Demographics details for Friendship, TN vs South jordan, UT
Population Overview
Compare main population characteristics in Friendship, TN vs South jordan, UT.
| Data | Friendship | South jordan |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 613 | 83,513 |
| Median Age | 32.1 years | 34.4 years |
| Median Income | $33,036 | $119,822 |
| Married Families | 22.0% | 44.0% |
| Poverty Level | Data is updating | 5% |
| Unemployment Rate | 3.2 | 3.7 |
Population Comparison: Friendship vs South jordan
- The population in South jordan is higher at 83,513, compared to 613 in Friendship.
- The median age in South jordan is higher at 34.4 years, compared to 32.1 years in Friendship.
- South jordan has a higher median income of $119,822, compared to $33,036 in Friendship.
- In South jordan, the percentage of married families is higher at 44.0%, compared to 22.0% in Friendship.
- The poverty level is higher in South jordan at 5%, compared to 0% in Friendship.
- South jordan has a higher unemployment rate at 3.7% compared to 3.2% in Friendship.
Demographics
Demographics Friendship vs South jordan provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.
| Demographic | Friendship | South jordan |
|---|---|---|
| Black | 10 | Data is updating |
| White | 60 | 83 |
| Asian | 3 | 4 |
| Hispanic | 10 | 7 |
| Two or More Races | 16 | 5 |
| American Indian | 1 | 1 |
Demographics Comparison: Friendship vs South jordan
- A higher percentage of Black residents are in Friendship at 10% compared to 0% in South jordan.
- The percentage of White residents is higher in South jordan at 83% compared to 60% in Friendship.
- In South jordan, the Asian population stands at 4%, greater than 3% in Friendship.
- The Hispanic community is larger in Friendship at 10% compared to 7% in South jordan.
- More residents identify as two or more races in Friendship at 16% compared to 5% in South jordan.
- The percentage of American Indian residents is the same in both Friendship and South jordan at 1%.
Health Statistics
The health statistics provide insights into prevalent health conditions in two communities.
| Health Metric | Friendship | South jordan |
|---|---|---|
| Mental Health Not Good | 20.0% | 16.7% |
| Physical Health Not Good | 14.4% | 9.0% |
| Depression | 28.9% | 26.5% |
| Smoking | 24.1% | 7.3% |
| Binge Drinking | 15.0% | 16.9% |
| Obesity | 36.8% | 28.6% |
| Disability Percentage | 18.0% | 6.0% |
Health Statistics Comparison: Friendship vs South jordan
- More residents in Friendship report poor mental health at 20.0% compared to 16.7% in South jordan.
- Depression is more prevalent in Friendship at 28.9% compared to 26.5% in South jordan.
- Smoking is more prevalent in Friendship at 24.1% compared to 7.3% in South jordan.
- More residents engage in binge drinking in South jordan at 16.9% compared to 15.0% in Friendship.
- Obesity rates are higher in Friendship at 36.8% compared to 28.6% in South jordan.
- Disability percentages are higher in Friendship at 18.0% compared to 6.0% in South jordan.
Education Levels
The educational attainment in the area helps gauge the workforce's skill level and economic potential.
| Education Level | Friendship | South jordan |
|---|---|---|
| No Schooling | 1.6% (10) | 0.2% (172) |
| High School Diploma | 27.2% (167) | 8.4% (6,995) |
| Less than High School | 33.4% (205) | 2.7% (2,236) |
| Bachelor's Degree and Higher | 7.0% (43) | 27.1% (22,648) |
Education Levels Comparison: Friendship vs South jordan
- A higher percentage of residents in Friendship have no formal schooling at 1.6% compared to 0.2% in South jordan.
- A higher percentage of residents in Friendship hold a high school diploma at 27.2% compared to 8.4% in South jordan.
- More residents in Friendship have less than a high school education at 33.4% compared to 2.7% in South jordan.
- In South jordan, a larger share of residents have a bachelor's degree or higher at 27.1% compared to 7.0% in Friendship.
Crime and Safety
Understanding crime rates and safety measures is crucial for assessing the livability of a city or town. Crime levels can vary significantly from one neighborhood to another, influenced by various factors such as population density and local amenities. For instance, areas with high foot traffic, like train stations, might experience different crime dynamics compared to quieter residential neighborhoods. Evaluating these patterns helps in making informed decisions about safety and community well-being.