Immigrants from Czechoslovakia vs Carpatho Rusyn Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 46,005,046 people shows a moderate positive correlation between the proportion of Carpatho Rusyns within Immigrant from Czechoslovakia communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.470. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Czechoslovakia within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.088% in Carpatho Rusyns. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Czechoslovakia corresponds to an increase of 87.7 Carpatho Rusyns.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Czechoslovakia and Carpatho Rusyn communities in the United States are seen in householder income under 25 years ($54,352 compared to $49,113, a difference of 10.7%), median household income ($95,319 compared to $86,635, a difference of 10.0%), and per capita income ($51,770 compared to $47,248, a difference of 9.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (27.3% compared to 27.3%, a difference of 0.020%), median female earnings ($43,571 compared to $40,825, a difference of 6.7%), and householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($106,888 compared to $99,449, a difference of 7.5%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Czechoslovakia and Carpatho Rusyn communities in the United States are seen in child poverty under the age of 5 (14.8% compared to 17.5%, a difference of 18.7%), married-couple family poverty (4.6% compared to 3.9%, a difference of 16.4%), and single male poverty (12.1% compared to 13.4%, a difference of 11.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family poverty (7.7% compared to 7.5%, a difference of 1.7%), male poverty (10.0% compared to 10.2%, a difference of 2.3%), and poverty (11.0% compared to 11.3%, a difference of 2.6%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Czechoslovakia and Carpatho Rusyn communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (8.4% compared to 9.7%, a difference of 14.6%), unemployment among women with children under 6 years (7.0% compared to 8.0%, a difference of 13.1%), and unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (9.0% compared to 10.0%, a difference of 10.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (17.8% compared to 17.9%, a difference of 0.97%), unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.8% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 1.2%), and unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (5.3% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 1.7%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Czechoslovakia and Carpatho Rusyn communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (36.6% compared to 40.8%, a difference of 11.6%), in labor force | age 20-24 (75.0% compared to 76.5%, a difference of 2.0%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (85.4% compared to 87.0%, a difference of 1.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 45-54 (83.4% compared to 83.5%, a difference of 0.12%), in labor force | age > 16 (64.8% compared to 65.0%, a difference of 0.44%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (79.9% compared to 80.3%, a difference of 0.45%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Czechoslovakia and Carpatho Rusyn communities in the United States are seen in births to unmarried women (28.4% compared to 30.9%, a difference of 8.9%), single mother households (5.3% compared to 5.7%, a difference of 6.4%), and married-couple households (47.8% compared to 45.7%, a difference of 4.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of divorced or separated (11.7% compared to 11.9%, a difference of 1.5%), average family size (3.14 compared to 3.06, a difference of 2.6%), and currently married (48.4% compared to 47.0%, a difference of 2.8%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Czechoslovakia and Carpatho Rusyn communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (11.8% compared to 10.7%, a difference of 10.5%), 4 or more vehicles in household (5.8% compared to 5.5%, a difference of 4.5%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.5% compared to 18.0%, a difference of 2.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 2 or more vehicles in household (54.1% compared to 54.4%, a difference of 0.63%), 1 or more vehicles in household (88.3% compared to 89.5%, a difference of 1.3%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.5% compared to 18.0%, a difference of 2.4%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Czechoslovakia and Carpatho Rusyn communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.8% compared to 1.4%, a difference of 32.7%), professional degree (5.8% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 10.4%), and master's degree (18.5% compared to 17.5%, a difference of 5.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (98.2% compared to 98.7%, a difference of 0.47%), kindergarten (98.2% compared to 98.7%, a difference of 0.47%), and 1st grade (98.2% compared to 98.6%, a difference of 0.48%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Czechoslovakia and Carpatho Rusyn communities in the United States are seen in disability age 5 to 17 (5.2% compared to 6.3%, a difference of 20.4%), disability age under 5 (1.2% compared to 1.4%, a difference of 19.0%), and disability age 35 to 64 (10.0% compared to 11.5%, a difference of 15.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (45.1% compared to 44.8%, a difference of 0.69%), self-care disability (2.4% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 1.2%), and vision disability (2.0% compared to 2.1%, a difference of 2.6%).