Immigrants from Czechoslovakia vs Icelander Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 101,831,463 people shows a significant positive correlation between the proportion of Icelanders within Immigrant from Czechoslovakia communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.601. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Czechoslovakia within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.557% in Icelanders. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Czechoslovakia corresponds to an increase of 557.2 Icelanders.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Czechoslovakia and Icelander communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($51,770 compared to $44,987, a difference of 15.1%), median male earnings ($62,217 compared to $55,415, a difference of 12.3%), and householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($106,888 compared to $95,560, a difference of 11.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (27.3% compared to 27.5%, a difference of 0.68%), householder income under 25 years ($54,352 compared to $51,247, a difference of 6.1%), and householder income over 65 years ($66,376 compared to $61,270, a difference of 8.3%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Czechoslovakia and Icelander communities in the United States are seen in single female poverty (19.0% compared to 21.6%, a difference of 13.5%), female poverty among 18-24 year olds (19.1% compared to 21.5%, a difference of 12.6%), and single father poverty (16.2% compared to 14.5%, a difference of 11.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.7% compared to 11.7%, a difference of 0.22%), married-couple family poverty (4.6% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 1.3%), and seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.0% compared to 10.3%, a difference of 2.4%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Czechoslovakia and Icelander communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (8.4% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 19.9%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (9.0% compared to 8.1%, a difference of 11.9%), and unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.9% compared to 4.7%, a difference of 5.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (5.3% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 0.42%), unemployment among ages 45 to 54 years (4.4% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 0.84%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.1% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 1.0%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Czechoslovakia and Icelander communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (36.6% compared to 40.8%, a difference of 11.5%), in labor force | age 20-24 (75.0% compared to 76.9%, a difference of 2.5%), and in labor force | age > 16 (64.8% compared to 65.6%, a difference of 1.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-64 (79.9% compared to 79.7%, a difference of 0.21%), in labor force | age 45-54 (83.4% compared to 82.8%, a difference of 0.75%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (85.4% compared to 84.7%, a difference of 0.76%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Czechoslovakia and Icelander communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.0% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 13.8%), single mother households (5.3% compared to 6.0%, a difference of 12.4%), and births to unmarried women (28.4% compared to 30.3%, a difference of 6.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (63.4% compared to 63.3%, a difference of 0.27%), average family size (3.14 compared to 3.19, a difference of 1.4%), and married-couple households (47.8% compared to 47.0%, a difference of 1.6%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Czechoslovakia and Icelander communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (5.8% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 27.8%), no vehicles in household (11.8% compared to 9.6%, a difference of 22.5%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.5% compared to 21.5%, a difference of 16.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (88.3% compared to 90.5%, a difference of 2.5%), 2 or more vehicles in household (54.1% compared to 58.0%, a difference of 7.2%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.5% compared to 21.5%, a difference of 16.4%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Czechoslovakia and Icelander communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (5.8% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 21.6%), master's degree (18.5% compared to 15.5%, a difference of 19.7%), and doctorate degree (2.4% compared to 2.1%, a difference of 15.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 10th grade (94.7% compared to 94.7%, a difference of 0.040%), 9th grade (95.7% compared to 95.7%, a difference of 0.050%), and 8th grade (96.4% compared to 96.5%, a difference of 0.090%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Czechoslovakia and Icelander communities in the United States are seen in disability age 35 to 64 (10.0% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 14.0%), disability age 18 to 34 (6.3% compared to 7.1%, a difference of 13.1%), and disability age 65 to 74 (21.0% compared to 23.3%, a difference of 10.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of self-care disability (2.4% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 0.15%), disability age under 5 (1.2% compared to 1.2%, a difference of 0.94%), and ambulatory disability (5.8% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 1.5%).