Demographics details for Fitzgerald, GA vs Clinton, SC
Population Overview
Compare main population characteristics in Fitzgerald, GA vs Clinton, SC.
| Data | Fitzgerald | Clinton |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 8,900 | 7,554 |
| Median Age | 35.3 years | 35.4 years |
| Median Income | $32,500 | $38,350 |
| Married Families | 26.0% | 19.0% |
| Poverty Level | 18% | 18% |
| Unemployment Rate | 4.5 | 4.5 |
Population Comparison: Fitzgerald vs Clinton
- In Fitzgerald, the population is higher at 8,900, compared to 7,554 in Clinton.
- The median age in Clinton is higher at 35.4 years, compared to 35.3 years in Fitzgerald.
- Clinton has a higher median income of $38,350, compared to $32,500 in Fitzgerald.
- A higher percentage of married families is found in Fitzgerald at 26.0% compared to 19.0% in Clinton.
- The poverty level is identical in both Fitzgerald and Clinton at 18%.
- The unemployment rate is the same in both Fitzgerald and Clinton at 4.5%.
Demographics
Demographics Fitzgerald vs Clinton provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.
| Demographic | Fitzgerald | Clinton |
|---|---|---|
| Black | 55 | 38 |
| White | 42 | 55 |
| Asian | 1 | 2 |
| Hispanic | 1 | 1 |
| Two or More Races | 1 | 4 |
| American Indian | Data is updating | Data is updating |
Demographics Comparison: Fitzgerald vs Clinton
- A higher percentage of Black residents are in Fitzgerald at 55% compared to 38% in Clinton.
- The percentage of White residents is higher in Clinton at 55% compared to 42% in Fitzgerald.
- In Clinton, the Asian population stands at 2%, greater than 1% in Fitzgerald.
- The percentage of Hispanic residents is the same in both Fitzgerald and Clinton at 1%.
- The percentage of residents identifying as two or more races is higher in Clinton at 4%, compared to 1% in Fitzgerald.
- The percentage of American Indian residents is the same in both Fitzgerald and Clinton at 0%.
Health Statistics
The health statistics provide insights into prevalent health conditions in two communities.
| Health Metric | Fitzgerald | Clinton |
|---|---|---|
| Mental Health Not Good | 19.3% | 19.1% |
| Physical Health Not Good | 15.1% | 14.0% |
| Depression | 22.4% | 23.7% |
| Smoking | 22.9% | 22.0% |
| Binge Drinking | 13.4% | 15.8% |
| Obesity | 45.0% | 44.9% |
| Disability Percentage | 14.0% | 17.0% |
Health Statistics Comparison: Fitzgerald vs Clinton
- More residents in Fitzgerald report poor mental health at 19.3% compared to 19.1% in Clinton.
- Higher depression rates are seen in Clinton at 23.7% versus 22.4% in Fitzgerald.
- Smoking is more prevalent in Fitzgerald at 22.9% compared to 22.0% in Clinton.
- More residents engage in binge drinking in Clinton at 15.8% compared to 13.4% in Fitzgerald.
- Obesity rates are higher in Fitzgerald at 45.0% compared to 44.9% in Clinton.
- There is a higher percentage of disabled individuals in Clinton at 17.0% compared to 14.0% in Fitzgerald.
Education Levels
The educational attainment in the area helps gauge the workforce's skill level and economic potential.
| Education Level | Fitzgerald | Clinton |
|---|---|---|
| No Schooling | 0.5% (41) | 1.0% (74) |
| High School Diploma | 32.9% (2,930) | 19.3% (1,460) |
| Less than High School | 11.1% (992) | 15.6% (1,177) |
| Bachelor's Degree and Higher | 9.3% (828) | 17.3% (1,310) |
Education Levels Comparison: Fitzgerald vs Clinton
- In Clinton, a larger percentage of residents lack formal schooling at 1.0% compared to 0.5% in Fitzgerald.
- A higher percentage of residents in Fitzgerald hold a high school diploma at 32.9% compared to 19.3% in Clinton.
- The percentage of residents with less than a high school education is higher in Clinton at 15.6%, compared to 11.1% in Fitzgerald.
- In Clinton, a larger share of residents have a bachelor's degree or higher at 17.3% compared to 9.3% in Fitzgerald.
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.