Demographics details for Lumber bridge, NC vs Hoover, AL
Population Overview
Compare main population characteristics in Lumber bridge, NC vs Hoover, AL.
| Data | Lumber bridge | Hoover |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 82 | 92,435 |
| Median Age | 43.8 years | 38.3 years |
| Median Income | $61,250 | $101,765 |
| Married Families | 38.0% | 46.0% |
| Poverty Level | 12% | 7% |
| Unemployment Rate | 4.6 | 2.2 |
Population Comparison: Lumber bridge vs Hoover
- The population in Hoover is higher at 92,435, compared to 82 in Lumber bridge.
- Residents in Lumber bridge have a higher median age of 43.8 years compared to 38.3 years in Hoover.
- Hoover has a higher median income of $101,765, compared to $61,250 in Lumber bridge.
- In Hoover, the percentage of married families is higher at 46.0%, compared to 38.0% in Lumber bridge.
- Lumber bridge has a higher poverty level at 12% compared to 7% in Hoover.
- The unemployment rate in Lumber bridge is higher at 4.6%, compared to 2.2% in Hoover.
Demographics
Demographics Lumber bridge vs Hoover provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.
| Demographic | Lumber bridge | Hoover |
|---|---|---|
| Black | 7 | 20 |
| White | 88 | 67 |
| Asian | Data is updating | 5 |
| Hispanic | Data is updating | 5 |
| Two or More Races | Data is updating | 3 |
| American Indian | 5 | Data is updating |
Demographics Comparison: Lumber bridge vs Hoover
- In Hoover, the percentage of Black residents is higher at 20% compared to 7% in Lumber bridge.
- Lumber bridge has a higher percentage of White residents at 88% compared to 67% in Hoover.
- In Hoover, the Asian population stands at 5%, greater than 0% in Lumber bridge.
- Hoover has a higher percentage of Hispanic residents at 5%, compared to 0% in Lumber bridge.
- The percentage of residents identifying as two or more races is higher in Hoover at 3%, compared to 0% in Lumber bridge.
- A greater percentage of American Indian residents live in Lumber bridge at 5% compared to 0% in Hoover.
Health Statistics
The health statistics provide insights into prevalent health conditions in two communities.
| Health Metric | Lumber bridge | Hoover |
|---|---|---|
| Mental Health Not Good | 17.8% | 14.9% |
| Physical Health Not Good | 14.2% | 8.6% |
| Depression | 23.8% | 21.3% |
| Smoking | 23.0% | 11.0% |
| Binge Drinking | 16.2% | 16.7% |
| Obesity | 40.5% | 32.1% |
| Disability Percentage | 9.0% | 9.0% |
Health Statistics Comparison: Lumber bridge vs Hoover
- More residents in Lumber bridge report poor mental health at 17.8% compared to 14.9% in Hoover.
- Depression is more prevalent in Lumber bridge at 23.8% compared to 21.3% in Hoover.
- Smoking is more prevalent in Lumber bridge at 23.0% compared to 11.0% in Hoover.
- More residents engage in binge drinking in Hoover at 16.7% compared to 16.2% in Lumber bridge.
- Obesity rates are higher in Lumber bridge at 40.5% compared to 32.1% in Hoover.
- Disability percentages are the same in both Lumber bridge and Hoover at 9.0%.
Education Levels
The educational attainment in the area helps gauge the workforce's skill level and economic potential.
| Education Level | Lumber bridge | Hoover |
|---|---|---|
| No Schooling | 0.0% (Data is updating) | 0.6% (583) |
| High School Diploma | 32.9% (27) | 7.3% (6,787) |
| Less than High School | 9.8% (8) | 3.8% (3,478) |
| Bachelor's Degree and Higher | 7.3% (6) | 41.1% (38,000) |
Education Levels Comparison: Lumber bridge vs Hoover
- In Hoover, a larger percentage of residents lack formal schooling at 0.6% compared to 0.0% in Lumber bridge.
- A higher percentage of residents in Lumber bridge hold a high school diploma at 32.9% compared to 7.3% in Hoover.
- More residents in Lumber bridge have less than a high school education at 9.8% compared to 3.8% in Hoover.
- In Hoover, a larger share of residents have a bachelor's degree or higher at 41.1% compared to 7.3% in Lumber bridge.
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.