Chickasaw vs Panamanian Community Comparison
COMPARE
Chickasaw
Panamanian
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Chickasaw
Panamanians
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
2,119
SOCIAL INDEX
18.7/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
268th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
Panamanian Integration in Chickasaw Communities
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 109,918,838 people shows a substantial positive correlation between the proportion of Panamanians within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.573. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.236% in Panamanians. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to an increase of 236.0 Panamanians.
Chickasaw vs Panamanian Income
When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Panamanian communities in the United States are seen in median household income ($70,005 compared to $82,272, a difference of 17.5%), householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($82,193 compared to $96,066, a difference of 16.9%), and householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($77,929 compared to $90,193, a difference of 15.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income over 65 years ($53,732 compared to $58,266, a difference of 8.4%), median male earnings ($47,832 compared to $52,835, a difference of 10.5%), and wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 24.4%, a difference of 11.5%).
Income Metric | Chickasaw | Panamanian |
Per Capita Income | Tragic $36,475 | Poor $42,035 |
Median Family Income | Tragic $85,356 | Tragic $97,683 |
Median Household Income | Tragic $70,005 | Poor $82,272 |
Median Earnings | Tragic $40,672 | Fair $45,593 |
Median Male Earnings | Tragic $47,832 | Poor $52,835 |
Median Female Earnings | Tragic $34,414 | Fair $39,049 |
Householder Age | Under 25 years | Tragic $44,763 | Poor $51,611 |
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years | Tragic $77,929 | Tragic $90,193 |
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years | Tragic $82,193 | Poor $96,066 |
Householder Age | Over 65 years | Tragic $53,732 | Tragic $58,266 |
Wage/Income Gap | Tragic 27.2% | Exceptional 24.4% |
Chickasaw vs Panamanian Poverty
When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Panamanian communities in the United States are seen in single male poverty (16.3% compared to 12.9%, a difference of 26.7%), female poverty among 18-24 year olds (24.5% compared to 19.7%, a difference of 24.4%), and single female poverty (26.3% compared to 21.7%, a difference of 20.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of receiving food stamps (13.1% compared to 13.1%, a difference of 0.050%), married-couple family poverty (5.8% compared to 5.6%, a difference of 4.0%), and family poverty (10.8% compared to 9.8%, a difference of 10.2%).
Poverty Metric | Chickasaw | Panamanian |
Poverty | Tragic 14.7% | Tragic 13.1% |
Families | Tragic 10.8% | Tragic 9.8% |
Males | Tragic 13.5% | Tragic 11.9% |
Females | Tragic 15.9% | Tragic 14.2% |
Females 18 to 24 years | Tragic 24.5% | Excellent 19.7% |
Females 25 to 34 years | Tragic 17.0% | Tragic 14.2% |
Children Under 5 years | Tragic 21.8% | Tragic 18.2% |
Children Under 16 years | Tragic 19.5% | Tragic 17.5% |
Boys Under 16 years | Tragic 19.8% | Tragic 17.7% |
Girls Under 16 years | Tragic 19.6% | Tragic 17.6% |
Single Males | Tragic 16.3% | Fair 12.9% |
Single Females | Tragic 26.3% | Tragic 21.7% |
Single Fathers | Tragic 19.0% | Fair 16.4% |
Single Mothers | Tragic 34.4% | Fair 29.6% |
Married Couples | Tragic 5.8% | Tragic 5.6% |
Seniors Over 65 years | Good 10.7% | Tragic 11.9% |
Seniors Over 75 years | Exceptional 11.6% | Tragic 13.4% |
Receiving Food Stamps | Tragic 13.1% | Tragic 13.1% |
Chickasaw vs Panamanian Unemployment
When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Panamanian communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.3% compared to 9.1%, a difference of 24.1%), 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 5.2%, a difference of 17.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.8% compared to 4.7%, a difference of 1.1%), unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.9% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 1.2%), and unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.7% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 4.4%).
