Chickasaw vs Pima Seniors Poverty Over the Age of 65

On this page

Metric Comparison Correlation Chart Correlation Data Summary Similar Demographics Chickasaw Pima

COMPARE

Chickasaw

Race

Asian Black/African American Hawaiian Hispanic or Latino Native/Alaskan White/Caucasian

Ancestry

Afghan African Alaska Native Alaskan Athabascan Albanian Aleut Alsatian American Apache Arab Arapaho Argentinean Armenian Assyrian/Chaldean/Syriac Australian Austrian Bahamian Bangladeshi Barbadian Basque Belgian Belizean Bermudan Bhutanese Blackfeet Bolivian Brazilian British British West Indian Bulgarian Burmese Cajun Cambodian Canadian Cape Verdean Carpatho Rusyn Celtic Central American Central American Indian Cherokee CheyenneChickasawChilean Chinese Chippewa Choctaw Colombian Colville Comanche Costa Rican Cree Creek Croatian Crow Cuban Cypriot Czech Czechoslovakian Danish Delaware Dominican Dutch Dutch West Indian Eastern European Ecuadorian Egyptian English Estonian Ethiopian European Fijian Filipino Finnish French French American Indian French Canadian German German Russian Ghanaian Greek Guamanian/Chamorro Guatemalan Guyanese Haitian Hmong Honduran Hopi Houma Hungarian Icelander Indian (Asian)Indonesian Inupiat Iranian Iraqi Irish Iroquois Israeli Italian Jamaican Japanese Jordanian Kenyan Kiowa Korean Laotian Latvian Lebanese Liberian Lithuanian Lumbee Luxembourger Macedonian Malaysian Maltese Marshallese Menominee Mexican Mexican American Indian Mongolian Moroccan Native Hawaiian Navajo Nepalese New Zealander Nicaraguan Nigerian Northern European Norwegian Okinawan Osage Ottawa Paiute Pakistani Palestinian Panamanian Paraguayan Pennsylvania German Peruvian Polish Portuguese Potawatomi Pueblo Puerto Rican Puget Sound Salish Romanian Russian Salvadoran Samoan Scandinavian Scotch-Irish Scottish Seminole Senegalese Serbian Shoshone Sierra Leonean Sioux Slavic Slovak Slovene Somali South African South American South American Indian Soviet Union Spaniard Spanish Spanish American Spanish American Indian Sri Lankan Subsaharan African Sudanese Swedish Swiss Syrian Taiwanese Thai Tlingit-Haida Tohono O'Odham Tongan Trinidadian and Tobagonian Tsimshian Turkish U.S. Virgin Islander Ugandan Ukrainian Uruguayan Ute Venezuelan Vietnamese Welsh West Indian Yakama Yaqui Yugoslavian Yuman Yup'ik Zimbabwean

Immigration

Nonimmigrants Immigrants Afghanistan Africa Albania Argentina Armenia Asia Australia Austria Bahamas Bangladesh Barbados Belarus Belgium Belize Bolivia Bosnia and Herzegovina Brazil Bulgaria Burma/Myanmar Cabo Verde Cambodia Cameroon Canada Caribbean Central America Chile China Colombia Congo Costa Rica Croatia Cuba Czechoslovakia Denmark Dominica Dominican Republic Eastern Africa Eastern Asia Eastern Europe Ecuador Egypt El Salvador England Eritrea Ethiopia Europe Fiji France Germany Ghana Greece Grenada Guatemala Guyana Haiti Honduras Hong Kong Hungary India Indonesia Iran Iraq Ireland Israel Italy Jamaica Japan Jordan Kazakhstan Kenya Korea Kuwait Laos Latin America Latvia Lebanon Liberia Lithuania Malaysia Mexico Micronesia Middle Africa Moldova Morocco Nepal Netherlands Nicaragua Nigeria North America North Macedonia Northern Africa Northern Europe Norway Oceania Pakistan Panama Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Romania Russia Saudi Arabia Scotland Senegal Serbia Sierra Leone Singapore Somalia South Africa South America South Central Asia South Eastern Asia Southern Europe Spain Sri Lanka St. Vincent and the Grenadines Sudan Sweden Switzerland Syria Taiwan Thailand Trinidad and Tobago Turkey Uganda Ukraine Uruguay Uzbekistan Venezuela Vietnam West Indies Western Africa Western Asia Western Europe Yemen Zaire Zimbabwe Azores

Pima

Race

Asian Black/African American Hawaiian Hispanic or Latino Native/Alaskan White/Caucasian

