Immigrants from Bangladesh vs Chickasaw Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 91,010,284 people shows a slight negative correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw within Immigrant from Bangladesh communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.098. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Bangladesh within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.002% in Chickasaw. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Bangladesh corresponds to a decrease of 1.7 Chickasaw.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Bangladesh and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in wage/income gap (20.9% compared to 27.2%, a difference of 29.7%), householder income under 25 years ($54,714 compared to $44,763, a difference of 22.2%), and householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($90,448 compared to $77,929, a difference of 16.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income over 65 years ($55,394 compared to $53,732, a difference of 3.1%), median male earnings ($51,642 compared to $47,832, a difference of 8.0%), and median family income ($94,665 compared to $85,356, a difference of 10.9%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Bangladesh and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in seniors poverty over the age of 75 (15.8% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 35.7%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (14.1% compared to 10.7%, a difference of 31.7%), and married-couple family poverty (7.5% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 29.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of child poverty among boys under 16 (19.9% compared to 19.8%, a difference of 0.62%), child poverty among girls under 16 (19.9% compared to 19.6%, a difference of 1.1%), and child poverty under the age of 16 (19.8% compared to 19.5%, a difference of 1.6%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Bangladesh and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (6.0% compared to 4.3%, a difference of 37.6%), unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.7% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 29.8%), and unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (21.5% compared to 16.7%, a difference of 28.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among women with children under 6 years (8.8% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 1.5%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.8% compared to 8.6%, a difference of 2.7%), and unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (6.4% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 3.5%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Bangladesh and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (30.0% compared to 38.3%, a difference of 27.6%), in labor force | age 20-24 (70.6% compared to 74.5%, a difference of 5.4%), and in labor force | age > 16 (64.5% compared to 62.3%, a difference of 3.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 25-29 (83.0% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 1.3%), in labor force | age 30-34 (83.6% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 2.1%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (80.7% compared to 79.0%, a difference of 2.2%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Bangladesh and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.1% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 32.9%), divorced or separated (11.0% compared to 14.2%, a difference of 29.5%), and births to unmarried women (30.9% compared to 36.3%, a difference of 17.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (63.9% compared to 64.4%, a difference of 0.85%), family households with children (27.6% compared to 28.2%, a difference of 2.4%), and single mother households (6.9% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 2.5%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Bangladesh and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (25.8% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 227.7%), 4 or more vehicles in household (3.9% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 90.8%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (12.5% compared to 22.2%, a difference of 77.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (74.3% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 24.2%), 2 or more vehicles in household (38.8% compared to 59.0%, a difference of 52.1%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (12.5% compared to 22.2%, a difference of 77.4%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Bangladesh and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (3.1% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 85.6%), master's degree (15.5% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 35.5%), and professional degree (4.4% compared to 3.4%, a difference of 32.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of college, under 1 year (61.3% compared to 60.4%, a difference of 1.4%), nursery school (96.9% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 1.6%), and kindergarten (96.8% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 1.6%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Bangladesh and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (0.85% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 104.0%), hearing disability (2.4% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 84.6%), and disability age 18 to 34 (5.6% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 59.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (17.8% compared to 18.5%, a difference of 3.6%), disability age over 75 (48.0% compared to 51.2%, a difference of 6.6%), and self-care disability (2.6% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 8.7%).