Czechoslovakian vs Latvian Community Comparison

COMPARE

Czechoslovakian
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNepaleseNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPaiutePakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPimaPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuebloPuerto RicanPuget Sound SalishRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSeminoleSenegaleseSerbianShoshoneSierra LeoneanSiouxSlavicSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSoviet UnionSpaniardSpanishSpanish AmericanSpanish American IndianSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSudaneseSwedishSwissSyrianTaiwaneseThaiTlingit-HaidaTohono O'OdhamTonganTrinidadian and TobagonianTsimshianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUgandanUkrainianUruguayanUteVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYumanYup'ikZimbabwean
Immigration
NonimmigrantsImmigrantsAfghanistanAfricaAlbaniaArgentinaArmeniaAsiaAustraliaAustriaBahamasBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBoliviaBosnia and HerzegovinaBrazilBulgariaBurma/MyanmarCabo VerdeCambodiaCameroonCanadaCaribbeanCentral AmericaChileChinaColombiaCongoCosta RicaCroatiaCubaCzechoslovakiaDenmarkDominicaDominican RepublicEastern AfricaEastern AsiaEastern EuropeEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEnglandEritreaEthiopiaEuropeFijiFranceGermanyGhanaGreeceGrenadaGuatemalaGuyanaHaitiHondurasHong KongHungaryIndiaIndonesiaIranIraqIrelandIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJordanKazakhstanKenyaKoreaKuwaitLaosLatin AmericaLatviaLebanonLiberiaLithuaniaMalaysiaMexicoMicronesiaMiddle AfricaMoldovaMoroccoNepalNetherlandsNicaraguaNigeriaNorth AmericaNorth MacedoniaNorthern AfricaNorthern EuropeNorwayOceaniaPakistanPanamaPeruPhilippinesPolandPortugalRomaniaRussiaSaudi ArabiaScotlandSenegalSerbiaSierra LeoneSingaporeSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth AmericaSouth Central AsiaSouth Eastern AsiaSouthern EuropeSpainSri LankaSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudanSwedenSwitzerlandSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUruguayUzbekistanVenezuelaVietnamWest IndiesWestern AfricaWestern AsiaWestern EuropeYemenZaireZimbabweAzores
Latvian
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNepaleseNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPaiutePakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPimaPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuebloPuerto RicanPuget Sound SalishRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSeminoleSenegaleseSerbianShoshoneSierra LeoneanSiouxSlavicSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSoviet UnionSpaniardSpanishSpanish AmericanSpanish American IndianSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSudaneseSwedishSwissSyrianTaiwaneseThaiTlingit-HaidaTohono O'OdhamTonganTrinidadian and TobagonianTsimshianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUgandanUkrainianUruguayanUteVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYumanYup'ikZimbabwean
Immigration
NonimmigrantsImmigrantsAfghanistanAfricaAlbaniaArgentinaArmeniaAsiaAustraliaAustriaBahamasBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBoliviaBosnia and HerzegovinaBrazilBulgariaBurma/MyanmarCabo VerdeCambodiaCameroonCanadaCaribbeanCentral AmericaChileChinaColombiaCongoCosta RicaCroatiaCubaCzechoslovakiaDenmarkDominicaDominican RepublicEastern AfricaEastern AsiaEastern EuropeEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEnglandEritreaEthiopiaEuropeFijiFranceGermanyGhanaGreeceGrenadaGuatemalaGuyanaHaitiHondurasHong KongHungaryIndiaIndonesiaIranIraqIrelandIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJordanKazakhstanKenyaKoreaKuwaitLaosLatin AmericaLatviaLebanonLiberiaLithuaniaMalaysiaMexicoMicronesiaMiddle AfricaMoldovaMoroccoNepalNetherlandsNicaraguaNigeriaNorth AmericaNorth MacedoniaNorthern AfricaNorthern EuropeNorwayOceaniaPakistanPanamaPeruPhilippinesPolandPortugalRomaniaRussiaSaudi ArabiaScotlandSenegalSerbiaSierra LeoneSingaporeSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth AmericaSouth Central AsiaSouth Eastern AsiaSouthern EuropeSpainSri LankaSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudanSwedenSwitzerlandSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUruguayUzbekistanVenezuelaVietnamWest IndiesWestern AfricaWestern AsiaWestern EuropeYemenZaireZimbabweAzores
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Income
Poverty
Unemployment
Labor Participation
Family Structure
Vehicle Availability
Education Level
Disability

