Immigrants from Latin America vs Alaska Native Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 73,779,647 people shows a poor negative correlation between the proportion of Alaska Natives within Immigrant from Latin America communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.198. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Latin America within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.001% in Alaska Natives. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Latin America corresponds to a decrease of 0.8 Alaska Natives.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latin America and Alaska Native communities in the United States are seen in householder income over 65 years ($53,265 compared to $60,748, a difference of 14.1%), median family income ($86,989 compared to $95,573, a difference of 9.9%), and median female earnings ($35,307 compared to $38,202, a difference of 8.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (23.7% compared to 24.4%, a difference of 2.9%), householder income under 25 years ($51,387 compared to $54,000, a difference of 5.1%), and median household income ($75,420 compared to $79,509, a difference of 5.4%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latin America and Alaska Native communities in the United States are seen in seniors poverty over the age of 75 (15.6% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 36.7%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (14.2% compared to 10.8%, a difference of 30.7%), and child poverty among boys under 16 (20.6% compared to 16.8%, a difference of 22.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of receiving food stamps (15.7% compared to 15.6%, a difference of 0.41%), single female poverty (23.7% compared to 23.3%, a difference of 1.8%), and female poverty among 25-34 year olds (16.0% compared to 16.8%, a difference of 4.8%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latin America and Alaska Native communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (9.0% compared to 14.7%, a difference of 63.6%), unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (5.3% compared to 7.6%, a difference of 43.6%), and unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (6.1% compared to 8.5%, a difference of 38.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among women with children under 18 years (6.4% compared to 6.7%, a difference of 3.9%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (9.6% compared to 10.3%, a difference of 7.0%), and female unemployment (6.1% compared to 6.6%, a difference of 8.4%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latin America and Alaska Native communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (33.9% compared to 39.1%, a difference of 15.3%), in labor force | age 20-24 (74.1% compared to 75.9%, a difference of 2.4%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (83.1% compared to 81.3%, a difference of 2.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age > 16 (64.8% compared to 64.7%, a difference of 0.16%), in labor force | age 45-54 (81.0% compared to 81.8%, a difference of 0.92%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (82.8% compared to 81.6%, a difference of 1.5%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latin America and Alaska Native communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.8% compared to 3.5%, a difference of 25.5%), single mother households (7.9% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 6.9%), and currently married (43.8% compared to 45.5%, a difference of 4.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of divorced or separated (12.4% compared to 12.4%, a difference of 0.10%), family households with children (29.7% compared to 29.9%, a difference of 0.58%), and average family size (3.42 compared to 3.37, a difference of 1.5%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latin America and Alaska Native communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (10.4% compared to 17.4%, a difference of 68.0%), 1 or more vehicles in household (89.8% compared to 83.8%, a difference of 7.2%), and 4 or more vehicles in household (7.1% compared to 7.3%, a difference of 2.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 2 or more vehicles in household (54.3% compared to 53.6%, a difference of 1.3%), 3 or more vehicles in household (20.5% compared to 21.0%, a difference of 2.1%), and 4 or more vehicles in household (7.1% compared to 7.3%, a difference of 2.8%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latin America and Alaska Native communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (3.3% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 123.1%), doctorate degree (1.3% compared to 1.4%, a difference of 10.5%), and high school diploma (82.1% compared to 89.9%, a difference of 9.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of associate's degree (37.9% compared to 37.5%, a difference of 1.1%), nursery school (96.7% compared to 98.8%, a difference of 2.1%), and kindergarten (96.7% compared to 98.7%, a difference of 2.1%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latin America and Alaska Native communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.2% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 140.8%), hearing disability (2.8% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 58.1%), and disability age 35 to 64 (11.5% compared to 14.5%, a difference of 25.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (17.6% compared to 17.5%, a difference of 0.050%), ambulatory disability (6.3% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 1.6%), and female disability (12.2% compared to 12.8%, a difference of 5.1%).