Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Laos Community Comparison
COMPARE
Chickasaw
Immigrants from Laos
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Chickasaw
Immigrants from Laos
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
2,709
SOCIAL INDEX
24.6/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
242nd/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
Immigrants from Laos Integration in Chickasaw Communities
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 97,492,400 people shows a mild negative correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Laos within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.364. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.007% in Immigrants from Laos. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to a decrease of 7.2 Immigrants from Laos.
Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Laos Income
When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Laos communities in the United States are seen in wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 23.8%, a difference of 14.0%), median household income ($70,005 compared to $78,327, a difference of 11.9%), and householder income under 25 years ($44,763 compared to $50,041, a difference of 11.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of median male earnings ($47,832 compared to $49,190, a difference of 2.8%), per capita income ($36,475 compared to $37,857, a difference of 3.8%), and median earnings ($40,672 compared to $42,884, a difference of 5.4%).
Income Metric | Chickasaw | Immigrants from Laos |
Per Capita Income | Tragic $36,475 | Tragic $37,857 |
Median Family Income | Tragic $85,356 | Tragic $92,239 |
Median Household Income | Tragic $70,005 | Tragic $78,327 |
Median Earnings | Tragic $40,672 | Tragic $42,884 |
Median Male Earnings | Tragic $47,832 | Tragic $49,190 |
Median Female Earnings | Tragic $34,414 | Tragic $36,841 |
Householder Age | Under 25 years | Tragic $44,763 | Tragic $50,041 |
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years | Tragic $77,929 | Tragic $85,553 |
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years | Tragic $82,193 | Tragic $90,909 |
Householder Age | Over 65 years | Tragic $53,732 | Tragic $56,722 |
Wage/Income Gap | Tragic 27.2% | Exceptional 23.8% |
Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Laos Poverty
When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Laos communities in the United States are seen in single father poverty (19.0% compared to 15.1%, a difference of 25.9%), single male poverty (16.3% compared to 13.0%, a difference of 25.5%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (24.5% compared to 20.6%, a difference of 18.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of married-couple family poverty (5.8% compared to 5.7%, a difference of 1.8%), seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.6% compared to 12.0%, a difference of 2.8%), and seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.7% compared to 11.1%, a difference of 3.7%).
Poverty Metric | Chickasaw | Immigrants from Laos |
Poverty | Tragic 14.7% | Tragic 13.8% |
Families | Tragic 10.8% | Tragic 10.2% |
Males | Tragic 13.5% | Tragic 12.6% |
Females | Tragic 15.9% | Tragic 15.0% |
Females 18 to 24 years | Tragic 24.5% | Tragic 20.6% |
Females 25 to 34 years | Tragic 17.0% | Tragic 15.2% |
Children Under 5 years | Tragic 21.8% | Tragic 19.4% |
Children Under 16 years | Tragic 19.5% | Tragic 18.7% |
Boys Under 16 years | Tragic 19.8% | Tragic 18.7% |
Girls Under 16 years | Tragic 19.6% | Tragic 18.9% |
Single Males | Tragic 16.3% | Fair 13.0% |
Single Females | Tragic 26.3% | Tragic 22.9% |
Single Fathers | Tragic 19.0% | Exceptional 15.1% |
Single Mothers | Tragic 34.4% | Tragic 30.6% |
Married Couples | Tragic 5.8% | Tragic 5.7% |
Seniors Over 65 years | Good 10.7% | Fair 11.1% |
Seniors Over 75 years | Exceptional 11.6% | Good 12.0% |
Receiving Food Stamps | Tragic 13.1% | Tragic 13.8% |
Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Laos Unemployment
When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Laos communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.3% compared to 8.9%, a difference of 20.7%), unemployment among women with children under 6 years (9.0% compared to 7.6%, a difference of 17.2%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.4% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 16.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (9.9% compared to 9.9%, a difference of 0.18%), unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.8% compared to 4.7%, a difference of 2.2%), and unemployment among women with children under 18 years (5.4% compared to 5.5%, a difference of 2.2%).
