Immigrants from Lithuania vs Immigrants from Canada Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 114,559,374 people shows a near-perfect positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Canada within Immigrant from Lithuania communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.927. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Lithuania within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.984% in Immigrants from Canada. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Lithuania corresponds to an increase of 984.4 Immigrants from Canada.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Lithuania and Immigrants from Canada communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($108,149 compared to $102,616, a difference of 5.4%), median household income ($96,836 compared to $92,029, a difference of 5.2%), and median earnings ($52,769 compared to $50,192, a difference of 5.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (28.6% compared to 28.5%, a difference of 0.51%), householder income over 65 years ($66,087 compared to $64,952, a difference of 1.8%), and householder income under 25 years ($55,028 compared to $53,411, a difference of 3.0%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Lithuania and Immigrants from Canada communities in the United States are seen in female poverty among 25-34 year olds (11.1% compared to 12.9%, a difference of 15.9%), single female poverty (17.8% compared to 20.2%, a difference of 13.8%), and single mother poverty (25.2% compared to 28.4%, a difference of 12.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 65 (9.7% compared to 9.8%, a difference of 1.5%), seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.0% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 2.3%), and married-couple family poverty (4.3% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 2.9%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Lithuania and Immigrants from Canada communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.2% compared to 6.6%, a difference of 7.3%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.6% compared to 9.1%, a difference of 6.8%), and unemployment among seniors over 75 years (8.7% compared to 9.2%, a difference of 5.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female unemployment (4.9% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 0.20%), unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (10.1% compared to 10.1%, a difference of 0.32%), and unemployment among women with children under 6 years (7.5% compared to 7.6%, a difference of 0.54%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Lithuania and Immigrants from Canada communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (37.2% compared to 38.9%, a difference of 4.6%), in labor force | age > 16 (65.6% compared to 63.7%, a difference of 3.0%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (80.7% compared to 79.0%, a difference of 2.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (76.1% compared to 75.9%, a difference of 0.29%), in labor force | age 30-34 (85.6% compared to 84.6%, a difference of 1.3%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (85.4% compared to 84.2%, a difference of 1.4%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Lithuania and Immigrants from Canada communities in the United States are seen in single father households (1.9% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 14.8%), births to unmarried women (27.7% compared to 30.4%, a difference of 9.8%), and divorced or separated (11.3% compared to 12.1%, a difference of 7.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of currently married (48.8% compared to 48.8%, a difference of 0.13%), family households (63.9% compared to 64.0%, a difference of 0.18%), and married-couple households (48.6% compared to 48.4%, a difference of 0.33%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Lithuania and Immigrants from Canada communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (5.6% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 15.8%), no vehicles in household (9.8% compared to 8.7%, a difference of 12.5%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.5% compared to 20.2%, a difference of 9.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (90.2% compared to 91.4%, a difference of 1.3%), 2 or more vehicles in household (55.8% compared to 57.5%, a difference of 3.0%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.5% compared to 20.2%, a difference of 9.6%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Lithuania and Immigrants from Canada communities in the United States are seen in master's degree (18.5% compared to 17.2%, a difference of 7.5%), bachelor's degree (44.6% compared to 41.7%, a difference of 6.9%), and associate's degree (52.4% compared to 50.1%, a difference of 4.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 10th grade (95.0% compared to 95.1%, a difference of 0.040%), nursery school (98.3% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.080%), and kindergarten (98.3% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.080%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Lithuania and Immigrants from Canada communities in the United States are seen in disability age 18 to 34 (5.8% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 20.0%), hearing disability (2.9% compared to 3.5%, a difference of 18.5%), and disability age 35 to 64 (9.6% compared to 11.0%, a difference of 14.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (44.9% compared to 45.7%, a difference of 1.8%), cognitive disability (16.0% compared to 16.5%, a difference of 3.3%), and self-care disability (2.3% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 5.6%).