Comanche vs Immigrants from Czechoslovakia Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 70,124,104 people shows a moderate positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Czechoslovakia within Comanche communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.485. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Comanche within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.178% in Immigrants from Czechoslovakia. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Comanche corresponds to an increase of 177.5 Immigrants from Czechoslovakia.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Comanche and Immigrants from Czechoslovakia communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($38,088 compared to $51,770, a difference of 35.9%), median family income ($88,556 compared to $116,165, a difference of 31.2%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($85,787 compared to $111,914, a difference of 30.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (25.0% compared to 27.3%, a difference of 8.9%), householder income under 25 years ($47,518 compared to $54,352, a difference of 14.4%), and householder income over 65 years ($54,922 compared to $66,376, a difference of 20.8%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Comanche and Immigrants from Czechoslovakia communities in the United States are seen in family poverty (11.0% compared to 7.7%, a difference of 44.1%), child poverty under the age of 16 (19.9% compared to 13.9%, a difference of 43.1%), and child poverty among girls under 16 (20.2% compared to 14.2%, a difference of 42.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 75 (12.8% compared to 11.7%, a difference of 9.5%), single father poverty (18.5% compared to 16.2%, a difference of 14.0%), and seniors poverty over the age of 65 (12.1% compared to 10.0%, a difference of 20.5%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Comanche and Immigrants from Czechoslovakia communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (6.7% compared to 8.4%, a difference of 26.3%), unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (6.3% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 19.2%), and unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (7.8% compared to 6.6%, a difference of 18.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (9.0% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 0.23%), unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (10.2% compared to 10.3%, a difference of 1.8%), and unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (5.0% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 2.7%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Comanche and Immigrants from Czechoslovakia communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 45-54 (79.2% compared to 83.4%, a difference of 5.3%), in labor force | age 25-29 (81.9% compared to 85.4%, a difference of 4.3%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (81.5% compared to 84.8%, a difference of 4.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (75.4% compared to 75.0%, a difference of 0.54%), in labor force | age > 16 (63.6% compared to 64.8%, a difference of 1.8%), and in labor force | age 16-19 (37.7% compared to 36.6%, a difference of 3.1%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Comanche and Immigrants from Czechoslovakia communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (7.0% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 32.1%), births to unmarried women (36.7% compared to 28.4%, a difference of 29.3%), and single father households (2.5% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 24.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (63.5% compared to 63.4%, a difference of 0.060%), average family size (3.25 compared to 3.14, a difference of 3.5%), and family households with children (27.6% compared to 26.2%, a difference of 5.3%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Comanche and Immigrants from Czechoslovakia communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (6.8% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 17.5%), no vehicles in household (10.2% compared to 11.8%, a difference of 15.0%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (21.0% compared to 18.5%, a difference of 13.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (89.9% compared to 88.3%, a difference of 1.8%), 2 or more vehicles in household (56.5% compared to 54.1%, a difference of 4.4%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (21.0% compared to 18.5%, a difference of 13.5%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Comanche and Immigrants from Czechoslovakia communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (3.5% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 64.7%), master's degree (12.1% compared to 18.5%, a difference of 53.3%), and doctorate degree (1.6% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 50.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of kindergarten (98.0% compared to 98.2%, a difference of 0.20%), nursery school (98.0% compared to 98.2%, a difference of 0.21%), and 1st grade (98.0% compared to 98.2%, a difference of 0.21%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Comanche and Immigrants from Czechoslovakia communities in the United States are seen in disability age 35 to 64 (14.7% compared to 10.0%, a difference of 47.9%), vision disability (2.8% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 40.9%), and disability age 65 to 74 (28.3% compared to 21.0%, a difference of 35.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age under 5 (1.2% compared to 1.2%, a difference of 3.9%), disability age over 75 (51.7% compared to 45.1%, a difference of 14.6%), and cognitive disability (18.6% compared to 16.2%, a difference of 14.8%).