Unemployment Metric | Chickasaw | Immigrants from Laos |
Unemployment | Exceptional 5.0% | Fair 5.3% |
Males | Excellent 5.2% | Poor 5.4% |
Females | Excellent 5.1% | Average 5.3% |
Youth < 25 | Exceptional 11.2% | Good 11.5% |
Age | 16 to 19 years | Exceptional 16.7% | Excellent 17.1% |
Age | 20 to 24 years | Exceptional 9.9% | Exceptional 9.9% |
Age | 25 to 29 years | Fair 6.7% | Good 6.6% |
Age | 30 to 34 years | Tragic 6.2% | Average 5.5% |
Age | 35 to 44 years | Tragic 4.9% | Fair 4.7% |
Age | 45 to 54 years | Exceptional 4.2% | Fair 4.6% |
Age | 55 to 59 years | Good 4.8% | Exceptional 4.7% |
Age | 60 to 64 years | Exceptional 4.3% | Exceptional 4.6% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Exceptional 4.7% | Good 5.3% |
Seniors > 65 | Exceptional 4.4% | Good 5.1% |
Seniors > 75 | Exceptional 7.3% | Fair 8.9% |
Women w/ Children < 6 | Tragic 9.0% | Average 7.6% |
Women w/ Children 6 to 17 | Exceptional 8.6% | Exceptional 8.2% |
Women w/ Children < 18 | Good 5.4% | Fair 5.5% |
Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Laos Labor Participation
When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Laos communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (38.3% compared to 40.6%, a difference of 6.0%), in labor force | age > 16 (62.3% compared to 66.0%, a difference of 6.0%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (76.2% compared to 79.4%, a difference of 4.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 30-34 (81.9% compared to 84.2%, a difference of 2.8%), in labor force | age 45-54 (79.0% compared to 81.6%, a difference of 3.3%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (81.9% compared to 84.8%, a difference of 3.5%).
Labor Participation Metric | Chickasaw | Immigrants from Laos |
In Labor Force | Age > 16 | Tragic 62.3% | Exceptional 66.0% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-64 | Tragic 76.2% | Fair 79.4% |
In Labor Force | Age 16-19 | Exceptional 38.3% | Exceptional 40.6% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-24 | Poor 74.5% | Exceptional 77.4% |
In Labor Force | Age 25-29 | Tragic 81.9% | Good 84.8% |
In Labor Force | Age 30-34 | Tragic 81.9% | Tragic 84.2% |
In Labor Force | Age 35-44 | Tragic 80.9% | Tragic 83.8% |
In Labor Force | Age 45-54 | Tragic 79.0% | Tragic 81.6% |
Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Laos Family Structure
When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Laos communities in the United States are seen in divorced or separated (14.2% compared to 12.4%, a difference of 14.7%), single mother households (7.0% compared to 7.7%, a difference of 8.8%), and births to unmarried women (36.3% compared to 34.0%, a difference of 6.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (64.4% compared to 65.3%, a difference of 1.4%), married-couple households (45.9% compared to 45.1%, a difference of 1.7%), and currently married (46.6% compared to 45.0%, a difference of 3.5%).
Family Structure Metric | Chickasaw | Immigrants from Laos |
Family Households | Good 64.4% | Exceptional 65.3% |
Family Households with Children | Exceptional 28.2% | Exceptional 29.8% |
Married-couple Households | Fair 45.9% | Tragic 45.1% |
Average Family Size | Tragic 3.19 | Exceptional 3.34 |
Single Father Households | Tragic 2.8% | Tragic 2.9% |
Single Mother Households | Tragic 7.0% | Tragic 7.7% |
Currently Married | Average 46.6% | Tragic 45.0% |
Divorced or Separated | Tragic 14.2% | Tragic 12.4% |
Births to Unmarried Women | Tragic 36.3% | Tragic 34.0% |
Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Laos Vehicle Availability
When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Laos communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 8.2%, a difference of 4.0%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 7.7%, a difference of 3.6%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 22.4%, a difference of 0.82%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 59.2%, a difference of 0.30%), 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 91.8%, a difference of 0.48%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 22.4%, a difference of 0.82%).
