Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Northern Africa Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 116,323,510 people shows a moderate positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Northern Africa within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.403. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.010% in Immigrants from Northern Africa. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to an increase of 10.0 Immigrants from Northern Africa.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Northern Africa communities in the United States are seen in median household income ($70,005 compared to $90,026, a difference of 28.6%), householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($82,193 compared to $105,430, a difference of 28.3%), and per capita income ($36,475 compared to $46,531, a difference of 27.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 25.2%, a difference of 7.6%), householder income over 65 years ($53,732 compared to $62,522, a difference of 16.4%), and householder income under 25 years ($44,763 compared to $53,185, a difference of 18.8%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Northern Africa communities in the United States are seen in single male poverty (16.3% compared to 11.9%, a difference of 36.6%), female poverty among 25-34 year olds (17.0% compared to 12.6%, a difference of 35.1%), and child poverty under the age of 5 (21.8% compared to 16.4%, a difference of 33.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.7% compared to 11.0%, a difference of 2.8%), seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.6% compared to 12.5%, a difference of 7.0%), and married-couple family poverty (5.8% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 11.1%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Northern Africa communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (9.0% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 20.7%), unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (6.2% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 20.5%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.4% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 18.2%). 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 0.22%), male unemployment (5.2% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 0.92%), and unemployment among women with children under 18 years (5.4% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 0.96%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Northern Africa communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age > 16 (62.3% compared to 66.6%, a difference of 6.9%), in labor force | age 16-19 (38.3% compared to 35.9%, a difference of 6.7%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (79.0% compared to 83.3%, a difference of 5.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 74.6%, a difference of 0.24%), in labor force | age 30-34 (81.9% compared to 85.2%, a difference of 4.0%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (81.9% compared to 85.2%, a difference of 4.1%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Northern Africa communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.8% compared to 2.1%, a difference of 28.5%), divorced or separated (14.2% compared to 11.5%, a difference of 23.7%), and births to unmarried women (36.3% compared to 29.5%, a difference of 23.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of married-couple households (45.9% compared to 46.0%, a difference of 0.10%), currently married (46.6% compared to 46.5%, a difference of 0.30%), and average family size (3.19 compared to 3.22, a difference of 1.1%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Northern Africa communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 12.6%, a difference of 60.4%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 5.6%, a difference of 31.7%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 17.8%, a difference of 24.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 87.4%, a difference of 5.5%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 52.3%, a difference of 12.7%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 17.8%, a difference of 24.8%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Northern Africa communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (3.4% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 50.6%), master's degree (11.4% compared to 17.1%, a difference of 49.5%), and doctorate degree (1.5% compared to 2.1%, a difference of 40.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 11th grade (92.3% compared to 92.6%, a difference of 0.27%), 10th grade (94.1% compared to 93.7%, a difference of 0.42%), and nursery school (98.4% compared to 97.8%, a difference of 0.57%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Northern Africa communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (4.5% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 62.6%), vision disability (3.2% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 57.7%), and disability age 35 to 64 (16.1% compared to 10.3%, a difference of 56.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 17.3%, a difference of 7.0%), disability age over 75 (51.2% compared to 46.7%, a difference of 9.5%), and self-care disability (2.9% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 21.7%).