Immigrants from Latvia vs Immigrants from Australia Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 85,811,510 people shows a strong positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Australia within Immigrant from Latvia communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.739. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Latvia within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.089% in Immigrants from Australia. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Latvia corresponds to an increase of 88.7 Immigrants from Australia.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latvia and Immigrants from Australia communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($50,914 compared to $57,953, a difference of 13.8%), median family income ($114,826 compared to $126,620, a difference of 10.3%), and median male earnings ($61,422 compared to $67,634, a difference of 10.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (26.7% compared to 28.2%, a difference of 5.5%), householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($111,454 compared to $119,308, a difference of 7.0%), and householder income over 65 years ($64,298 compared to $69,164, a difference of 7.6%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latvia and Immigrants from Australia communities in the United States are seen in receiving food stamps (10.3% compared to 9.2%, a difference of 13.0%), child poverty among girls under 16 (14.9% compared to 14.0%, a difference of 6.8%), and child poverty under the age of 5 (15.6% compared to 14.6%, a difference of 6.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single male poverty (12.2% compared to 12.2%, a difference of 0.030%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.5% compared to 10.5%, a difference of 0.060%), and single father poverty (15.8% compared to 15.7%, a difference of 0.36%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latvia and Immigrants from Australia communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.6% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 6.7%), unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.9% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 5.3%), and unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.7% compared to 8.3%, a difference of 5.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.4% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 0.21%), unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (5.2% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 0.22%), and unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.9% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 0.32%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latvia and Immigrants from Australia communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (36.8% compared to 35.1%, a difference of 4.9%), in labor force | age > 16 (65.1% compared to 65.9%, a difference of 1.3%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (83.4% compared to 82.9%, a difference of 0.63%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-64 (80.1% compared to 80.0%, a difference of 0.10%), in labor force | age 25-29 (85.6% compared to 85.3%, a difference of 0.28%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (85.0% compared to 84.8%, a difference of 0.31%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latvia and Immigrants from Australia communities in the United States are seen in births to unmarried women (29.1% compared to 26.6%, a difference of 9.3%), single mother households (5.5% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 7.6%), and divorced or separated (11.6% compared to 11.3%, a difference of 2.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.13 compared to 3.13, a difference of 0.27%), family households with children (25.9% compared to 26.0%, a difference of 0.63%), and currently married (46.7% compared to 47.3%, a difference of 1.1%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latvia and Immigrants from Australia communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (12.1% compared to 13.8%, a difference of 14.3%), 4 or more vehicles in household (5.5% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 5.9%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (17.4% compared to 18.1%, a difference of 3.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 2 or more vehicles in household (52.2% compared to 52.4%, a difference of 0.37%), 1 or more vehicles in household (88.1% compared to 86.4%, a difference of 2.0%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (17.4% compared to 18.1%, a difference of 3.9%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latvia and Immigrants from Australia communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (5.8% compared to 6.9%, a difference of 18.2%), doctorate degree (2.4% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 17.6%), and master's degree (19.1% compared to 20.9%, a difference of 9.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (98.2% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.10%), kindergarten (98.2% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.10%), and 1st grade (98.2% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.10%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latvia and Immigrants from Australia communities in the United States are seen in ambulatory disability (6.0% compared to 5.5%, a difference of 10.8%), disability age under 5 (1.2% compared to 1.2%, a difference of 6.8%), and female disability (11.8% compared to 11.1%, a difference of 6.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (17.2% compared to 17.1%, a difference of 0.11%), disability age over 75 (46.2% compared to 45.5%, a difference of 1.6%), and disability age 65 to 74 (21.6% compared to 21.0%, a difference of 3.0%).