 0.25%), and unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.8% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 0.87%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Hungarian communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 45-54 (79.0% compared to 82.7%, a difference of 4.6%), in labor force | age 35-44 (80.9% compared to 84.2%, a difference of 4.1%), and in labor force | age 16-19 (38.3% compared to 39.8%, a difference of 4.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age > 16 (62.3% compared to 63.8%, a difference of 2.4%), in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 76.3%, a difference of 2.5%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (81.9% compared to 84.5%, a difference of 3.2%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Hungarian communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.8% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 26.7%), single mother households (7.0% compared to 5.7%, a difference of 24.2%), and divorced or separated (14.2% compared to 12.0%, a difference of 18.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.19 compared to 3.18, a difference of 0.35%), family households (64.4% compared to 64.9%, a difference of 0.77%), and family households with children (28.2% compared to 27.6%, a difference of 2.2%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Hungarian communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 9.9%, a difference of 26.2%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 6.4%, a difference of 16.2%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 19.8%, a difference of 12.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 90.3%, a difference of 2.1%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 56.5%, a difference of 4.4%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 19.8%, a difference of 12.0%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Hungarian communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (3.4% compared to 4.6%, a difference of 37.9%), master's degree (11.4% compared to 15.6%, a difference of 36.2%), and doctorate degree (1.5% compared to 1.9%, a difference of 26.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (98.4% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.090%), kindergarten (98.4% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.090%), and 1st grade (98.3% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.090%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Hungarian communities in the United States are seen in vision disability (3.2% compared to 2.1%, a difference of 48.4%), disability age 35 to 64 (16.1% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 41.1%), and disability age 65 to 74 (30.2% compared to 22.4%, a difference of 34.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (51.2% compared to 46.5%, a difference of 10.0%), cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 16.5%, a difference of 12.3%), and disability age under 5 (1.7% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 12.4%).