Choctaw vs Iroquois Community Comparison

COMPARE

Choctaw
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican 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
Iroquois
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaColombianColvilleComancheCosta 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

Choctaw

Iroquois

Fair
Fair
2,496
SOCIAL INDEX
22.5/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
254th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
2,526
SOCIAL INDEX
22.8/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
253rd/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Iroquois Integration in Choctaw Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 133,476,019 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Iroquois within Choctaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.019. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Choctaw within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.002% in Iroquois. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Choctaw corresponds to an increase of 1.7 Iroquois.
Choctaw Integration in Iroquois Communities

Choctaw vs Iroquois Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Choctaw and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in wage/income gap (28.1% compared to 25.1%, a difference of 12.2%), per capita income ($35,999 compared to $39,104, a difference of 8.6%), and median female earnings ($33,775 compared to $36,408, a difference of 7.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income over 65 years ($53,060 compared to $53,737, a difference of 1.3%), median male earnings ($47,729 compared to $49,374, a difference of 3.5%), and householder income under 25 years ($45,450 compared to $47,380, a difference of 4.3%).
Choctaw vs Iroquois Income
Income MetricChoctawIroquois
Per Capita Income
Tragic
$35,999
Tragic
$39,104
Median Family Income
Tragic
$84,835
Tragic
$90,543
Median Household Income
Tragic
$69,947
Tragic
$74,279
Median Earnings
Tragic
$40,270
Tragic
$42,430
Median Male Earnings
Tragic
$47,729
Tragic
$49,374
Median Female Earnings
Tragic
$33,775
Tragic
$36,408
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Tragic
$45,450
Tragic
$47,380
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Tragic
$78,168
Tragic
$83,682
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Tragic
$82,287
Tragic
$87,255
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Tragic
$53,060
Tragic
$53,737
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
28.1%
Excellent
25.1%

Choctaw vs Iroquois Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Choctaw and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in single male poverty (17.0% compared to 14.5%, a difference of 17.2%), single father poverty (20.7% compared to 17.7%, a difference of 16.9%), and married-couple family poverty (6.3% compared to 5.5%, a difference of 14.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of receiving food stamps (13.6% compared to 13.5%, a difference of 0.43%), female poverty among 25-34 year olds (18.1% compared to 17.5%, a difference of 3.4%), and child poverty among girls under 16 (21.1% compared to 20.4%, a difference of 3.5%).
Choctaw vs Iroquois Poverty
Poverty MetricChoctawIroquois
Poverty
Tragic
15.6%
Tragic
14.5%
Families
Tragic
11.6%
Tragic
10.7%
Males
Tragic
14.4%
Tragic
13.2%
Females
Tragic
16.8%
Tragic
15.8%
Females 18 to 24 years
Tragic
24.3%
Tragic
22.9%
Females 25 to 34 years
Tragic
18.1%
Tragic
17.5%
Children Under 5 years
Tragic
23.5%
Tragic
22.0%
Children Under 16 years
Tragic
21.0%
Tragic
19.9%
Boys Under 16 years
Tragic
21.3%
Tragic
19.6%
Girls Under 16 years
Tragic
21.1%
Tragic
20.4%
Single Males
Tragic
17.0%
Tragic
14.5%
Single Females
Tragic
27.2%
Tragic
25.7%
Single Fathers
Tragic
20.7%
Tragic
17.7%
Single Mothers
Tragic
36.4%
Tragic
34.8%
Married Couples
Tragic
6.3%
Poor
5.5%
Seniors Over 65 years
Poor
11.4%
Tragic
11.9%
Seniors Over 75 years
Fair
12.5%
Tragic
14.0%
Receiving Food Stamps
Tragic
13.6%
Tragic
13.5%

Choctaw vs Iroquois Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Choctaw and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (9.8% compared to 8.7%, a difference of 12.0%), unemployment among ages 45 to 54 years (4.7% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 9.7%), and unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (6.4% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 9.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment (5.4% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 0.36%), unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (7.5% compared to 7.5%, a difference of 0.78%), and female unemployment (5.4% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 0.93%).
Choctaw vs Iroquois Unemployment
Unemployment MetricChoctawIroquois
Unemployment
Poor
5.4%
Poor
5.4%
Males
Tragic
5.6%
Tragic
5.7%
Females
Poor
5.4%
Fair
5.4%
Youth < 25
Tragic
12.1%
Exceptional
11.3%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Tragic
19.0%
Average
17.6%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Tragic
10.6%
Exceptional
10.1%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Tragic
7.5%
Tragic
7.5%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Tragic
6.4%
Tragic
5.9%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Tragic
5.3%
Tragic
5.1%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Tragic
4.7%
Tragic
5.1%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Tragic
5.0%
Fair
4.9%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
4.8%
Exceptional
4.7%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
5.1%
Exceptional
5.1%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
4.9%
Exceptional
4.9%
Seniors > 75
Fair
8.8%
Tragic
9.3%
Women w/ Children < 6
Tragic
9.8%
Tragic
8.7%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Tragic
9.9%
Tragic
9.2%
Women w/ Children < 18
Tragic
5.9%
Tragic
5.7%