Social Comparison

Czechoslovakians

Latvians

Good
Exceptional
7,027
SOCIAL INDEX
67.8/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
132nd/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
9,576
SOCIAL INDEX
93.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
12th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Latvian Integration in Czechoslovakian Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 185,693,141 people shows a moderate positive correlation between the proportion of Latvians within Czechoslovakian communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.404. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Czechoslovakians within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.115% in Latvians. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Czechoslovakians corresponds to an increase of 115.4 Latvians.
Czechoslovakian Integration in Latvian Communities

Czechoslovakian vs Latvian Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Czechoslovakian and Latvian communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($43,806 compared to $52,649, a difference of 20.2%), median family income ($103,273 compared to $120,301, a difference of 16.5%), and median male earnings ($55,382 compared to $63,498, a difference of 14.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (28.2% compared to 27.9%, a difference of 1.2%), householder income under 25 years ($51,224 compared to $52,783, a difference of 3.0%), and householder income over 65 years ($60,581 compared to $67,326, a difference of 11.1%).
Czechoslovakian vs Latvian Income
Income MetricCzechoslovakianLatvian
Per Capita Income
Average
$43,806
Exceptional
$52,649
Median Family Income
Average
$103,273
Exceptional
$120,301
Median Household Income
Average
$84,965
Exceptional
$97,311
Median Earnings
Average
$46,658
Exceptional
$53,001
Median Male Earnings
Good
$55,382
Exceptional
$63,498
Median Female Earnings
Poor
$38,738
Exceptional
$43,941
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Tragic
$51,224
Excellent
$52,783
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Average
$95,070
Exceptional
$108,926
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Good
$101,387
Exceptional
$115,957
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Average
$60,581
Exceptional
$67,326
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
28.2%
Tragic
27.9%

Czechoslovakian vs Latvian Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Czechoslovakian and Latvian communities in the United States are seen in female poverty among 25-34 year olds (13.7% compared to 11.8%, a difference of 15.9%), child poverty under the age of 5 (16.8% compared to 14.5%, a difference of 15.8%), and child poverty among boys under 16 (15.3% compared to 13.4%, a difference of 14.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 65 (9.5% compared to 9.5%, a difference of 0.050%), seniors poverty over the age of 75 (10.9% compared to 10.8%, a difference of 0.76%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (20.0% compared to 19.5%, a difference of 2.6%).
Czechoslovakian vs Latvian Poverty
Poverty MetricCzechoslovakianLatvian
Poverty
Exceptional
11.4%
Exceptional
10.5%
Families
Exceptional
8.0%
Exceptional
7.1%
Males
Exceptional
10.3%
Exceptional
9.6%
Females
Exceptional
12.4%
Exceptional
11.4%
Females 18 to 24 years
Good
20.0%
Exceptional
19.5%
Females 25 to 34 years
Fair
13.7%
Exceptional
11.8%
Children Under 5 years
Good
16.8%
Exceptional
14.5%
Children Under 16 years
Exceptional
15.1%
Exceptional
13.2%
Boys Under 16 years
Exceptional
15.3%
Exceptional
13.4%
Girls Under 16 years
Excellent
15.5%
Exceptional
13.5%
Single Males
Tragic
13.4%
Good
12.7%
Single Females
Fair
21.3%
Exceptional
19.0%
Single Fathers
Tragic
17.1%
Fair
16.5%
Single Mothers
Poor
29.7%
Exceptional
26.9%
Married Couples
Exceptional
4.4%
Exceptional
3.9%
Seniors Over 65 years
Exceptional
9.5%
Exceptional
9.5%
Seniors Over 75 years
Exceptional
10.9%
Exceptional
10.8%
Receiving Food Stamps
Exceptional
10.3%
Exceptional
9.1%

