Demographics details for Clinton, SC vs Columbia, MO
Population Overview
Compare main population characteristics in Clinton, SC vs Columbia, MO.
| Data | Clinton | Columbia |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 7,554 | 128,555 |
| Median Age | 35.4 years | 28.8 years |
| Median Income | $38,350 | $60,455 |
| Married Families | 19.0% | 32.0% |
| Poverty Level | 18% | 19% |
| Unemployment Rate | 4.5 | 3.8 |
Population Comparison: Clinton vs Columbia
- The population in Columbia is higher at 128,555, compared to 7,554 in Clinton.
- Residents in Clinton have a higher median age of 35.4 years compared to 28.8 years in Columbia.
- Columbia has a higher median income of $60,455, compared to $38,350 in Clinton.
- In Columbia, the percentage of married families is higher at 32.0%, compared to 19.0% in Clinton.
- The poverty level is higher in Columbia at 19%, compared to 18% in Clinton.
- The unemployment rate in Clinton is higher at 4.5%, compared to 3.8% in Columbia.
Demographics
Demographics Clinton vs Columbia provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.
| Demographic | Clinton | Columbia |
|---|---|---|
| Black | 38 | 11 |
| White | 55 | 73 |
| Asian | 2 | 6 |
| Hispanic | 1 | 4 |
| Two or More Races | 4 | 6 |
| American Indian | Data is updating | Data is updating |
Demographics Comparison: Clinton vs Columbia
- A higher percentage of Black residents are in Clinton at 38% compared to 11% in Columbia.
- The percentage of White residents is higher in Columbia at 73% compared to 55% in Clinton.
- In Columbia, the Asian population stands at 6%, greater than 2% in Clinton.
- Columbia has a higher percentage of Hispanic residents at 4%, compared to 1% in Clinton.
- The percentage of residents identifying as two or more races is higher in Columbia at 6%, compared to 4% in Clinton.
- The percentage of American Indian residents is the same in both Clinton and Columbia at 0%.
Health Statistics
The health statistics provide insights into prevalent health conditions in two communities.
| Health Metric | Clinton | Columbia |
|---|---|---|
| Mental Health Not Good | 19.1% | 16.7% |
| Physical Health Not Good | 14.0% | 11.4% |
| Depression | 23.7% | 25.3% |
| Smoking | 22.0% | 16.3% |
| Binge Drinking | 15.8% | 17.7% |
| Obesity | 44.9% | 33.5% |
| Disability Percentage | 17.0% | 11.0% |
Health Statistics Comparison: Clinton vs Columbia
- More residents in Clinton report poor mental health at 19.1% compared to 16.7% in Columbia.
- Higher depression rates are seen in Columbia at 25.3% versus 23.7% in Clinton.
- Smoking is more prevalent in Clinton at 22.0% compared to 16.3% in Columbia.
- More residents engage in binge drinking in Columbia at 17.7% compared to 15.8% in Clinton.
- Obesity rates are higher in Clinton at 44.9% compared to 33.5% in Columbia.
- Disability percentages are higher in Clinton at 17.0% compared to 11.0% in Columbia.
Education Levels
The educational attainment in the area helps gauge the workforce's skill level and economic potential.
| Education Level | Clinton | Columbia |
|---|---|---|
| No Schooling | 1.0% (74) | 0.7% (845) |
| High School Diploma | 19.3% (1,460) | 7.8% (9,965) |
| Less than High School | 15.6% (1,177) | 4.2% (5,383) |
| Bachelor's Degree and Higher | 17.3% (1,310) | 30.5% (39,270) |
Education Levels Comparison: Clinton vs Columbia
- A higher percentage of residents in Clinton have no formal schooling at 1.0% compared to 0.7% in Columbia.
- A higher percentage of residents in Clinton hold a high school diploma at 19.3% compared to 7.8% in Columbia.
- More residents in Clinton have less than a high school education at 15.6% compared to 4.2% in Columbia.
- In Columbia, a larger share of residents have a bachelor's degree or higher at 30.5% compared to 17.3% in Clinton.
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.