Chickasaw vs Macedonian Community Comparison

COMPARE

Chickasaw
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMexicanMexican 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 TobagonianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUgandanUkrainianUruguayanVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYup'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
Macedonian
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

Macedonians

Fair
Excellent
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
8,797
SOCIAL INDEX
85.4/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
47th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Macedonian Integration in Chickasaw Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 65,295,096 people shows a very strong positive correlation between the proportion of Macedonians within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.819. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.077% in Macedonians. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to an increase of 77.1 Macedonians.
Chickasaw Integration in Macedonian Communities

Chickasaw vs Macedonian Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Macedonian communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($77,929 compared to $101,882, a difference of 30.7%), per capita income ($36,475 compared to $47,573, a difference of 30.4%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($82,193 compared to $107,074, a difference of 30.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 28.6%, a difference of 5.1%), householder income over 65 years ($53,732 compared to $61,564, a difference of 14.6%), and median female earnings ($34,414 compared to $41,286, a difference of 20.0%).
Chickasaw vs Macedonian Income
Income MetricChickasawMacedonian
Per Capita Income
Tragic
$36,475
Exceptional
$47,573
Median Family Income
Tragic
$85,356
Exceptional
$109,668
Median Household Income
Tragic
$70,005
Exceptional
$90,761
Median Earnings
Tragic
$40,672
Exceptional
$49,893
Median Male Earnings
Tragic
$47,832
Exceptional
$59,522
Median Female Earnings
Tragic
$34,414
Exceptional
$41,286
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Tragic
$44,763
Exceptional
$54,563
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Tragic
$77,929
Exceptional
$101,882
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Tragic
$82,193
Exceptional
$107,074
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Tragic
$53,732
Good
$61,564
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
27.2%
Tragic
28.6%

Chickasaw vs Macedonian Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Macedonian communities in the United States are seen in female poverty among 25-34 year olds (17.0% compared to 11.9%, a difference of 42.5%), family poverty (10.8% compared to 7.8%, a difference of 39.7%), and single female poverty (26.3% compared to 18.9%, a difference of 38.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.6% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 1.8%), single father poverty (19.0% compared to 17.7%, a difference of 7.3%), and seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.7% compared to 9.9%, a difference of 8.5%).
Chickasaw vs Macedonian Poverty
Poverty MetricChickasawMacedonian
Poverty
Tragic
14.7%
Exceptional
10.8%
Families
Tragic
10.8%
Exceptional
7.8%
Males
Tragic
13.5%
Exceptional
9.7%
Females
Tragic
15.9%
Exceptional
11.8%
Females 18 to 24 years
Tragic
24.5%
Exceptional
18.1%
Females 25 to 34 years
Tragic
17.0%
Exceptional
11.9%
Children Under 5 years
Tragic
21.8%
Exceptional
15.8%
Children Under 16 years
Tragic
19.5%
Exceptional
14.4%
Boys Under 16 years
Tragic
19.8%
Exceptional
14.7%
Girls Under 16 years
Tragic
19.6%
Exceptional
14.7%
Single Males
Tragic
16.3%
Fair
12.9%
Single Females
Tragic
26.3%
Exceptional
18.9%
Single Fathers
Tragic
19.0%
Tragic
17.7%
Single Mothers
Tragic
34.4%
Exceptional
27.4%
Married Couples
Tragic
5.8%
Exceptional
4.4%
Seniors Over 65 years
Good
10.7%
Exceptional
9.9%
Seniors Over 75 years
Exceptional
11.6%
Exceptional
11.4%
Receiving Food Stamps
Tragic
13.1%
Exceptional
9.9%

Chickasaw vs Macedonian Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Macedonian communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.3% compared to 9.6%, a difference of 31.2%), unemployment among women with children under 6 years (9.0% compared to 7.2%, a difference of 25.0%), and unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (6.2% compared to 5.5%, a difference of 13.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among youth under 25 years (11.2% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 0.020%), male unemployment (5.2% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 0.49%), and unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (16.7% compared to 16.6%, a difference of 0.55%).
Chickasaw vs Macedonian Unemployment
Unemployment MetricChickasawMacedonian
Unemployment
Exceptional
5.0%
Excellent
5.1%
Males
Excellent
5.2%
Good
5.2%
Females
Excellent
5.1%
Exceptional
5.1%
Youth < 25
Exceptional
11.2%
Exceptional
11.2%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Exceptional
16.7%
Exceptional
16.6%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
9.9%
Exceptional
10.0%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Fair
6.7%
Excellent
6.5%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Tragic
6.2%
Average
5.5%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Tragic
4.9%
Excellent
4.5%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.2%
Good
4.5%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Good
4.8%
Fair
4.9%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Exceptional
4.7%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
4.7%
Exceptional
5.0%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
4.4%
Exceptional
4.8%
Seniors > 75
Exceptional
7.3%
Tragic
9.6%
Women w/ Children < 6
Tragic
9.0%
Exceptional
7.2%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
8.6%
Tragic
9.3%
Women w/ Children < 18
Good
5.4%
Excellent
5.3%