Czechoslovakian vs Latvian Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Czechoslovakian and Latvian communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (7.7% compared to 6.8%, a difference of 13.9%), unemployment among seniors over 75 years (9.4% compared to 8.6%, a difference of 10.1%), and unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.6% compared to 4.2%, a difference of 8.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among youth under 25 years (11.0% compared to 11.0%, a difference of 0.25%), unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (9.9% compared to 9.9%, a difference of 0.26%), and unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.6% compared to 4.6%, a difference of 0.82%).
Czechoslovakian vs Latvian Unemployment
Unemployment MetricCzechoslovakianLatvian
Unemployment
Exceptional
4.8%
Exceptional
4.7%
Males
Exceptional
5.0%
Exceptional
4.8%
Females
Exceptional
4.8%
Exceptional
4.7%
Youth < 25
Exceptional
11.0%
Exceptional
11.0%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Exceptional
16.5%
Exceptional
16.7%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
9.9%
Exceptional
9.9%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Average
6.7%
Exceptional
6.2%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Good
5.4%
Exceptional
5.0%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Excellent
4.6%
Exceptional
4.2%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.2%
Exceptional
4.2%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Exceptional
4.6%
Exceptional
4.6%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
4.6%
Good
4.8%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Excellent
5.3%
Exceptional
5.1%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
5.0%
Exceptional
4.9%
Seniors > 75
Tragic
9.4%
Excellent
8.6%
Women w/ Children < 6
Fair
7.7%
Exceptional
6.8%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Fair
9.1%
Exceptional
8.6%
Women w/ Children < 18
Exceptional
5.1%
Exceptional
4.9%

Czechoslovakian vs Latvian Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Czechoslovakian and Latvian communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (41.9% compared to 38.9%, a difference of 7.7%), in labor force | age 20-24 (77.5% compared to 76.1%, a difference of 1.8%), and in labor force | age > 16 (64.3% compared to 65.5%, a difference of 1.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 35-44 (84.6% compared to 85.4%, a difference of 0.93%), in labor force | age 45-54 (83.0% compared to 83.8%, a difference of 1.0%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (85.0% compared to 86.1%, a difference of 1.2%).
Czechoslovakian vs Latvian Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricCzechoslovakianLatvian
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Tragic
64.3%
Excellent
65.5%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Average
79.5%
Exceptional
80.5%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
41.9%
Exceptional
38.9%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Exceptional
77.5%
Exceptional
76.1%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Exceptional
85.0%
Exceptional
86.1%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Good
84.8%
Exceptional
86.0%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Excellent
84.6%
Exceptional
85.4%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Good
83.0%
Exceptional
83.8%

Czechoslovakian vs Latvian Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Czechoslovakian and Latvian communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.3% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 15.8%), births to unmarried women (32.0% compared to 27.7%, a difference of 15.5%), and single mother households (5.9% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 11.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of currently married (48.8% compared to 48.5%, a difference of 0.70%), average family size (3.13 compared to 3.11, a difference of 0.72%), and married-couple households (48.5% compared to 47.9%, a difference of 1.4%).
Czechoslovakian vs Latvian Family Structure
Family Structure MetricCzechoslovakianLatvian
Family Households
Excellent
64.6%
Tragic
62.8%
Family Households with Children
Tragic
27.0%
Tragic
26.4%
Married-couple Households
Exceptional
48.5%
Exceptional
47.9%
Average Family Size
Tragic
3.13
Tragic
3.11
Single Father Households
Average
2.3%
Exceptional
2.0%
Single Mother Households
Exceptional
5.9%
Exceptional
5.3%
Currently Married
Exceptional
48.8%
Exceptional
48.5%
Divorced or Separated
Poor
12.3%
Exceptional
11.6%
Births to Unmarried Women
Fair
32.0%
Exceptional
27.7%

