Australian vs Chickasaw Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 100,001,379 people shows a significant positive correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw within Australian communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.648. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Australians within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.145% in Chickasaw. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Australians corresponds to an increase of 145.1 Chickasaw.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Australian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($52,074 compared to $36,475, a difference of 42.8%), median family income ($118,440 compared to $85,356, a difference of 38.8%), and householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($107,912 compared to $77,929, a difference of 38.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (28.2% compared to 27.2%, a difference of 3.7%), householder income under 25 years ($53,739 compared to $44,763, a difference of 20.1%), and householder income over 65 years ($66,891 compared to $53,732, a difference of 24.5%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Australian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in child poverty under the age of 5 (15.5% compared to 21.8%, a difference of 40.8%), family poverty (7.8% compared to 10.8%, a difference of 38.7%), and receiving food stamps (9.6% compared to 13.1%, a difference of 36.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.5% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 1.4%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (9.9% compared to 10.7%, a difference of 7.5%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (20.8% compared to 24.5%, a difference of 17.8%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Australian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (7.2% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 24.3%), unemployment among seniors over 75 years (8.7% compared to 7.3%, a difference of 19.0%), and unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (5.3% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 16.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.8% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 0.69%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.5% compared to 8.6%, a difference of 0.88%), and unemployment among youth under 25 years (10.9% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 2.0%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Australian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age > 16 (65.3% compared to 62.3%, a difference of 4.8%), in labor force | age 45-54 (82.5% compared to 79.0%, a difference of 4.4%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (79.5% compared to 76.2%, a difference of 4.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (75.5% compared to 74.5%, a difference of 1.4%), in labor force | age 16-19 (37.8% compared to 38.3%, a difference of 1.5%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (84.9% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 3.7%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Australian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.2% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 26.5%), single mother households (5.6% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 26.5%), and births to unmarried women (29.5% compared to 36.3%, a difference of 22.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.13 compared to 3.19, a difference of 1.8%), currently married (47.6% compared to 46.6%, a difference of 2.1%), and family households (62.8% compared to 64.4%, a difference of 2.5%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Australian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (10.1% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 28.5%), 4 or more vehicles in household (6.6% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 13.4%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (20.1% compared to 22.2%, a difference of 10.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (90.0% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 2.5%), 2 or more vehicles in household (56.7% compared to 59.0%, a difference of 4.1%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (20.1% compared to 22.2%, a difference of 10.4%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Australian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (5.9% compared to 3.4%, a difference of 75.1%), master's degree (18.4% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 61.0%), and doctorate degree (2.4% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 58.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (98.5% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.060%), kindergarten (98.4% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.060%), and 1st grade (98.4% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.060%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Australian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in vision disability (2.1% compared to 3.2%, a difference of 54.4%), disability age 35 to 64 (10.8% compared to 16.1%, a difference of 49.8%), and hearing disability (3.2% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 41.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (17.2% compared to 18.5%, a difference of 7.8%), disability age over 75 (45.7% compared to 51.2%, a difference of 12.1%), and disability age 5 to 17 (5.5% compared to 6.8%, a difference of 24.1%).