Immigrants from Micronesia vs Czechoslovakian Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 53,843,802 people shows a mild positive correlation between the proportion of Czechoslovakians within Immigrant from Micronesia communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.306. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Micronesia within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.285% in Czechoslovakians. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Micronesia corresponds to an increase of 285.1 Czechoslovakians.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Micronesia and Czechoslovakian communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($80,544 compared to $95,070, a difference of 18.0%), median male earnings ($47,177 compared to $55,382, a difference of 17.4%), and per capita income ($37,464 compared to $43,806, a difference of 16.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income over 65 years ($61,000 compared to $60,581, a difference of 0.69%), householder income under 25 years ($50,691 compared to $51,224, a difference of 1.1%), and median female earnings ($35,477 compared to $38,738, a difference of 9.2%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Micronesia and Czechoslovakian communities in the United States are seen in receiving food stamps (13.5% compared to 10.3%, a difference of 31.3%), married-couple family poverty (5.5% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 26.2%), and family poverty (9.8% compared to 8.0%, a difference of 22.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single male poverty (13.5% compared to 13.4%, a difference of 1.1%), female poverty among 18-24 year olds (20.7% compared to 20.0%, a difference of 3.4%), and seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.4% compared to 10.9%, a difference of 4.6%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Micronesia and Czechoslovakian communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (5.5% compared to 4.6%, a difference of 20.6%), unemployment among women with children under 6 years (9.1% compared to 7.7%, a difference of 18.4%), and male unemployment (5.6% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 12.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.6% compared to 4.6%, a difference of 0.010%), unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (10.0% compared to 9.9%, a difference of 0.75%), and unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.9% compared to 9.1%, a difference of 1.9%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Micronesia and Czechoslovakian communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (40.2% compared to 41.9%, a difference of 4.3%), in labor force | age 30-34 (82.4% compared to 84.8%, a difference of 2.9%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (83.0% compared to 85.0%, a difference of 2.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (77.8% compared to 77.5%, a difference of 0.42%), in labor force | age > 16 (64.7% compared to 64.3%, a difference of 0.56%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (78.9% compared to 79.5%, a difference of 0.75%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Micronesia and Czechoslovakian communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (6.9% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 16.9%), single father households (2.6% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 10.5%), and married-couple households (44.9% compared to 48.5%, a difference of 8.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (64.2% compared to 64.6%, a difference of 0.62%), family households with children (27.2% compared to 27.0%, a difference of 0.71%), and births to unmarried women (32.9% compared to 32.0%, a difference of 2.6%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Micronesia and Czechoslovakian communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (10.1% compared to 7.8%, a difference of 28.9%), 2 or more vehicles in household (55.1% compared to 59.8%, a difference of 8.6%), and 4 or more vehicles in household (7.6% compared to 7.1%, a difference of 6.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (90.1% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 2.5%), 3 or more vehicles in household (20.7% compared to 21.7%, a difference of 4.7%), and 4 or more vehicles in household (7.6% compared to 7.1%, a difference of 6.4%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Micronesia and Czechoslovakian communities in the United States are seen in master's degree (10.8% compared to 14.5%, a difference of 34.8%), doctorate degree (1.3% compared to 1.8%, a difference of 33.0%), and professional degree (3.2% compared to 4.2%, a difference of 30.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of kindergarten (98.0% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.47%), nursery school (98.0% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.48%), and 1st grade (97.9% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.49%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Micronesia and Czechoslovakian communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.0% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 50.4%), disability age 65 to 74 (26.1% compared to 23.0%, a difference of 13.5%), and ambulatory disability (7.0% compared to 6.4%, a difference of 10.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age 5 to 17 (5.9% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 1.2%), disability age 18 to 34 (7.3% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 2.2%), and hearing disability (3.6% compared to 3.6%, a difference of 2.4%).