Ancestry

Afghan African Alaska Native Alaskan Athabascan Albanian Aleut Alsatian American Apache Arab Arapaho Argentinean Armenian Assyrian/Chaldean/Syriac Australian Austrian Bahamian Bangladeshi Barbadian Basque Belgian Belizean Bermudan Bhutanese Blackfeet Bolivian Brazilian British British West Indian Bulgarian Burmese Cajun Cambodian Canadian Cape Verdean Carpatho Rusyn Celtic Central American Central American Indian Cherokee Cheyenne Chilean Chinese Chippewa Choctaw Colombian Colville Comanche Costa Rican Cree Creek Croatian Crow Cuban Cypriot Czech Czechoslovakian Danish Delaware Dominican Dutch Dutch West Indian Eastern European Ecuadorian Egyptian English Estonian Ethiopian European Fijian Filipino Finnish French French American Indian French Canadian German German Russian Ghanaian Greek Guamanian/Chamorro Guatemalan Guyanese Haitian Hmong Honduran Hopi Houma Hungarian Icelander Indian (Asian)Indonesian Inupiat Iranian Iraqi Irish Iroquois Israeli Italian Jamaican Japanese Jordanian Kenyan Kiowa Korean Laotian Latvian Lebanese Liberian Lithuanian Lumbee Luxembourger Macedonian Malaysian Maltese Marshallese Menominee Mexican Mexican American Indian Mongolian Moroccan Native Hawaiian Navajo Nepalese New Zealander Nicaraguan Nigerian Northern European Norwegian Okinawan Osage Ottawa Paiute Pakistani Palestinian Panamanian Paraguayan Pennsylvania German PeruvianPimaPolish Portuguese Potawatomi Pueblo Puerto Rican Puget Sound Salish Romanian Russian Salvadoran Samoan Scandinavian Scotch-Irish Scottish Seminole Senegalese Serbian Shoshone Sierra Leonean Sioux Slavic Slovak Slovene Somali South African South American South American Indian Soviet Union Spaniard Spanish Spanish American Spanish American Indian Sri Lankan Subsaharan African Sudanese Swedish Swiss Syrian Taiwanese Thai Tlingit-Haida Tohono O'Odham Tongan Trinidadian and Tobagonian Tsimshian Turkish U.S. Virgin Islander Ugandan Ukrainian Uruguayan Ute Venezuelan Vietnamese Welsh West Indian Yakama Yaqui Yugoslavian Yuman Yup'ik Zimbabwean

Immigration

Seniors Poverty Over the Age of 65

Social Comparison

Income

Per Capita Income Median Family Income Median Household Income Median Earnings Median Male Earnings Median Female Earnings Householder Income Under 25 years Householder Income Ages 25 - 44 years Householder Income Ages 45 - 64 years Householder Income Over 65 years Wage/Income Gap

Poverty

Poverty Family Poverty Male Poverty Female Poverty Female Poverty Among 18-24 Year Olds Female Poverty Among 25-34 Year Olds Child Poverty Under the Age of 5 Child Poverty Under the Age of 16 Child Poverty Among Boys Under 16 Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Single Male Poverty Single Female Poverty Single Father Poverty Single Mother Poverty Married-Couple Family PovertySeniors Poverty Over the Age of 65Seniors Poverty Over the Age of 75 Receiving Food Stamps

Unemployment

Labor Participation

Family Structure

Family Households Family Households with Children Married-couple Households Average Family Size Single Father Households Single Mother Households Currently Married Divorced or Separated Births to Unmarried Women

Vehicle Availability

No Vehicles in Household 1 or more Vehicles in Household 2 or more Vehicles in Household 3 or more Vehicles in Household 4 or more Vehicles in Household

Education Level

No Schooling Completed Nursery School Kindergarten 1st Grade 2nd Grade 3rd Grade 4th Grade 5th Grade 6th Grade 7th Grade 8th Grade 9th Grade 10th Grade 11th Grade 12th Grade, No Diploma High School Diploma GED/Equivalency College, Under 1 year College, 1 year or more Associate's Degree Bachelor's Degree Master's Degree Professional Degree Doctorate Degree

Disability

Disability Male Disability Female Disability Disability Age Under 5 Disability Age 5 to 17 Disability Age 18 to 34 Disability Age 35 to 64 Disability Age 65 to 74 Disability Age Over 75 Vision Disability Hearing Disability Cognitive Disability Ambulatory Disability Self-Care Disability

Seniors Poverty Over the Age of 65 Comparison

Chickasaw

Pima

Good

Tragic

10.7%

SENIORS POVERTY OVER THE AGE OF 65

73.6/ 100

METRIC RATING

155th/ 347

METRIC RANK

19.8%

SENIORS POVERTY OVER THE AGE OF 65

0.0/ 100

METRIC RATING

345th/ 347

METRIC RANK

Chickasaw vs Pima Seniors Poverty Over the Age of 65 Correlation Chart

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 147,403,073 people shows a slight positive correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw and poverty level among seniors over the age of 65 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.068 and weighted average of 10.7%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 61,518,607 people shows a moderate positive correlation between the proportion of Pima and poverty level among seniors over the age of 65 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.494 and weighted average of 19.8%, a difference of 85.4%.

