Chickasaw vs Panamanian Community Comparison

COMPARE

Chickasaw
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNepaleseNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPaiutePakistaniPalestinianParaguayanPennsylvania 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
Panamanian
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

Panamanians

Fair
Poor
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
2,119
SOCIAL INDEX
18.7/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
268th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Panamanian Integration in Chickasaw Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 109,918,838 people shows a substantial positive correlation between the proportion of Panamanians within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.573. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.236% in Panamanians. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to an increase of 236.0 Panamanians.
Chickasaw Integration in Panamanian Communities

Chickasaw vs Panamanian Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Panamanian communities in the United States are seen in median household income ($70,005 compared to $82,272, a difference of 17.5%), householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($82,193 compared to $96,066, a difference of 16.9%), and householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($77,929 compared to $90,193, a difference of 15.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income over 65 years ($53,732 compared to $58,266, a difference of 8.4%), median male earnings ($47,832 compared to $52,835, a difference of 10.5%), and wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 24.4%, a difference of 11.5%).
Chickasaw vs Panamanian Income
Income MetricChickasawPanamanian
Per Capita Income
Tragic
$36,475
Poor
$42,035
Median Family Income
Tragic
$85,356
Tragic
$97,683
Median Household Income
Tragic
$70,005
Poor
$82,272
Median Earnings
Tragic
$40,672
Fair
$45,593
Median Male Earnings
Tragic
$47,832
Poor
$52,835
Median Female Earnings
Tragic
$34,414
Fair
$39,049
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Tragic
$44,763
Poor
$51,611
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Tragic
$77,929
Tragic
$90,193
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Tragic
$82,193
Poor
$96,066
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Tragic
$53,732
Tragic
$58,266
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
27.2%
Exceptional
24.4%

Chickasaw vs Panamanian Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Panamanian communities in the United States are seen in single male poverty (16.3% compared to 12.9%, a difference of 26.7%), female poverty among 18-24 year olds (24.5% compared to 19.7%, a difference of 24.4%), and single female poverty (26.3% compared to 21.7%, a difference of 20.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of receiving food stamps (13.1% compared to 13.1%, a difference of 0.050%), married-couple family poverty (5.8% compared to 5.6%, a difference of 4.0%), and family poverty (10.8% compared to 9.8%, a difference of 10.2%).
Chickasaw vs Panamanian Poverty
Poverty MetricChickasawPanamanian
Poverty
Tragic
14.7%
Tragic
13.1%
Families
Tragic
10.8%
Tragic
9.8%
Males
Tragic
13.5%
Tragic
11.9%
Females
Tragic
15.9%
Tragic
14.2%
Females 18 to 24 years
Tragic
24.5%
Excellent
19.7%
Females 25 to 34 years
Tragic
17.0%
Tragic
14.2%
Children Under 5 years
Tragic
21.8%
Tragic
18.2%
Children Under 16 years
Tragic
19.5%
Tragic
17.5%
Boys Under 16 years
Tragic
19.8%
Tragic
17.7%
Girls Under 16 years
Tragic
19.6%
Tragic
17.6%
Single Males
Tragic
16.3%
Fair
12.9%
Single Females
Tragic
26.3%
Tragic
21.7%
Single Fathers
Tragic
19.0%
Fair
16.4%
Single Mothers
Tragic
34.4%
Fair
29.6%
Married Couples
Tragic
5.8%
Tragic
5.6%
Seniors Over 65 years
Good
10.7%
Tragic
11.9%
Seniors Over 75 years
Exceptional
11.6%
Tragic
13.4%
Receiving Food Stamps
Tragic
13.1%
Tragic
13.1%

Chickasaw vs Panamanian Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Panamanian communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.3% compared to 9.1%, a difference of 24.1%), unemployment among women with children under 6 years (9.0% compared to 7.6%, a difference of 17.2%), 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 55 to 59 years (4.8% compared to 4.7%, a difference of 1.1%), unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.9% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 1.2%), and unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.7% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 4.4%).
Chickasaw vs Panamanian Unemployment
Unemployment MetricChickasawPanamanian
Unemployment
Exceptional
5.0%
Tragic
5.5%
Males
Excellent
5.2%
Tragic
5.6%
Females
Excellent
5.1%
Tragic
5.5%
Youth < 25
Exceptional
11.2%
Tragic
12.4%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Exceptional
16.7%
Tragic
18.7%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
9.9%
Tragic
10.9%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Fair
6.7%
Tragic
7.0%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Tragic
6.2%
Tragic
5.8%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Tragic
4.9%
Tragic
5.0%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.2%
Poor
4.6%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Good
4.8%
Excellent
4.7%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Excellent
4.8%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
4.7%
Average
5.4%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
4.4%
Average
5.2%
Seniors > 75
Exceptional
7.3%
Tragic
9.1%
Women w/ Children < 6
Tragic
9.0%
Average
7.6%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
8.6%
Tragic
9.3%
Women w/ Children < 18
Good
5.4%
Poor
5.7%

