Chickasaw vs Russian Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 143,302,445 people shows a slight negative correlation between the proportion of Russians within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.078. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.010% in Russians. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to a decrease of 9.7 Russians.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Russian communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($36,475 compared to $53,154, a difference of 45.7%), householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($77,929 compared to $110,398, a difference of 41.7%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($82,193 compared to $116,328, a difference of 41.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 28.0%, a difference of 3.1%), householder income under 25 years ($44,763 compared to $54,389, a difference of 21.5%), and householder income over 65 years ($53,732 compared to $67,626, a difference of 25.9%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Russian communities in the United States are seen in child poverty under the age of 5 (21.8% compared to 14.8%, a difference of 47.9%), family poverty (10.8% compared to 7.5%, a difference of 45.5%), and child poverty under the age of 16 (19.5% compared to 13.5%, a difference of 44.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.6% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 0.080%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.7% compared to 10.0%, a difference of 6.8%), and single father poverty (19.0% compared to 16.4%, a difference of 15.2%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Russian communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (9.0% compared to 7.2%, a difference of 24.8%), unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.3% compared to 8.9%, a difference of 20.9%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.4% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 17.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.8% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 1.3%), unemployment (5.0% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 1.5%), and unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.7% compared to 6.6%, a difference of 1.5%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Russian communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 45-54 (79.0% compared to 83.4%, a difference of 5.5%), in labor force | age 20-64 (76.2% compared to 80.0%, a difference of 5.1%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (80.9% compared to 85.0%, a difference of 5.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 74.8%, a difference of 0.53%), in labor force | age > 16 (62.3% compared to 64.9%, a difference of 4.1%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (81.9% compared to 85.3%, a difference of 4.2%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Russian communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.8% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 37.2%), single mother households (7.0% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 33.3%), and births to unmarried women (36.3% compared to 28.0%, a difference of 29.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (64.4% compared to 63.4%, a difference of 1.6%), average family size (3.19 compared to 3.12, a difference of 2.0%), and currently married (46.6% compared to 48.6%, a difference of 4.2%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Russian communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 47.6%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 6.0%, a difference of 24.4%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 18.8%, a difference of 17.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 88.7%, a difference of 4.1%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 54.8%, a difference of 7.7%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 18.8%, a difference of 17.8%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Russian communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (3.4% compared to 6.3%, a difference of 88.4%), master's degree (11.4% compared to 19.5%, a difference of 71.1%), and doctorate degree (1.5% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 69.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of kindergarten (98.4% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.0%), 1st grade (98.3% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.0%), and nursery school (98.4% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.010%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Russian communities in the United States are seen in disability age 35 to 64 (16.1% compared to 10.2%, a difference of 58.3%), vision disability (3.2% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 57.3%), and disability age 65 to 74 (30.2% compared to 21.2%, a difference of 42.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (51.2% compared to 45.5%, a difference of 12.5%), cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 16.4%, a difference of 12.7%), and self-care disability (2.9% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 18.8%).