Immigrants from Oceania vs Alaskan Athabascan Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 41,671,538 people shows a poor positive correlation between the proportion of Alaskan Athabascans within Immigrant from Oceania communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.185. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Oceania within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.080% in Alaskan Athabascans. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Oceania corresponds to an increase of 79.9 Alaskan Athabascans.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in median household income ($89,100 compared to $76,383, a difference of 16.7%), per capita income ($45,220 compared to $39,163, a difference of 15.5%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($103,705 compared to $90,951, a difference of 14.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (25.6% compared to 25.8%, a difference of 0.50%), householder income over 65 years ($64,416 compared to $62,330, a difference of 3.4%), and householder income under 25 years ($53,680 compared to $51,713, a difference of 3.8%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in female poverty among 25-34 year olds (13.5% compared to 19.1%, a difference of 41.2%), single male poverty (12.4% compared to 16.1%, a difference of 29.8%), and child poverty under the age of 5 (16.9% compared to 21.8%, a difference of 29.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.4% compared to 10.6%, a difference of 1.6%), single mother poverty (28.7% compared to 30.3%, a difference of 5.5%), and female poverty (13.3% compared to 14.4%, a difference of 7.9%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 45 to 54 years (4.4% compared to 8.5%, a difference of 92.0%), male unemployment (5.3% compared to 9.8%, a difference of 84.2%), and unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.8% compared to 8.6%, a difference of 80.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (17.2% compared to 17.7%, a difference of 2.7%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.1% compared to 8.5%, a difference of 4.7%), and unemployment among youth under 25 years (11.4% compared to 12.2%, a difference of 6.7%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (37.9% compared to 45.2%, a difference of 19.3%), in labor force | age 20-24 (76.1% compared to 79.1%, a difference of 3.9%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (79.3% compared to 76.9%, a difference of 3.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 45-54 (82.1% compared to 81.8%, a difference of 0.41%), in labor force | age > 16 (65.5% compared to 64.8%, a difference of 1.1%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (84.2% compared to 82.3%, a difference of 2.3%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.5% compared to 3.4%, a difference of 37.3%), births to unmarried women (30.6% compared to 37.7%, a difference of 23.4%), and single mother households (6.3% compared to 7.3%, a difference of 16.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.29 compared to 3.27, a difference of 0.81%), family households with children (28.1% compared to 27.6%, a difference of 2.0%), and currently married (46.5% compared to 44.6%, a difference of 4.2%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (9.7% compared to 15.6%, a difference of 60.3%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.6% compared to 8.1%, a difference of 5.9%), and 1 or more vehicles in household (90.4% compared to 86.0%, a difference of 5.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 3 or more vehicles in household (21.8% compared to 21.9%, a difference of 0.67%), 2 or more vehicles in household (57.5% compared to 55.2%, a difference of 4.3%), and 1 or more vehicles in household (90.4% compared to 86.0%, a difference of 5.1%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (2.2% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 53.1%), bachelor's degree (37.3% compared to 28.8%, a difference of 29.6%), and master's degree (14.7% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 26.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of ged/equivalency (85.5% compared to 85.3%, a difference of 0.15%), nursery school (97.8% compared to 98.8%, a difference of 1.0%), and kindergarten (97.8% compared to 98.8%, a difference of 1.0%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (3.2% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 67.3%), vision disability (2.2% compared to 3.1%, a difference of 45.0%), and disability age 18 to 34 (6.7% compared to 9.4%, a difference of 41.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (17.6% compared to 17.6%, a difference of 0.050%), self-care disability (2.5% compared to 2.5%, a difference of 1.4%), and disability age over 75 (48.0% compared to 54.0%, a difference of 12.4%).