Unemployment Metric | Chickasaw | Panamanian |
Unemployment | Exceptional 5.0% | Tragic 5.5% |
Males | Excellent 5.2% | Tragic 5.6% |
Females | Excellent 5.1% | Tragic 5.5% |
Youth < 25 | Exceptional 11.2% | Tragic 12.4% |
Age | 16 to 19 years | Exceptional 16.7% | Tragic 18.7% |
Age | 20 to 24 years | Exceptional 9.9% | Tragic 10.9% |
Age | 25 to 29 years | Fair 6.7% | Tragic 7.0% |
Age | 30 to 34 years | Tragic 6.2% | Tragic 5.8% |
Age | 35 to 44 years | Tragic 4.9% | Tragic 5.0% |
Age | 45 to 54 years | Exceptional 4.2% | Poor 4.6% |
Age | 55 to 59 years | Good 4.8% | Excellent 4.7% |
Age | 60 to 64 years | Exceptional 4.3% | Excellent 4.8% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Exceptional 4.7% | Average 5.4% |
Seniors > 65 | Exceptional 4.4% | Average 5.2% |
Seniors > 75 | Exceptional 7.3% | Tragic 9.1% |
Women w/ Children < 6 | Tragic 9.0% | Average 7.6% |
Women w/ Children 6 to 17 | Exceptional 8.6% | Tragic 9.3% |
Women w/ Children < 18 | Good 5.4% | Poor 5.7% |
Chickasaw vs Panamanian Labor Participation
When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Panamanian communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (38.3% compared to 36.1%, a difference of 6.0%), in labor force | age > 16 (62.3% compared to 65.3%, a difference of 4.9%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (79.0% compared to 82.2%, a difference of 3.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 74.7%, a difference of 0.40%), in labor force | age 30-34 (81.9% compared to 84.2%, a difference of 2.8%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (81.9% compared to 84.2%, a difference of 2.8%).
Labor Participation Metric | Chickasaw | Panamanian |
In Labor Force | Age > 16 | Tragic 62.3% | Good 65.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-64 | Tragic 76.2% | Tragic 79.1% |
In Labor Force | Age 16-19 | Exceptional 38.3% | Fair 36.1% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-24 | Poor 74.5% | Fair 74.7% |
In Labor Force | Age 25-29 | Tragic 81.9% | Tragic 84.2% |
In Labor Force | Age 30-34 | Tragic 81.9% | Tragic 84.2% |
In Labor Force | Age 35-44 | Tragic 80.9% | Tragic 84.0% |
In Labor Force | Age 45-54 | Tragic 79.0% | Tragic 82.2% |
Chickasaw vs Panamanian Family Structure
When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Panamanian communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.8% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 15.9%), divorced or separated (14.2% compared to 12.7%, a difference of 12.3%), and births to unmarried women (36.3% compared to 34.2%, a difference of 6.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households with children (28.2% compared to 28.2%, a difference of 0.11%), family households (64.4% compared to 64.8%, a difference of 0.68%), and single mother households (7.0% compared to 7.1%, a difference of 1.1%).
Family Structure Metric | Chickasaw | Panamanian |
Family Households | Good 64.4% | Exceptional 64.8% |
Family Households with Children | Exceptional 28.2% | Exceptional 28.2% |
Married-couple Households | Fair 45.9% | Tragic 45.2% |
Average Family Size | Tragic 3.19 | Excellent 3.25 |
Single Father Households | Tragic 2.8% | Fair 2.4% |
Single Mother Households | Tragic 7.0% | Tragic 7.1% |
Currently Married | Average 46.6% | Tragic 45.3% |
Divorced or Separated | Tragic 14.2% | Tragic 12.7% |
Births to Unmarried Women | Tragic 36.3% | Tragic 34.2% |
Chickasaw vs Panamanian Vehicle Availability
When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Panamanian communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 12.5%, a difference of 59.5%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 6.0%, a difference of 23.0%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 18.8%, a difference of 18.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 87.5%, a difference of 5.4%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 53.5%, a difference of 10.2%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 18.8%, a difference of 18.4%).
