Immigrants from Czechoslovakia vs New Zealander Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 80,896,389 people shows a mild positive correlation between the proportion of New Zealanders within Immigrant from Czechoslovakia communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.386. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Czechoslovakia within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.072% in New Zealanders. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Czechoslovakia corresponds to an increase of 71.6 New Zealanders.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Czechoslovakia and New Zealander communities in the United States are seen in median female earnings ($43,571 compared to $42,446, a difference of 2.6%), per capita income ($51,770 compared to $50,575, a difference of 2.4%), and median earnings ($52,361 compared to $51,246, a difference of 2.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of median household income ($95,319 compared to $95,146, a difference of 0.18%), householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($111,914 compared to $111,286, a difference of 0.56%), and median family income ($116,165 compared to $115,230, a difference of 0.81%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Czechoslovakia and New Zealander communities in the United States are seen in female poverty among 18-24 year olds (19.1% compared to 21.7%, a difference of 13.5%), child poverty under the age of 5 (14.8% compared to 16.6%, a difference of 12.7%), and single female poverty (19.0% compared to 21.0%, a difference of 10.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.0% compared to 10.0%, a difference of 0.050%), seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.7% compared to 11.7%, a difference of 0.11%), and single father poverty (16.2% compared to 16.6%, a difference of 2.6%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Czechoslovakia and New Zealander communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.6% compared to 6.0%, a difference of 9.6%), unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (17.8% compared to 16.8%, a difference of 5.9%), and unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (9.0% compared to 8.6%, a difference of 5.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.5% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 0.23%), unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.9% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 0.33%), and unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (5.3% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 0.40%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Czechoslovakia and New Zealander communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (36.6% compared to 38.0%, a difference of 3.9%), in labor force | age > 16 (64.8% compared to 65.7%, a difference of 1.5%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (83.4% compared to 82.6%, a difference of 0.93%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-64 (79.9% compared to 79.7%, a difference of 0.27%), in labor force | age 20-24 (75.0% compared to 75.2%, a difference of 0.32%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (85.4% compared to 85.0%, a difference of 0.43%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Czechoslovakia and New Zealander communities in the United States are seen in births to unmarried women (28.4% compared to 30.3%, a difference of 6.9%), single mother households (5.3% compared to 5.6%, a difference of 5.6%), and family households with children (26.2% compared to 27.1%, a difference of 3.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.14 compared to 3.15, a difference of 0.36%), family households (63.4% compared to 62.9%, a difference of 0.88%), and married-couple households (47.8% compared to 47.2%, a difference of 1.2%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Czechoslovakia and New Zealander communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (11.8% compared to 10.2%, a difference of 15.7%), 4 or more vehicles in household (5.8% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 12.3%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.5% compared to 20.4%, a difference of 10.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (88.3% compared to 90.1%, a difference of 2.0%), 2 or more vehicles in household (54.1% compared to 56.7%, a difference of 4.8%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.5% compared to 20.4%, a difference of 10.2%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Czechoslovakia and New Zealander communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.8% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 9.0%), doctorate degree (2.4% compared to 2.5%, a difference of 6.0%), and professional degree (5.8% compared to 6.0%, a difference of 2.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of ged/equivalency (87.9% compared to 88.0%, a difference of 0.060%), bachelor's degree (44.0% compared to 44.0%, a difference of 0.11%), and associate's degree (51.9% compared to 51.8%, a difference of 0.15%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Czechoslovakia and New Zealander communities in the United States are seen in disability age 18 to 34 (6.3% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 11.3%), disability age 35 to 64 (10.0% compared to 11.0%, a difference of 10.0%), and disability age 65 to 74 (21.0% compared to 22.9%, a difference of 8.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of ambulatory disability (5.8% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 0.11%), disability age under 5 (1.2% compared to 1.2%, a difference of 0.23%), and female disability (11.6% compared to 11.7%, a difference of 1.3%).