Demographics details for Kaysville, UT vs Clinton, SC
Population Overview
Compare main population characteristics in Kaysville, UT vs Clinton, SC.
| Data | Kaysville | Clinton |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 32,761 | 7,554 |
| Median Age | 32.1 years | 35.4 years |
| Median Income | $121,867 | $38,350 |
| Married Families | 45.0% | 19.0% |
| Poverty Level | Data is updating | 18% |
| Unemployment Rate | 3.7 | 4.5 |
Population Comparison: Kaysville vs Clinton
- In Kaysville, the population is higher at 32,761, compared to 7,554 in Clinton.
- The median age in Clinton is higher at 35.4 years, compared to 32.1 years in Kaysville.
- Kaysville has a higher median income of $121,867 compared to $38,350 in Clinton.
- A higher percentage of married families is found in Kaysville at 45.0% compared to 19.0% in Clinton.
- The poverty level is higher in Clinton at 18%, compared to 0% in Kaysville.
- Clinton has a higher unemployment rate at 4.5% compared to 3.7% in Kaysville.
Demographics
Demographics Kaysville vs Clinton provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.
| Demographic | Kaysville | Clinton |
|---|---|---|
| Black | Data is updating | 38 |
| White | 88 | 55 |
| Asian | 1 | 2 |
| Hispanic | 5 | 1 |
| Two or More Races | 6 | 4 |
| American Indian | Data is updating | Data is updating |
Demographics Comparison: Kaysville vs Clinton
- In Clinton, the percentage of Black residents is higher at 38% compared to 0% in Kaysville.
- Kaysville has a higher percentage of White residents at 88% compared to 55% in Clinton.
- In Clinton, the Asian population stands at 2%, greater than 1% in Kaysville.
- The Hispanic community is larger in Kaysville at 5% compared to 1% in Clinton.
- More residents identify as two or more races in Kaysville at 6% compared to 4% in Clinton.
- The percentage of American Indian residents is the same in both Kaysville and Clinton at 0%.
Health Statistics
The health statistics provide insights into prevalent health conditions in two communities.
| Health Metric | Kaysville | Clinton |
|---|---|---|
| Mental Health Not Good | 14.8% | 19.1% |
| Physical Health Not Good | 8.7% | 14.0% |
| Depression | 23.7% | 23.7% |
| Smoking | 6.7% | 22.0% |
| Binge Drinking | 11.4% | 15.8% |
| Obesity | 31.6% | 44.9% |
| Disability Percentage | 8.0% | 17.0% |
Health Statistics Comparison: Kaysville vs Clinton
- In Clinton, a higher percentage report poor mental health at 19.1% compared to 14.8% in Kaysville.
- Both cities have comparable depression rates at 23.7%.
- Clinton has a higher smoking rate at 22.0% compared to 6.7% in Kaysville.
- More residents engage in binge drinking in Clinton at 15.8% compared to 11.4% in Kaysville.
- Clinton has higher obesity rates at 44.9% compared to 31.6% in Kaysville.
- There is a higher percentage of disabled individuals in Clinton at 17.0% compared to 8.0% in Kaysville.
Education Levels
The educational attainment in the area helps gauge the workforce's skill level and economic potential.
| Education Level | Kaysville | Clinton |
|---|---|---|
| No Schooling | 0.4% (141) | 1.0% (74) |
| High School Diploma | 6.1% (1,986) | 19.3% (1,460) |
| Less than High School | 2.6% (859) | 15.6% (1,177) |
| Bachelor's Degree and Higher | 28.5% (9,340) | 17.3% (1,310) |
Education Levels Comparison: Kaysville vs Clinton
- In Clinton, a larger percentage of residents lack formal schooling at 1.0% compared to 0.4% in Kaysville.
- In Clinton, the rate of residents with high school diplomas is higher at 19.3% compared to 6.1% in Kaysville.
- The percentage of residents with less than a high school education is higher in Clinton at 15.6%, compared to 2.6% in Kaysville.
- A higher percentage of residents in Kaysville hold a bachelor's degree or higher at 28.5% 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.