Vehicle Availability Metric | Chickasaw | Panamanian |
No Vehicles Available | Exceptional 7.9% | Tragic 12.5% |
1+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 92.3% | Tragic 87.5% |
2+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 59.0% | Tragic 53.5% |
3+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 22.2% | Poor 18.8% |
4+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 7.4% | Poor 6.0% |
Chickasaw vs Panamanian Education Level
When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Panamanian communities in the United States are seen in master's degree (11.4% compared to 14.4%, a difference of 26.1%), no schooling completed (1.7% compared to 2.1%, a difference of 24.2%), and professional degree (3.4% compared to 4.1%, a difference of 23.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 11th grade (92.3% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 0.060%), high school diploma (88.4% compared to 88.6%, a difference of 0.23%), and nursery school (98.4% compared to 97.9%, a difference of 0.46%).
Education Level Metric | Chickasaw | Panamanian |
No Schooling Completed | Exceptional 1.7% | Average 2.1% |
Nursery School | Exceptional 98.4% | Fair 97.9% |
Kindergarten | Exceptional 98.4% | Fair 97.9% |
1st Grade | Exceptional 98.3% | Fair 97.9% |
2nd Grade | Exceptional 98.3% | Fair 97.8% |
3rd Grade | Exceptional 98.2% | Fair 97.7% |
4th Grade | Exceptional 98.0% | Fair 97.4% |
5th Grade | Exceptional 97.9% | Fair 97.3% |
6th Grade | Exceptional 97.6% | Fair 96.9% |
7th Grade | Exceptional 96.7% | Fair 95.9% |
8th Grade | Exceptional 96.4% | Fair 95.6% |
9th Grade | Exceptional 95.5% | Fair 94.7% |
10th Grade | Excellent 94.1% | Fair 93.5% |
11th Grade | Fair 92.3% | Fair 92.3% |
12th Grade, No Diploma | Tragic 90.3% | Fair 90.8% |
High School Diploma | Poor 88.4% | Poor 88.6% |
GED/Equivalency | Tragic 83.8% | Poor 85.0% |
College, Under 1 year | Tragic 60.4% | Poor 64.3% |
College, 1 year or more | Tragic 53.3% | Poor 58.3% |
Associate's Degree | Tragic 38.6% | Poor 45.1% |
Bachelor's Degree | Tragic 30.4% | Poor 36.5% |
Master's Degree | Tragic 11.4% | Fair 14.4% |
Professional Degree | Tragic 3.4% | Poor 4.1% |
Doctorate Degree | Tragic 1.5% | Tragic 1.7% |
Chickasaw vs Panamanian Disability
When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Panamanian communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (4.5% compared to 3.0%, a difference of 49.0%), vision disability (3.2% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 36.7%), and disability age 35 to 64 (16.1% compared to 11.9%, a difference of 35.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 17.8%, a difference of 4.2%), disability age over 75 (51.2% compared to 47.9%, a difference of 6.9%), and self-care disability (2.9% compared to 2.5%, a difference of 12.3%).
Disability Metric | Chickasaw | Panamanian |
Disability | Tragic 15.2% | Tragic 12.1% |
Males | Tragic 15.1% | Tragic 11.7% |
Females | Tragic 15.2% | Poor 12.4% |
Age | Under 5 years | Tragic 1.7% | Tragic 1.3% |
Age | 5 to 17 years | Tragic 6.8% | Tragic 6.0% |
Age | 18 to 34 years | Tragic 9.0% | Poor 6.8% |
Age | 35 to 64 years | Tragic 16.1% | Tragic 11.9% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Tragic 30.2% | Tragic 24.4% |
Age | Over 75 years | Tragic 51.2% | Poor 47.9% |
Vision | Tragic 3.2% | Tragic 2.3% |
Hearing | Tragic 4.5% | Average 3.0% |
Cognitive | Tragic 18.5% | Tragic 17.8% |
Ambulatory | Tragic 8.0% | Tragic 6.4% |
Self-Care | Tragic 2.9% | Tragic 2.5% |