Icelander vs Immigrants from Czechoslovakia Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 101,831,463 people shows a very strong positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Czechoslovakia within Icelander communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.875. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Icelanders within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.124% in Immigrants from Czechoslovakia. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Icelanders corresponds to an increase of 123.6 Immigrants from Czechoslovakia.

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

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

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Icelander and Immigrants from Czechoslovakia communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.0% compared to 8.4%, a difference of 19.9%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.1% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 11.9%), and unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.7% compared to 4.9%, 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 (5.2% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 1.0%).

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

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

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

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Icelander and Immigrants from Czechoslovakia communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (4.8% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 21.6%), master's degree (15.5% compared to 18.5%, a difference of 19.7%), and doctorate degree (2.1% compared to 2.4%, 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 (96.5% compared to 96.4%, a difference of 0.090%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Icelander and Immigrants from Czechoslovakia communities in the United States are seen in disability age 35 to 64 (11.4% compared to 10.0%, a difference of 14.0%), disability age 18 to 34 (7.1% compared to 6.3%, a difference of 13.1%), and disability age 65 to 74 (23.3% compared to 21.0%, 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 (5.9% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 1.5%).