Fijian vs Chickasaw Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 40,769,422 people shows a poor negative correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw within Fijian communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.128. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Fijians within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.006% in Chickasaw. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Fijians corresponds to a decrease of 6.0 Chickasaw.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Fijian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in wage/income gap (22.9% compared to 27.2%, a difference of 18.6%), householder income under 25 years ($50,132 compared to $44,763, a difference of 12.0%), and median household income ($74,205 compared to $70,005, a difference of 6.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of per capita income ($36,690 compared to $36,475, a difference of 0.59%), median earnings ($40,193 compared to $40,672, a difference of 1.2%), and median female earnings ($35,114 compared to $34,414, a difference of 2.0%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Fijian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in female poverty among 18-24 year olds (20.0% compared to 24.5%, a difference of 22.3%), single father poverty (15.7% compared to 19.0%, a difference of 20.9%), and single male poverty (13.8% compared to 16.3%, a difference of 18.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.7% compared to 10.7%, a difference of 0.24%), married-couple family poverty (5.8% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 0.28%), and receiving food stamps (13.0% compared to 13.1%, a difference of 0.60%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Fijian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (6.6% compared to 8.6%, a difference of 29.7%), unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (5.0% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 23.4%), and unemployment among seniors over 75 years (8.7% compared to 7.3%, a difference of 18.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of male unemployment (5.2% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 0.44%), unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.9% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 0.78%), and unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (10.0% compared to 9.9%, a difference of 1.1%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Fijian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (40.4% compared to 38.3%, a difference of 5.5%), in labor force | age > 16 (64.8% compared to 62.3%, a difference of 4.0%), and in labor force | age 20-24 (77.4% compared to 74.5%, a difference of 3.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 25-29 (82.9% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 1.3%), in labor force | age 45-54 (80.2% compared to 79.0%, a difference of 1.5%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (83.4% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 1.8%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Fijian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in divorced or separated (12.6% compared to 14.2%, a difference of 12.5%), births to unmarried women (32.3% compared to 36.3%, a difference of 12.5%), and single father households (3.0% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 9.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of married-couple households (46.1% compared to 45.9%, a difference of 0.32%), currently married (46.3% compared to 46.6%, a difference of 0.69%), and single mother households (7.2% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 2.1%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Fijian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (9.5% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 21.0%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.8% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 5.2%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (57.6% compared to 59.0%, a difference of 2.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 22.2%, a difference of 0.16%), 1 or more vehicles in household (90.5% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 1.9%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (57.6% compared to 59.0%, a difference of 2.4%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Fijian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (2.5% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 46.4%), doctorate degree (1.1% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 33.8%), and professional degree (2.9% compared to 3.4%, a difference of 14.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (97.6% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.84%), kindergarten (97.5% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.84%), and 1st grade (97.5% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.85%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Fijian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.2% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 46.0%), vision disability (2.4% compared to 3.2%, a difference of 33.1%), and hearing disability (3.5% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 26.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (49.0% compared to 51.2%, a difference of 4.4%), cognitive disability (17.7% compared to 18.5%, a difference of 4.6%), and self-care disability (2.7% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 6.0%).