Immigrants from Uzbekistan vs Immigrants from Oceania Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 101,526,463 people shows a weak negative correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Oceania within Immigrant from Uzbekistan communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.239. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Uzbekistan within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.043% in Immigrants from Oceania. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Uzbekistan corresponds to a decrease of 43.5 Immigrants from Oceania.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Uzbekistan and Immigrants from Oceania communities in the United States are seen in householder income over 65 years ($56,331 compared to $64,416, a difference of 14.3%), wage/income gap (22.7% compared to 25.6%, a difference of 12.7%), and median female earnings ($43,363 compared to $40,297, a difference of 7.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($98,849 compared to $97,623, a difference of 1.3%), householder income under 25 years ($54,846 compared to $53,680, a difference of 2.2%), and median household income ($86,425 compared to $89,100, a difference of 3.1%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Uzbekistan and Immigrants from Oceania communities in the United States are seen in seniors poverty over the age of 75 (16.5% compared to 11.7%, a difference of 41.9%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (14.0% compared to 10.4%, a difference of 34.2%), and married-couple family poverty (6.6% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 32.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of child poverty under the age of 5 (17.0% compared to 16.9%, a difference of 0.66%), single female poverty (20.3% compared to 20.7%, a difference of 1.5%), and single mother poverty (29.3% compared to 28.7%, a difference of 2.0%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Uzbekistan and Immigrants from Oceania communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.2% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 24.5%), unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (20.5% compared to 17.2%, a difference of 19.1%), and unemployment among women with children under 6 years (6.3% compared to 7.5%, a difference of 17.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among women with children under 18 years (5.4% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 2.9%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (7.8% compared to 8.1%, a difference of 3.6%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.2% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 4.5%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Uzbekistan and Immigrants from Oceania communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (29.2% compared to 37.9%, a difference of 30.0%), in labor force | age 20-24 (70.4% compared to 76.1%, a difference of 8.1%), 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 45-54 (82.3% compared to 82.1%, a difference of 0.20%), in labor force | age 20-64 (79.1% compared to 79.3%, a difference of 0.24%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (83.9% compared to 84.2%, a difference of 0.35%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Uzbekistan and Immigrants from Oceania communities in the United States are seen in single father households (1.8% compared to 2.5%, a difference of 35.4%), births to unmarried women (25.8% compared to 30.6%, a difference of 18.6%), and divorced or separated (11.1% compared to 11.9%, a difference of 7.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of currently married (46.9% compared to 46.5%, a difference of 0.80%), average family size (3.24 compared to 3.29, a difference of 1.6%), and family households (63.4% compared to 64.9%, a difference of 2.4%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Uzbekistan and Immigrants from Oceania communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (26.7% compared to 9.7%, a difference of 174.0%), 4 or more vehicles in household (3.6% compared to 7.6%, a difference of 110.3%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (12.0% compared to 21.8%, a difference of 81.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (73.4% compared to 90.4%, a difference of 23.1%), 2 or more vehicles in household (37.9% compared to 57.5%, a difference of 51.8%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (12.0% compared to 21.8%, a difference of 81.9%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Uzbekistan and Immigrants from Oceania communities in the United States are seen in master's degree (17.9% compared to 14.7%, a difference of 21.8%), no schooling completed (2.6% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 15.1%), and bachelor's degree (42.8% compared to 37.3%, a difference of 14.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of college, under 1 year (65.8% compared to 65.6%, a difference of 0.30%), 5th grade (96.8% compared to 97.1%, a difference of 0.36%), and 4th grade (96.9% compared to 97.3%, a difference of 0.38%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Uzbekistan and Immigrants from Oceania communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (0.85% compared to 1.2%, a difference of 36.8%), disability age 18 to 34 (5.5% compared to 6.7%, a difference of 20.9%), and hearing disability (2.7% compared to 3.2%, a difference of 17.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female disability (12.3% compared to 12.1%, a difference of 1.1%), vision disability (2.1% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 1.7%), and disability age over 75 (49.2% compared to 48.0%, a difference of 2.4%).