Vehicle Availability Metric | Chickasaw | Immigrants from Laos |
No Vehicles Available | Exceptional 7.9% | Exceptional 8.2% |
1+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 92.3% | Exceptional 91.8% |
2+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 59.0% | Exceptional 59.2% |
3+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 22.2% | Exceptional 22.4% |
4+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 7.4% | Exceptional 7.7% |
Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Laos Education Level
When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Laos communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.7% compared to 3.1%, a difference of 85.9%), doctorate degree (1.5% compared to 1.4%, a difference of 9.7%), and associate's degree (38.6% compared to 40.7%, a difference of 5.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of master's degree (11.4% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 0.51%), ged/equivalency (83.8% compared to 82.7%, a difference of 1.3%), and college, under 1 year (60.4% compared to 61.3%, a difference of 1.4%).
Education Level Metric | Chickasaw | Immigrants from Laos |
No Schooling Completed | Exceptional 1.7% | Tragic 3.1% |
Nursery School | Exceptional 98.4% | Tragic 96.9% |
Kindergarten | Exceptional 98.4% | Tragic 96.9% |
1st Grade | Exceptional 98.3% | Tragic 96.8% |
2nd Grade | Exceptional 98.3% | Tragic 96.7% |
3rd Grade | Exceptional 98.2% | Tragic 96.6% |
4th Grade | Exceptional 98.0% | Tragic 96.3% |
5th Grade | Exceptional 97.9% | Tragic 96.0% |
6th Grade | Exceptional 97.6% | Tragic 95.7% |
7th Grade | Exceptional 96.7% | Tragic 94.5% |
8th Grade | Exceptional 96.4% | Tragic 94.1% |
9th Grade | Exceptional 95.5% | Tragic 93.2% |
10th Grade | Excellent 94.1% | Tragic 91.9% |
11th Grade | Fair 92.3% | Tragic 90.5% |
12th Grade, No Diploma | Tragic 90.3% | Tragic 88.9% |
High School Diploma | Poor 88.4% | Tragic 86.6% |
GED/Equivalency | Tragic 83.8% | Tragic 82.7% |
College, Under 1 year | Tragic 60.4% | Tragic 61.3% |
College, 1 year or more | Tragic 53.3% | Tragic 54.7% |
Associate's Degree | Tragic 38.6% | Tragic 40.7% |
Bachelor's Degree | Tragic 30.4% | Tragic 31.6% |
Master's Degree | Tragic 11.4% | Tragic 11.4% |
Professional Degree | Tragic 3.4% | Tragic 3.2% |
Doctorate Degree | Tragic 1.5% | Tragic 1.4% |
Chickasaw vs Immigrants from Laos Disability
When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Immigrants from Laos communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (4.5% compared to 3.2%, a difference of 40.7%), disability age under 5 (1.7% compared to 1.3%, a difference of 38.6%), and vision disability (3.2% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 35.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 18.1%, a difference of 2.4%), disability age over 75 (51.2% compared to 49.2%, a difference of 4.1%), and self-care disability (2.9% compared to 2.7%, a difference of 7.0%).
Disability Metric | Chickasaw | Immigrants from Laos |
Disability | Tragic 15.2% | Tragic 12.4% |
Males | Tragic 15.1% | Tragic 11.9% |
Females | Tragic 15.2% | Tragic 12.8% |
Age | Under 5 years | Tragic 1.7% | Fair 1.3% |
Age | 5 to 17 years | Tragic 6.8% | Tragic 5.8% |
Age | 18 to 34 years | Tragic 9.0% | Tragic 7.2% |
Age | 35 to 64 years | Tragic 16.1% | Tragic 13.0% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Tragic 30.2% | Tragic 26.1% |
Age | Over 75 years | Tragic 51.2% | Tragic 49.2% |
Vision | Tragic 3.2% | Tragic 2.4% |
Hearing | Tragic 4.5% | Tragic 3.2% |
Cognitive | Tragic 18.5% | Tragic 18.1% |
Ambulatory | Tragic 8.0% | Poor 6.3% |
Self-Care | Tragic 2.9% | Tragic 2.7% |