Choctaw vs Iroquois Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Choctaw and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (38.0% compared to 39.9%, a difference of 5.2%), in labor force | age 35-44 (80.5% compared to 83.5%, a difference of 3.7%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (81.0% compared to 83.8%, a difference of 3.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 30-34 (81.4% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 0.59%), in labor force | age 20-24 (74.7% compared to 75.6%, a difference of 1.3%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (75.4% compared to 77.5%, a difference of 2.8%).
Choctaw vs Iroquois Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricChoctawIroquois
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Tragic
61.5%
Tragic
63.2%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Tragic
75.4%
Tragic
77.5%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
38.0%
Exceptional
39.9%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Fair
74.7%
Excellent
75.6%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Tragic
81.0%
Tragic
83.8%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Tragic
81.4%
Tragic
81.9%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Tragic
80.5%
Tragic
83.5%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Tragic
78.2%
Tragic
80.6%

Choctaw vs Iroquois Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Choctaw and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in divorced or separated (14.1% compared to 12.9%, a difference of 9.8%), family households with children (28.1% compared to 26.1%, a difference of 7.7%), and married-couple households (46.0% compared to 43.7%, a difference of 5.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single mother households (7.0% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 1.1%), average family size (3.21 compared to 3.16, a difference of 1.8%), and currently married (46.3% compared to 44.7%, a difference of 3.4%).
Choctaw vs Iroquois Family Structure
Family Structure MetricChoctawIroquois
Family Households
Exceptional
64.9%
Tragic
62.2%
Family Households with Children
Exceptional
28.1%
Tragic
26.1%
Married-couple Households
Fair
46.0%
Tragic
43.7%
Average Family Size
Fair
3.21
Tragic
3.16
Single Father Households
Tragic
2.7%
Tragic
2.6%
Single Mother Households
Tragic
7.0%
Tragic
7.0%
Currently Married
Fair
46.3%
Tragic
44.7%
Divorced or Separated
Tragic
14.1%
Tragic
12.9%
Births to Unmarried Women
Tragic
36.9%
Tragic
38.2%

Choctaw vs Iroquois Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Choctaw and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 10.9%, a difference of 38.8%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.8% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 20.6%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (23.0% compared to 19.4%, a difference of 18.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.2% compared to 89.2%, a difference of 3.4%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.3% compared to 54.7%, a difference of 8.4%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (23.0% compared to 19.4%, a difference of 18.3%).
Choctaw vs Iroquois Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricChoctawIroquois
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.9%
Poor
10.9%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
92.2%
Poor
89.2%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
59.3%
Fair
54.7%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
23.0%
Average
19.4%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.8%
Good
6.5%

Choctaw vs Iroquois Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Choctaw and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in master's degree (11.0% compared to 12.9%, a difference of 16.9%), professional degree (3.2% compared to 3.7%, a difference of 14.5%), and associate's degree (37.8% compared to 42.8%, a difference of 13.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 6th grade (97.5% compared to 97.4%, a difference of 0.050%), 4th grade (97.9% compared to 97.8%, a difference of 0.070%), and 5th grade (97.7% compared to 97.7%, a difference of 0.070%).
Choctaw vs Iroquois Education Level
Education Level MetricChoctawIroquois
No Schooling Completed
Exceptional
1.8%
Exceptional
1.9%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.3%
Exceptional
98.2%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.3%
Exceptional
98.2%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.2%
Exceptional
98.1%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.2%
Exceptional
98.1%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.1%
Exceptional
98.0%
4th Grade
Exceptional
97.9%
Exceptional
97.8%
5th Grade
Exceptional
97.7%
Exceptional
97.7%
6th Grade
Exceptional
97.5%
Exceptional
97.4%
7th Grade
Exceptional
96.5%
Exceptional
96.6%
8th Grade
Exceptional
96.2%
Exceptional
96.3%
9th Grade
Excellent
95.1%
Exceptional
95.4%
10th Grade
Fair
93.6%
Exceptional
94.3%
11th Grade
Tragic
91.8%
Good
92.8%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Tragic
89.8%
Average
91.1%
High School Diploma
Tragic
87.8%
Average
89.2%
GED/Equivalency
Tragic
83.1%
Tragic
84.6%
College, Under 1 year
Tragic
59.3%
Tragic
62.6%
College, 1 year or more
Tragic
52.3%
Tragic
56.2%
Associate's Degree
Tragic
37.8%
Tragic
42.8%
Bachelor's Degree
Tragic
29.4%
Tragic
33.2%
Master's Degree
Tragic
11.0%
Tragic
12.9%
Professional Degree
Tragic
3.2%
Tragic
3.7%
Doctorate Degree
Tragic
1.4%
Tragic
1.6%

Choctaw vs Iroquois Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Choctaw and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.9% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 28.8%), vision disability (3.3% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 26.4%), and hearing disability (4.5% compared to 3.7%, a difference of 23.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age 5 to 17 (6.9% compared to 6.9%, a difference of 0.33%), cognitive disability (18.4% compared to 18.2%, a difference of 1.4%), and disability age over 75 (52.7% compared to 48.4%, a difference of 8.8%).
Choctaw vs Iroquois Disability
Disability MetricChoctawIroquois
Disability
Tragic
15.4%
Tragic
13.8%
Males
Tragic
15.4%
Tragic
13.6%
Females
Tragic
15.4%
Tragic
14.0%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
1.9%
Tragic
1.5%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Tragic
6.9%
Tragic
6.9%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
9.0%
Tragic
7.9%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Tragic
16.4%
Tragic
14.4%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
30.2%
Tragic
25.4%
Age | Over 75 years
Tragic
52.7%
Tragic
48.4%
Vision
Tragic
3.3%
Tragic
2.6%
Hearing
Tragic
4.5%
Tragic
3.7%
Cognitive
Tragic
18.4%
Tragic
18.2%
Ambulatory
Tragic
8.3%
Tragic
7.1%
Self-Care
Tragic
3.0%
Tragic
2.7%