Demographics details for Kingman, AZ vs Port gibson, MS
Population Overview
Compare main population characteristics in Kingman, AZ vs Port gibson, MS.
| Data | Kingman | Port gibson |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 34,918 | 1,206 |
| Median Age | 42.1 years | 47.3 years |
| Median Income | $56,360 | $24,773 |
| Married Families | 37.0% | 22.0% |
| Poverty Level | 12% | 30% |
| Unemployment Rate | 4.2 | 5.3 |
Population Comparison: Kingman vs Port gibson
- In Kingman, the population is higher at 34,918, compared to 1,206 in Port gibson.
- The median age in Port gibson is higher at 47.3 years, compared to 42.1 years in Kingman.
- Kingman has a higher median income of $56,360 compared to $24,773 in Port gibson.
- A higher percentage of married families is found in Kingman at 37.0% compared to 22.0% in Port gibson.
- The poverty level is higher in Port gibson at 30%, compared to 12% in Kingman.
- Port gibson has a higher unemployment rate at 5.3% compared to 4.2% in Kingman.
Demographics
Demographics Kingman vs Port gibson provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.
| Demographic | Kingman | Port gibson |
|---|---|---|
| Black | 2 | 82 |
| White | 72 | 12 |
| Asian | 2 | Data is updating |
| Hispanic | 16 | Data is updating |
| Two or More Races | 7 | 6 |
| American Indian | 1 | Data is updating |
Demographics Comparison: Kingman vs Port gibson
- In Port gibson, the percentage of Black residents is higher at 82% compared to 2% in Kingman.
- Kingman has a higher percentage of White residents at 72% compared to 12% in Port gibson.
- The Asian population is larger in Kingman at 2% compared to 0% in Port gibson.
- The Hispanic community is larger in Kingman at 16% compared to 0% in Port gibson.
- More residents identify as two or more races in Kingman at 7% compared to 6% in Port gibson.
- A greater percentage of American Indian residents live in Kingman at 1% compared to 0% in Port gibson.
Health Statistics
The health statistics provide insights into prevalent health conditions in two communities.
| Health Metric | Kingman | Port gibson |
|---|---|---|
| Mental Health Not Good | 18.2% | 19.0% |
| Physical Health Not Good | 12.4% | 16.0% |
| Depression | 21.2% | 20.0% |
| Smoking | 19.1% | 24.8% |
| Binge Drinking | 18.5% | 10.2% |
| Obesity | 34.5% | 50.5% |
| Disability Percentage | 18.0% | 23.0% |
Health Statistics Comparison: Kingman vs Port gibson
- In Port gibson, a higher percentage report poor mental health at 19.0% compared to 18.2% in Kingman.
- Depression is more prevalent in Kingman at 21.2% compared to 20.0% in Port gibson.
- Port gibson has a higher smoking rate at 24.8% compared to 19.1% in Kingman.
- Binge drinking is more common in Kingman at 18.5% compared to 10.2% in Port gibson.
- Port gibson has higher obesity rates at 50.5% compared to 34.5% in Kingman.
- There is a higher percentage of disabled individuals in Port gibson at 23.0% compared to 18.0% in Kingman.
Education Levels
The educational attainment in the area helps gauge the workforce's skill level and economic potential.
| Education Level | Kingman | Port gibson |
|---|---|---|
| No Schooling | 0.8% (266) | 0.5% (6) |
| High School Diploma | 15.7% (5,487) | 9.8% (118) |
| Less than High School | 13.6% (4,744) | 13.3% (160) |
| Bachelor's Degree and Higher | 13.7% (4,777) | 21.2% (256) |
Education Levels Comparison: Kingman vs Port gibson
- A higher percentage of residents in Kingman have no formal schooling at 0.8% compared to 0.5% in Port gibson.
- A higher percentage of residents in Kingman hold a high school diploma at 15.7% compared to 9.8% in Port gibson.
- More residents in Kingman have less than a high school education at 13.6% compared to 13.3% in Port gibson.
- In Port gibson, a larger share of residents have a bachelor's degree or higher at 21.2% compared to 13.7% in Kingman.
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.