Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Eastern Europe Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 139,298,429 people shows a slight positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Eastern Europe within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.098. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.014% in Immigrants from Eastern Europe. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to an increase of 14.1 Immigrants from Eastern Europe.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Eastern Europe communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($36,475 compared to $49,316, a difference of 35.2%), householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($77,929 compared to $104,662, a difference of 34.3%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($82,193 compared to $109,335, a difference of 33.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 26.4%, a difference of 3.0%), householder income over 65 years ($53,732 compared to $62,693, a difference of 16.7%), and householder income under 25 years ($44,763 compared to $55,572, a difference of 24.1%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Eastern Europe communities in the United States are seen in child poverty under the age of 5 (21.8% compared to 15.1%, a difference of 44.2%), female poverty among 25-34 year olds (17.0% compared to 12.0%, a difference of 42.0%), and single female poverty (26.3% compared to 19.0%, a difference of 37.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.7% compared to 10.9%, a difference of 1.8%), seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.6% compared to 12.6%, a difference of 8.2%), and married-couple family poverty (5.8% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 18.7%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Eastern Europe communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (9.0% compared to 7.1%, a difference of 26.8%), unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.3% compared to 8.8%, a difference of 20.1%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.4% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 16.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female unemployment (5.1% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 0.18%), unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.8% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 0.55%), and unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.6% compared to 8.5%, a difference of 1.0%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Eastern Europe communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (38.3% compared to 35.8%, a difference of 7.2%), in labor force | age 45-54 (79.0% compared to 83.3%, a difference of 5.4%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (76.2% compared to 80.2%, a difference of 5.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 74.9%, a difference of 0.55%), in labor force | age 25-29 (81.9% compared to 85.2%, a difference of 4.0%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (81.9% compared to 85.4%, a difference of 4.3%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Eastern Europe communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.8% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 38.2%), births to unmarried women (36.3% compared to 27.6%, a difference of 31.7%), and single mother households (7.0% compared to 5.6%, a difference of 25.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.19 compared to 3.17, a difference of 0.51%), family households (64.4% compared to 64.0%, a difference of 0.69%), and currently married (46.6% compared to 48.0%, a difference of 3.0%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Eastern Europe communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 13.6%, a difference of 73.0%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 36.8%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 17.4%, a difference of 27.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 86.7%, a difference of 6.4%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 51.7%, a difference of 14.1%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 17.4%, a difference of 27.6%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Eastern Europe communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (3.4% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 55.9%), master's degree (11.4% compared to 17.6%, a difference of 53.9%), and bachelor's degree (30.4% compared to 42.5%, a difference of 39.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 10th grade (94.1% compared to 94.3%, a difference of 0.21%), 9th grade (95.5% compared to 95.2%, a difference of 0.30%), and nursery school (98.4% compared to 98.0%, a difference of 0.38%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Eastern Europe communities in the United States are seen in disability age 35 to 64 (16.1% compared to 10.1%, a difference of 60.0%), vision disability (3.2% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 56.7%), and hearing disability (4.5% compared to 3.0%, a difference of 50.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (51.2% compared to 46.3%, a difference of 10.5%), cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 16.5%, a difference of 12.4%), and self-care disability (2.9% compared to 2.5%, a difference of 14.6%).