Turkish vs Chickasaw Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 105,260,648 people shows a substantial positive correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw within Turkish communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.522. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Turks within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.129% in Chickasaw. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Turks corresponds to an increase of 129.2 Chickasaw.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Turkish and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($52,391 compared to $36,475, a difference of 43.6%), householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($117,814 compared to $82,193, a difference of 43.3%), and median family income ($121,202 compared to $85,356, a difference of 42.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (27.7% compared to 27.2%, a difference of 2.0%), householder income under 25 years ($54,266 compared to $44,763, a difference of 21.2%), and householder income over 65 years ($68,037 compared to $53,732, a difference of 26.6%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Turkish and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in child poverty under the age of 5 (14.6% compared to 21.8%, a difference of 49.9%), female poverty among 25-34 year olds (11.4% compared to 17.0%, a difference of 49.3%), and child poverty among boys under 16 (13.6% compared to 19.8%, a difference of 45.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.7% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 0.20%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.0% compared to 10.7%, a difference of 6.8%), and single father poverty (15.8% compared to 19.0%, a difference of 20.3%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Turkish and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (7.0% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 27.3%), unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (5.1% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 22.0%), and unemployment among seniors over 75 years (8.6% compared to 7.3%, a difference of 17.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 45 to 54 years (4.3% compared to 4.2%, a difference of 0.90%), unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.7% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 1.7%), and unemployment (4.9% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 1.9%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Turkish and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (35.4% compared to 38.3%, a difference of 8.3%), in labor force | age > 16 (66.1% compared to 62.3%, a difference of 6.1%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (83.8% compared to 79.0%, a difference of 6.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (73.9% compared to 74.5%, a difference of 0.69%), in labor force | age 25-29 (85.6% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 4.6%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (85.7% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 4.6%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Turkish and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.0% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 39.2%), births to unmarried women (27.4% compared to 36.3%, a difference of 32.2%), and single mother households (5.5% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 28.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.16 compared to 3.19, a difference of 0.73%), family households (63.6% compared to 64.4%, a difference of 1.2%), and currently married (47.8% compared to 46.6%, a difference of 2.6%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Turkish and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (11.7% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 48.6%), 4 or more vehicles in household (5.8% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 27.7%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.4% compared to 22.2%, a difference of 20.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (88.4% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 4.4%), 2 or more vehicles in household (54.3% compared to 59.0%, a difference of 8.6%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.4% compared to 22.2%, a difference of 20.4%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Turkish and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (6.2% compared to 3.4%, a difference of 84.6%), doctorate degree (2.7% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 76.6%), and master's degree (19.9% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 74.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 7th grade (96.7% compared to 96.7%, a difference of 0.020%), 8th grade (96.5% compared to 96.4%, a difference of 0.050%), and 4th grade (97.9% compared to 98.0%, a difference of 0.10%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Turkish and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in disability age 35 to 64 (9.7% compared to 16.1%, a difference of 66.9%), vision disability (1.9% compared to 3.2%, a difference of 66.8%), and hearing disability (2.8% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 59.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (16.9% compared to 18.5%, a difference of 9.3%), disability age over 75 (45.7% compared to 51.2%, a difference of 12.1%), and self-care disability (2.2% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 27.5%).