Czechoslovakian vs Immigrants from China Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 331,001,777 people shows a mild positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from China within Czechoslovakian communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.391. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Czechoslovakians within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.172% in Immigrants from China. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Czechoslovakians corresponds to an increase of 172.3 Immigrants from China.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Czechoslovakian and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($95,070 compared to $119,756, a difference of 26.0%), median household income ($84,965 compared to $105,335, a difference of 24.0%), and per capita income ($43,806 compared to $54,264, a difference of 23.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (28.2% compared to 26.7%, a difference of 5.7%), householder income under 25 years ($51,224 compared to $57,931, a difference of 13.1%), and householder income over 65 years ($60,581 compared to $69,174, a difference of 14.2%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Czechoslovakian and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in child poverty under the age of 5 (16.8% compared to 13.6%, a difference of 23.5%), female poverty among 25-34 year olds (13.7% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 22.2%), and seniors poverty over the age of 65 (9.5% compared to 11.5%, a difference of 21.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female poverty (12.4% compared to 12.5%, a difference of 0.69%), female poverty among 18-24 year olds (20.0% compared to 20.2%, a difference of 0.94%), and family poverty (8.0% compared to 7.8%, a difference of 2.1%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Czechoslovakian and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (7.7% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 23.7%), unemployment among seniors over 75 years (9.4% compared to 7.8%, a difference of 21.5%), and unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (9.1% compared to 7.7%, a difference of 18.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (5.3% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 2.7%), unemployment among women with children under 18 years (5.1% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 3.0%), and unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.6% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 3.3%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Czechoslovakian and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (41.9% compared to 31.1%, a difference of 34.5%), in labor force | age 20-24 (77.5% compared to 71.1%, a difference of 9.0%), and in labor force | age > 16 (64.3% compared to 65.4%, a difference of 1.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 35-44 (84.6% compared to 84.7%, a difference of 0.15%), in labor force | age 20-64 (79.5% compared to 79.7%, a difference of 0.21%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (83.0% compared to 83.2%, a difference of 0.27%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Czechoslovakian and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in births to unmarried women (32.0% compared to 24.7%, a difference of 29.8%), single father households (2.3% compared to 1.8%, a difference of 25.8%), and divorced or separated (12.3% compared to 10.0%, a difference of 22.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (64.6% compared to 64.7%, a difference of 0.11%), married-couple households (48.5% compared to 48.4%, a difference of 0.27%), and family households with children (27.0% compared to 27.4%, a difference of 1.5%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Czechoslovakian and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.8% compared to 15.2%, a difference of 93.5%), 3 or more vehicles in household (21.7% compared to 18.2%, a difference of 19.3%), and 4 or more vehicles in household (7.1% compared to 6.0%, a difference of 17.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 84.9%, a difference of 8.7%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.8% compared to 51.5%, a difference of 16.1%), and 4 or more vehicles in household (7.1% compared to 6.0%, a difference of 17.9%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Czechoslovakian and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in doctorate degree (1.8% compared to 3.1%, a difference of 72.4%), professional degree (4.2% compared to 6.7%, a difference of 59.9%), and no schooling completed (1.6% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 58.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of ged/equivalency (87.4% compared to 86.9%, a difference of 0.56%), nursery school (98.5% compared to 97.5%, a difference of 1.0%), and kindergarten (98.4% compared to 97.4%, a difference of 1.0%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Czechoslovakian and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.5% compared to 0.96%, a difference of 57.0%), disability age 18 to 34 (7.4% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 36.5%), and disability age 35 to 64 (11.8% compared to 8.7%, a difference of 35.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (46.6% compared to 46.3%, a difference of 0.57%), cognitive disability (16.6% compared to 16.9%, a difference of 1.9%), and self-care disability (2.5% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 5.7%).