Czechoslovakian vs Latvian Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Czechoslovakian and Latvian communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.8% compared to 9.8%, a difference of 25.0%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.1% compared to 6.1%, a difference of 16.2%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (21.7% compared to 19.3%, a difference of 12.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 90.3%, a difference of 2.2%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.8% compared to 56.2%, a difference of 6.3%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (21.7% compared to 19.3%, a difference of 12.7%).
Czechoslovakian vs Latvian Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricCzechoslovakianLatvian
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.8%
Excellent
9.8%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
92.3%
Excellent
90.3%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
59.8%
Excellent
56.2%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
21.7%
Fair
19.3%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.1%
Fair
6.1%

Czechoslovakian vs Latvian Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Czechoslovakian and Latvian communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (4.2% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 48.4%), doctorate degree (1.8% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 43.8%), and master's degree (14.5% compared to 19.8%, a difference of 36.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (98.5% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.060%), kindergarten (98.4% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.060%), and 1st grade (98.4% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.060%).
Czechoslovakian vs Latvian Education Level
Education Level MetricCzechoslovakianLatvian
No Schooling Completed
Exceptional
1.6%
Exceptional
1.5%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.5%
Exceptional
98.5%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.4%
Exceptional
98.5%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.4%
Exceptional
98.5%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.4%
Exceptional
98.4%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Exceptional
98.4%
4th Grade
Exceptional
98.1%
Exceptional
98.2%
5th Grade
Exceptional
98.0%
Exceptional
98.1%
6th Grade
Exceptional
97.8%
Exceptional
97.9%
7th Grade
Exceptional
97.1%
Exceptional
97.2%
8th Grade
Exceptional
96.9%
Exceptional
97.0%
9th Grade
Exceptional
96.1%
Exceptional
96.4%
10th Grade
Exceptional
95.1%
Exceptional
95.6%
11th Grade
Exceptional
94.0%
Exceptional
94.7%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Exceptional
92.6%
Exceptional
93.6%
High School Diploma
Exceptional
90.9%
Exceptional
92.0%
GED/Equivalency
Exceptional
87.4%
Exceptional
89.2%
College, Under 1 year
Good
65.8%
Exceptional
71.6%
College, 1 year or more
Average
59.4%
Exceptional
66.1%
Associate's Degree
Average
46.0%
Exceptional
53.9%
Bachelor's Degree
Fair
37.0%
Exceptional
46.1%
Master's Degree
Fair
14.5%
Exceptional
19.8%
Professional Degree
Fair
4.2%
Exceptional
6.2%
Doctorate Degree
Fair
1.8%
Exceptional
2.6%

Czechoslovakian vs Latvian Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Czechoslovakian and Latvian communities in the United States are seen in disability age 35 to 64 (11.8% compared to 10.2%, a difference of 16.0%), disability age under 5 (1.5% compared to 1.3%, a difference of 15.2%), and vision disability (2.2% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 11.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (16.6% compared to 16.6%, a difference of 0.26%), disability age over 75 (46.6% compared to 45.1%, a difference of 3.2%), and self-care disability (2.5% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 7.2%).
Czechoslovakian vs Latvian Disability
Disability MetricCzechoslovakianLatvian
Disability
Tragic
12.5%
Excellent
11.4%
Males
Tragic
12.3%
Good
11.1%
Females
Tragic
12.7%
Exceptional
11.7%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
1.5%
Tragic
1.3%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Tragic
5.9%
Exceptional
5.4%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
7.4%
Poor
6.8%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Tragic
11.8%
Exceptional
10.2%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Good
23.0%
Exceptional
21.2%
Age | Over 75 years
Exceptional
46.6%
Exceptional
45.1%
Vision
Fair
2.2%
Exceptional
2.0%
Hearing
Tragic
3.6%
Tragic
3.2%
Cognitive
Exceptional
16.6%
Exceptional
16.6%
Ambulatory
Tragic
6.4%
Exceptional
5.7%
Self-Care
Average
2.5%
Exceptional
2.3%