Demographics details for South jordan, UT vs Warner robins, GA

Population Overview

Compare main population characteristics in South jordan, UT vs Warner robins, GA.

Data South jordan Warner robins
Population 83,513 82,175
Median Age 34.4 years 32.4 years
Median Income $119,822 $63,678
Married Families 44.0% 32.0%
Poverty Level 5% 8%
Unemployment Rate 3.7 3.8

Population Comparison: South jordan vs Warner robins

  • In South jordan, the population is higher at 83,513, compared to 82,175 in Warner robins.
  • Residents in South jordan have a higher median age of 34.4 years compared to 32.4 years in Warner robins.
  • South jordan has a higher median income of $119,822 compared to $63,678 in Warner robins.
  • A higher percentage of married families is found in South jordan at 44.0% compared to 32.0% in Warner robins.
  • The poverty level is higher in Warner robins at 8%, compared to 5% in South jordan.
  • Warner robins has a higher unemployment rate at 3.8% compared to 3.7% in South jordan.

Demographics

Demographics South jordan vs Warner robins provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.

Demographic South jordan Warner robins
Black Data is updating 40
White 83 42
Asian 4 3
Hispanic 7 7
Two or More Races 5 7
American Indian 1 1

Demographics Comparison: South jordan vs Warner robins

  • In Warner robins, the percentage of Black residents is higher at 40% compared to 0% in South jordan.
  • South jordan has a higher percentage of White residents at 83% compared to 42% in Warner robins.
  • The Asian population is larger in South jordan at 4% compared to 3% in Warner robins.
  • The percentage of Hispanic residents is the same in both South jordan and Warner robins at 7%.
  • The percentage of residents identifying as two or more races is higher in Warner robins at 7%, compared to 5% in South jordan.
  • The percentage of American Indian residents is the same in both South jordan and Warner robins at 1%.

Health Statistics

The health statistics provide insights into prevalent health conditions in two communities.

Health Metric South jordan Warner robins
Mental Health Not Good 16.7% 17.6%
Physical Health Not Good 9.0% 13.1%
Depression 26.5% 22.1%
Smoking 7.3% 18.6%
Binge Drinking 16.9% 15.9%
Obesity 28.6% 39.9%
Disability Percentage 6.0% 12.0%

Health Statistics Comparison: South jordan vs Warner robins

  • In Warner robins, a higher percentage report poor mental health at 17.6% compared to 16.7% in South jordan.
  • Depression is more prevalent in South jordan at 26.5% compared to 22.1% in Warner robins.
  • Warner robins has a higher smoking rate at 18.6% compared to 7.3% in South jordan.
  • Binge drinking is more common in South jordan at 16.9% compared to 15.9% in Warner robins.
  • Warner robins has higher obesity rates at 39.9% compared to 28.6% in South jordan.
  • There is a higher percentage of disabled individuals in Warner robins at 12.0% 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 South jordan Warner robins
No Schooling 0.2% (172) 0.4% (335)
High School Diploma 8.4% (6,995) 14.9% (12,260)
Less than High School 2.7% (2,236) 7.0% (5,714)
Bachelor's Degree and Higher 27.1% (22,648) 19.2% (15,752)

Education Levels Comparison: South jordan vs Warner robins

  • In Warner robins, a larger percentage of residents lack formal schooling at 0.4% compared to 0.2% in South jordan.
  • In Warner robins, the rate of residents with high school diplomas is higher at 14.9% compared to 8.4% in South jordan.
  • The percentage of residents with less than a high school education is higher in Warner robins at 7.0%, compared to 2.7% in South jordan.
  • A higher percentage of residents in South jordan hold a bachelor's degree or higher at 27.1% compared to 19.2% in Warner robins.

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.