Demographics details for Clinton, SC vs Chestnut mound, TN

Population Overview

Compare main population characteristics in Clinton, SC vs Chestnut mound, TN.

Data Clinton Chestnut mound
Population 7,554 215
Median Age 35.4 years 36.0 years
Median Income $38,350 $50,000
Married Families 19.0% 51.0%
Poverty Level 18% 15%
Unemployment Rate 4.5 5.6

Population Comparison: Clinton vs Chestnut mound

  • In Clinton, the population is higher at 7,554, compared to 215 in Chestnut mound.
  • The median age in Chestnut mound is higher at 36.0 years, compared to 35.4 years in Clinton.
  • Chestnut mound has a higher median income of $50,000, compared to $38,350 in Clinton.
  • In Chestnut mound, the percentage of married families is higher at 51.0%, compared to 19.0% in Clinton.
  • Clinton has a higher poverty level at 18% compared to 15% in Chestnut mound.
  • Chestnut mound has a higher unemployment rate at 5.6% compared to 4.5% in Clinton.

Demographics

Demographics Clinton vs Chestnut mound provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.

Demographic Clinton Chestnut mound
Black 38 Data is updating
White 55 100
Asian 2 Data is updating
Hispanic 1 Data is updating
Two or More Races 4 Data is updating
American Indian Data is updating Data is updating

Demographics Comparison: Clinton vs Chestnut mound

  • A higher percentage of Black residents are in Clinton at 38% compared to 0% in Chestnut mound.
  • The percentage of White residents is higher in Chestnut mound at 100% compared to 55% in Clinton.
  • The Asian population is larger in Clinton at 2% compared to 0% in Chestnut mound.
  • The Hispanic community is larger in Clinton at 1% compared to 0% in Chestnut mound.
  • More residents identify as two or more races in Clinton at 4% compared to 0% in Chestnut mound.
  • The percentage of American Indian residents is the same in both Clinton and Chestnut mound at 0%.

Health Statistics

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

Health Metric Clinton Chestnut mound
Mental Health Not Good 19.1% Data is updating%
Physical Health Not Good 14.0% Data is updating%
Depression 23.7% Data is updating%
Smoking 22.0% Data is updating%
Binge Drinking 15.8% Data is updating%
Obesity 44.9% Data is updating%
Disability Percentage 17.0% Data is updating%

Health Statistics Comparison: Clinton vs Chestnut mound

  • More residents in Clinton report poor mental health at 19.1% compared to 0.0% in Chestnut mound.
  • Depression is more prevalent in Clinton at 23.7% compared to 0.0% in Chestnut mound.
  • Smoking is more prevalent in Clinton at 22.0% compared to 0.0% in Chestnut mound.
  • Binge drinking is more common in Clinton at 15.8% compared to 0.0% in Chestnut mound.
  • Obesity rates are higher in Clinton at 44.9% compared to 0.0% in Chestnut mound.
  • Disability percentages are higher in Clinton at 17.0% compared to 0.0% in Chestnut mound.

Education Levels

The educational attainment in the area helps gauge the workforce's skill level and economic potential.

Education Level Clinton Chestnut mound
No Schooling 1.0% (74) 0.0% (Data is updating)
High School Diploma 19.3% (1,460) 0.0% (Data is updating)
Less than High School 15.6% (1,177) 0.0% (Data is updating)
Bachelor's Degree and Higher 17.3% (1,310) 0.0% (Data is updating)

Education Levels Comparison: Clinton vs Chestnut mound

  • A higher percentage of residents in Clinton have no formal schooling at 1.0% compared to 0.0% in Chestnut mound.
  • A higher percentage of residents in Clinton hold a high school diploma at 19.3% compared to 0.0% in Chestnut mound.
  • More residents in Clinton have less than a high school education at 15.6% compared to 0.0% in Chestnut mound.
  • A higher percentage of residents in Clinton hold a bachelor's degree or higher at 17.3% compared to 0.0% in Chestnut mound.

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.