Chickasaw vs Macedonian Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Macedonian communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 45-54 (79.0% compared to 83.5%, a difference of 5.7%), in labor force | age 35-44 (80.9% compared to 85.2%, a difference of 5.3%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (76.2% compared to 80.2%, a difference of 5.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 16-19 (38.3% compared to 37.8%, a difference of 1.4%), in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 76.0%, a difference of 2.1%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (81.9% compared to 85.5%, a difference of 4.3%).
Chickasaw vs Macedonian Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricChickasawMacedonian
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Tragic
62.3%
Average
65.1%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Tragic
76.2%
Exceptional
80.2%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
38.3%
Exceptional
37.8%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Poor
74.5%
Exceptional
76.0%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Tragic
81.9%
Exceptional
85.7%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Tragic
81.9%
Exceptional
85.5%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Tragic
80.9%
Exceptional
85.2%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Tragic
79.0%
Exceptional
83.5%

Chickasaw vs Macedonian Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Macedonian communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.8% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 37.7%), single mother households (7.0% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 30.6%), and births to unmarried women (36.3% compared to 27.9%, a difference of 30.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (64.4% compared to 63.7%, a difference of 1.1%), average family size (3.19 compared to 3.13, a difference of 1.7%), and currently married (46.6% compared to 48.3%, a difference of 3.6%).
Chickasaw vs Macedonian Family Structure
Family Structure MetricChickasawMacedonian
Family Households
Good
64.4%
Tragic
63.7%
Family Households with Children
Exceptional
28.2%
Tragic
26.4%
Married-couple Households
Fair
45.9%
Exceptional
47.6%
Average Family Size
Tragic
3.19
Tragic
3.13
Single Father Households
Tragic
2.8%
Exceptional
2.0%
Single Mother Households
Tragic
7.0%
Exceptional
5.4%
Currently Married
Average
46.6%
Exceptional
48.3%
Divorced or Separated
Tragic
14.2%
Exceptional
11.4%
Births to Unmarried Women
Tragic
36.3%
Exceptional
27.9%

Chickasaw vs Macedonian Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Macedonian communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 12.2%, a difference of 54.7%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 5.5%, a difference of 35.1%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 17.7%, a difference of 25.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 87.9%, a difference of 4.9%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 53.3%, a difference of 10.7%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 17.7%, a difference of 25.3%).
Chickasaw vs Macedonian Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricChickasawMacedonian
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.9%
Tragic
12.2%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
92.3%
Tragic
87.9%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
59.0%
Tragic
53.3%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
22.2%
Tragic
17.7%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.4%
Tragic
5.5%

Chickasaw vs Macedonian Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Macedonian communities in the United States are seen in master's degree (11.4% compared to 16.7%, a difference of 46.2%), professional degree (3.4% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 41.4%), and bachelor's degree (30.4% compared to 41.4%, a difference of 36.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 4th grade (98.0% compared to 98.0%, a difference of 0.0%), 5th grade (97.9% compared to 97.9%, a difference of 0.010%), and 6th grade (97.6% compared to 97.6%, a difference of 0.010%).
Chickasaw vs Macedonian Education Level
Education Level MetricChickasawMacedonian
No Schooling Completed
Exceptional
1.7%
Exceptional
1.7%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.4%
Exceptional
98.3%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.4%
Exceptional
98.3%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Exceptional
98.3%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Exceptional
98.2%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.2%
Exceptional
98.1%
4th Grade
Exceptional
98.0%
Exceptional
98.0%
5th Grade
Exceptional
97.9%
Exceptional
97.9%
6th Grade
Exceptional
97.6%
Exceptional
97.6%
7th Grade
Exceptional
96.7%
Exceptional
97.0%
8th Grade
Exceptional
96.4%
Exceptional
96.7%
9th Grade
Exceptional
95.5%
Exceptional
96.0%
10th Grade
Excellent
94.1%
Exceptional
95.2%
11th Grade
Fair
92.3%
Exceptional
94.1%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Tragic
90.3%
Exceptional
92.9%
High School Diploma
Poor
88.4%
Exceptional
91.1%
GED/Equivalency
Tragic
83.8%
Exceptional
88.1%
College, Under 1 year
Tragic
60.4%
Exceptional
67.6%
College, 1 year or more
Tragic
53.3%
Exceptional
61.8%
Associate's Degree
Tragic
38.6%
Exceptional
49.6%
Bachelor's Degree
Tragic
30.4%
Exceptional
41.4%
Master's Degree
Tragic
11.4%
Exceptional
16.7%
Professional Degree
Tragic
3.4%
Excellent
4.8%
Doctorate Degree
Tragic
1.5%
Good
1.9%

Chickasaw vs Macedonian Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Macedonian communities in the United States are seen in vision disability (3.2% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 59.3%), disability age 35 to 64 (16.1% compared to 10.4%, a difference of 54.7%), and hearing disability (4.5% compared to 3.1%, a difference of 46.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 16.5%, a difference of 12.2%), disability age over 75 (51.2% compared to 45.4%, a difference of 12.8%), and self-care disability (2.9% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 20.8%).
Chickasaw vs Macedonian Disability
Disability MetricChickasawMacedonian
Disability
Tragic
15.2%
Exceptional
11.4%
Males
Tragic
15.1%
Excellent
11.0%
Females
Tragic
15.2%
Exceptional
11.8%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
1.7%
Average
1.2%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Tragic
6.8%
Exceptional
5.2%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
9.0%
Exceptional
6.3%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Tragic
16.1%
Exceptional
10.4%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
30.2%
Exceptional
21.3%
Age | Over 75 years
Tragic
51.2%
Exceptional
45.4%
Vision
Tragic
3.2%
Exceptional
2.0%
Hearing
Tragic
4.5%
Fair
3.1%
Cognitive
Tragic
18.5%
Exceptional
16.5%
Ambulatory
Tragic
8.0%
Excellent
6.0%
Self-Care
Tragic
2.9%
Exceptional
2.4%