Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Western Asia Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 130,384,922 people shows a mild negative correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Western Asia within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.394. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.021% in Immigrants from Western Asia. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to a decrease of 20.8 Immigrants from Western Asia.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Western Asia communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($82,193 compared to $106,217, a difference of 29.2%), median household income ($70,005 compared to $90,005, a difference of 28.6%), and per capita income ($36,475 compared to $46,876, a difference of 28.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 26.3%, a difference of 3.3%), householder income under 25 years ($44,763 compared to $52,190, a difference of 16.6%), and householder income over 65 years ($53,732 compared to $62,645, a difference of 16.6%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Western Asia communities in the United States are seen in female poverty among 25-34 year olds (17.0% compared to 12.8%, a difference of 32.8%), single female poverty (26.3% compared to 19.9%, a difference of 31.9%), and single male poverty (16.3% compared to 12.5%, a difference of 30.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of married-couple family poverty (5.8% compared to 6.0%, a difference of 2.9%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.7% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 6.5%), and seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.6% compared to 12.9%, a difference of 11.1%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Western Asia communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.3% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 22.2%), unemployment among women with children under 6 years (9.0% compared to 7.5%, a difference of 18.9%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.4% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 17.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.7% compared to 6.7%, a difference of 0.10%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.6% compared to 8.7%, a difference of 1.3%), and unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.9% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 2.1%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Western Asia communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (38.3% compared to 34.8%, a difference of 10.2%), in labor force | age > 16 (62.3% compared to 65.3%, a difference of 4.8%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (79.0% compared to 82.4%, a difference of 4.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 73.5%, a difference of 1.2%), in labor force | age 25-29 (81.9% compared to 84.1%, a difference of 2.7%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (81.9% compared to 84.3%, a difference of 2.9%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Western Asia communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.8% compared to 2.1%, a difference of 33.6%), births to unmarried women (36.3% compared to 27.2%, a difference of 33.3%), and divorced or separated (14.2% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 27.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (64.4% compared to 64.1%, a difference of 0.52%), currently married (46.6% compared to 46.9%, a difference of 0.62%), and family households with children (28.2% compared to 27.9%, a difference of 1.3%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Western Asia communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 11.0%, a difference of 40.6%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 25.4%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 18.4%, a difference of 20.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 89.0%, a difference of 3.7%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 54.1%, a difference of 9.1%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 18.4%, a difference of 20.6%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Western Asia communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (3.4% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 60.9%), master's degree (11.4% compared to 17.5%, a difference of 52.9%), and doctorate degree (1.5% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 48.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 11th grade (92.3% compared to 92.4%, a difference of 0.040%), 10th grade (94.1% compared to 93.4%, a difference of 0.65%), and nursery school (98.4% compared to 97.7%, a difference of 0.71%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Western Asia communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.7% compared to 1.1%, a difference of 57.4%), hearing disability (4.5% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 56.4%), and vision disability (3.2% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 55.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 17.4%, a difference of 6.4%), disability age over 75 (51.2% compared to 48.0%, a difference of 6.6%), and self-care disability (2.9% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 9.4%).