Seniors Poverty Over the Age of 65 Correlation Summary

Measurement	Chickasaw	Pima
Minimum	2.1%	4.4%
Maximum	26.4%	100.0%
Range	24.4%	95.6%
Mean	11.9%	30.1%
Median	11.5%	24.6%
Interquartile 25% (IQ1)	9.1%	12.4%
Interquartile 75% (IQ3)	14.2%	34.3%
Interquartile Range (IQR)	5.1%	21.8%
Standard Deviation (Sample)	4.4%	23.6%
Standard Deviation (Population)	4.4%	23.1%

Similar Demographics by Seniors Poverty Over the Age of 65

Demographics Similar to Chickasaw by Seniors Poverty Over the Age of 65

In terms of seniors poverty over the age of 65, the demographic groups most similar to Chickasaw are Ethiopian (10.7%, a difference of 0.070%), Immigrants from Ethiopia (10.7%, a difference of 0.080%), Immigrants from Saudi Arabia (10.7%, a difference of 0.16%), Immigrants from Sierra Leone (10.7%, a difference of 0.22%), and Fijian (10.7%, a difference of 0.24%).

Demographics	Rating \| Rank	Seniors Poverty Over the Age of 65
Americans	78.1 /100 \| #148	Good 10.6%
Immigrants \| Cameroon	78.1 /100 \| #149	Good 10.6%
Immigrants \| Switzerland	77.3 /100 \| #150	Good 10.6%
Spanish	76.8 /100 \| #151	Good 10.6%
Immigrants \| Egypt	76.5 /100 \| #152	Good 10.6%
Fijians	75.6 /100 \| #153	Good 10.7%
Immigrants \| Saudi Arabia	74.9 /100 \| #154	Good 10.7%
Chickasaw	73.6 /100 \| #155	Good 10.7%
Ethiopians	72.9 /100 \| #156	Good 10.7%
Immigrants \| Ethiopia	72.9 /100 \| #157	Good 10.7%
Immigrants \| Sierra Leone	71.7 /100 \| #158	Good 10.7%
Immigrants \| Micronesia	70.8 /100 \| #159	Good 10.7%
Sudanese	68.2 /100 \| #160	Good 10.7%
Arabs	65.2 /100 \| #161	Good 10.8%
Immigrants \| Indonesia	64.8 /100 \| #162	Good 10.8%

Demographics Similar to Pima by Seniors Poverty Over the Age of 65

In terms of seniors poverty over the age of 65, the demographic groups most similar to Pima are Tohono O'odham (20.8%, a difference of 5.2%), Puerto Rican (21.4%, a difference of 8.1%), Immigrants from Dominican Republic (18.3%, a difference of 8.3%), Lumbee (18.1%, a difference of 9.3%), and Immigrants from Cuba (17.9%, a difference of 10.4%).

Demographics	Rating \| Rank	Seniors Poverty Over the Age of 65
Immigrants \| Yemen	0.0 /100 \| #333	Tragic 15.9%
Immigrants \| Nicaragua	0.0 /100 \| #334	Tragic 15.9%
Cubans	0.0 /100 \| #335	Tragic 16.1%
Immigrants \| Cabo Verde	0.0 /100 \| #336	Tragic 16.2%
Immigrants \| Caribbean	0.0 /100 \| #337	Tragic 16.5%
Pueblo	0.0 /100 \| #338	Tragic 17.2%
Navajo	0.0 /100 \| #339	Tragic 17.5%
Hopi	0.0 /100 \| #340	Tragic 17.8%
Dominicans	0.0 /100 \| #341	Tragic 17.8%
Immigrants \| Cuba	0.0 /100 \| #342	Tragic 17.9%
Lumbee	0.0 /100 \| #343	Tragic 18.1%
Immigrants \| Dominican Republic	0.0 /100 \| #344	Tragic 18.3%
Pima	0.0 /100 \| #345	Tragic 19.8%
Tohono O'odham	0.0 /100 \| #346	Tragic 20.8%
Puerto Ricans	0.0 /100 \| #347	Tragic 21.4%