Demographics details for Petersburg, PA vs Clinton, SC
Population Overview
Compare main population characteristics in Petersburg, PA vs Clinton, SC.
| Data | Petersburg | Clinton |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 412 | 7,554 |
| Median Age | 39.8 years | 35.4 years |
| Median Income | $58,125 | $38,350 |
| Married Families | 30.0% | 19.0% |
| Poverty Level | 8% | 18% |
| Unemployment Rate | 5.2 | 4.5 |
Population Comparison: Petersburg vs Clinton
- The population in Clinton is higher at 7,554, compared to 412 in Petersburg.
- Residents in Petersburg have a higher median age of 39.8 years compared to 35.4 years in Clinton.
- Petersburg has a higher median income of $58,125 compared to $38,350 in Clinton.
- A higher percentage of married families is found in Petersburg at 30.0% compared to 19.0% in Clinton.
- The poverty level is higher in Clinton at 18%, compared to 8% in Petersburg.
- The unemployment rate in Petersburg is higher at 5.2%, compared to 4.5% in Clinton.
Demographics
Demographics Petersburg vs Clinton provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.
| Demographic | Petersburg | Clinton |
|---|---|---|
| Black | Data is updating | 38 |
| White | 98 | 55 |
| Asian | Data is updating | 2 |
| Hispanic | Data is updating | 1 |
| Two or More Races | 2 | 4 |
| American Indian | Data is updating | Data is updating |
Demographics Comparison: Petersburg vs Clinton
- In Clinton, the percentage of Black residents is higher at 38% compared to 0% in Petersburg.
- Petersburg has a higher percentage of White residents at 98% compared to 55% in Clinton.
- In Clinton, the Asian population stands at 2%, greater than 0% in Petersburg.
- Clinton has a higher percentage of Hispanic residents at 1%, compared to 0% in Petersburg.
- The percentage of residents identifying as two or more races is higher in Clinton at 4%, compared to 2% in Petersburg.
- The percentage of American Indian residents is the same in both Petersburg and Clinton at 0%.
Health Statistics
The health statistics provide insights into prevalent health conditions in two communities.
| Health Metric | Petersburg | Clinton |
|---|---|---|
| Mental Health Not Good | 18.6% | 19.1% |
| Physical Health Not Good | 12.7% | 14.0% |
| Depression | 24.5% | 23.7% |
| Smoking | 22.3% | 22.0% |
| Binge Drinking | 18.6% | 15.8% |
| Obesity | 38.1% | 44.9% |
| Disability Percentage | 18.0% | 17.0% |
Health Statistics Comparison: Petersburg vs Clinton
- In Clinton, a higher percentage report poor mental health at 19.1% compared to 18.6% in Petersburg.
- Depression is more prevalent in Petersburg at 24.5% compared to 23.7% in Clinton.
- Smoking is more prevalent in Petersburg at 22.3% compared to 22.0% in Clinton.
- Binge drinking is more common in Petersburg at 18.6% compared to 15.8% in Clinton.
- Clinton has higher obesity rates at 44.9% compared to 38.1% in Petersburg.
- Disability percentages are higher in Petersburg at 18.0% compared to 17.0% in Clinton.
Education Levels
The educational attainment in the area helps gauge the workforce's skill level and economic potential.
| Education Level | Petersburg | Clinton |
|---|---|---|
| No Schooling | 0.5% (2) | 1.0% (74) |
| High School Diploma | 35.2% (145) | 19.3% (1,460) |
| Less than High School | 15.0% (62) | 15.6% (1,177) |
| Bachelor's Degree and Higher | 1.5% (6) | 17.3% (1,310) |
Education Levels Comparison: Petersburg vs Clinton
- In Clinton, a larger percentage of residents lack formal schooling at 1.0% compared to 0.5% in Petersburg.
- A higher percentage of residents in Petersburg hold a high school diploma at 35.2% 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 15.0% in Petersburg.
- In Clinton, a larger share of residents have a bachelor's degree or higher at 17.3% compared to 1.5% in Petersburg.
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.