Chickasaw vs Panamanian Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Panamanian communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (38.3% compared to 36.1%, a difference of 6.0%), in labor force | age > 16 (62.3% compared to 65.3%, a difference of 4.9%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (79.0% compared to 82.2%, a difference of 3.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 74.7%, a difference of 0.40%), in labor force | age 30-34 (81.9% compared to 84.2%, a difference of 2.8%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (81.9% compared to 84.2%, a difference of 2.8%).
Chickasaw vs Panamanian Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricChickasawPanamanian
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Tragic
62.3%
Good
65.3%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Tragic
76.2%
Tragic
79.1%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
38.3%
Fair
36.1%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Poor
74.5%
Fair
74.7%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Tragic
81.9%
Tragic
84.2%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Tragic
81.9%
Tragic
84.2%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Tragic
80.9%
Tragic
84.0%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Tragic
79.0%
Tragic
82.2%

Chickasaw vs Panamanian Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Panamanian communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.8% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 15.9%), divorced or separated (14.2% compared to 12.7%, a difference of 12.3%), and births to unmarried women (36.3% compared to 34.2%, a difference of 6.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households with children (28.2% compared to 28.2%, a difference of 0.11%), family households (64.4% compared to 64.8%, a difference of 0.68%), and single mother households (7.0% compared to 7.1%, a difference of 1.1%).
Chickasaw vs Panamanian Family Structure
Family Structure MetricChickasawPanamanian
Family Households
Good
64.4%
Exceptional
64.8%
Family Households with Children
Exceptional
28.2%
Exceptional
28.2%
Married-couple Households
Fair
45.9%
Tragic
45.2%
Average Family Size
Tragic
3.19
Excellent
3.25
Single Father Households
Tragic
2.8%
Fair
2.4%
Single Mother Households
Tragic
7.0%
Tragic
7.1%
Currently Married
Average
46.6%
Tragic
45.3%
Divorced or Separated
Tragic
14.2%
Tragic
12.7%
Births to Unmarried Women
Tragic
36.3%
Tragic
34.2%

Chickasaw vs Panamanian Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Panamanian communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 12.5%, a difference of 59.5%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 6.0%, a difference of 23.0%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 18.8%, a difference of 18.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 87.5%, a difference of 5.4%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 53.5%, a difference of 10.2%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 18.8%, a difference of 18.4%).
Chickasaw vs Panamanian Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricChickasawPanamanian
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.9%
Tragic
12.5%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
92.3%
Tragic
87.5%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
59.0%
Tragic
53.5%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
22.2%
Poor
18.8%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.4%
Poor
6.0%

Chickasaw vs Panamanian Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Panamanian communities in the United States are seen in master's degree (11.4% compared to 14.4%, a difference of 26.1%), no schooling completed (1.7% compared to 2.1%, a difference of 24.2%), and professional degree (3.4% compared to 4.1%, a difference of 23.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 11th grade (92.3% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 0.060%), high school diploma (88.4% compared to 88.6%, a difference of 0.23%), and nursery school (98.4% compared to 97.9%, a difference of 0.46%).
Chickasaw vs Panamanian Education Level
Education Level MetricChickasawPanamanian
No Schooling Completed
Exceptional
1.7%
Average
2.1%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.4%
Fair
97.9%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.4%
Fair
97.9%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Fair
97.9%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Fair
97.8%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.2%
Fair
97.7%
4th Grade
Exceptional
98.0%
Fair
97.4%
5th Grade
Exceptional
97.9%
Fair
97.3%
6th Grade
Exceptional
97.6%
Fair
96.9%
7th Grade
Exceptional
96.7%
Fair
95.9%
8th Grade
Exceptional
96.4%
Fair
95.6%
9th Grade
Exceptional
95.5%
Fair
94.7%
10th Grade
Excellent
94.1%
Fair
93.5%
11th Grade
Fair
92.3%
Fair
92.3%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Tragic
90.3%
Fair
90.8%
High School Diploma
Poor
88.4%
Poor
88.6%
GED/Equivalency
Tragic
83.8%
Poor
85.0%
College, Under 1 year
Tragic
60.4%
Poor
64.3%
College, 1 year or more
Tragic
53.3%
Poor
58.3%
Associate's Degree
Tragic
38.6%
Poor
45.1%
Bachelor's Degree
Tragic
30.4%
Poor
36.5%
Master's Degree
Tragic
11.4%
Fair
14.4%
Professional Degree
Tragic
3.4%
Poor
4.1%
Doctorate Degree
Tragic
1.5%
Tragic
1.7%

Chickasaw vs Panamanian Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Panamanian communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (4.5% compared to 3.0%, a difference of 49.0%), vision disability (3.2% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 36.7%), and disability age 35 to 64 (16.1% compared to 11.9%, a difference of 35.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 17.8%, a difference of 4.2%), disability age over 75 (51.2% compared to 47.9%, a difference of 6.9%), and self-care disability (2.9% compared to 2.5%, a difference of 12.3%).
Chickasaw vs Panamanian Disability
Disability MetricChickasawPanamanian
Disability
Tragic
15.2%
Tragic
12.1%
Males
Tragic
15.1%
Tragic
11.7%
Females
Tragic
15.2%
Poor
12.4%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
1.7%
Tragic
1.3%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Tragic
6.8%
Tragic
6.0%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
9.0%
Poor
6.8%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Tragic
16.1%
Tragic
11.9%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
30.2%
Tragic
24.4%
Age | Over 75 years
Tragic
51.2%
Poor
47.9%
Vision
Tragic
3.2%
Tragic
2.3%
Hearing
Tragic
4.5%
Average
3.0%
Cognitive
Tragic
18.5%
Tragic
17.8%
Ambulatory
Tragic
8.0%
Tragic
6.4%
Self-Care
Tragic
2.9%
Tragic
2.5%