Iroquois vs Immigrants from Latin America Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 205,515,820 people shows a weak negative correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Latin America within Iroquois communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.276. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Iroquois within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.036% in Immigrants from Latin America. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Iroquois corresponds to a decrease of 35.6 Immigrants from Latin America.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Iroquois and Immigrants from Latin America communities in the United States are seen in householder income under 25 years ($47,380 compared to $51,387, a difference of 8.5%), per capita income ($39,104 compared to $36,823, a difference of 6.2%), and wage/income gap (25.1% compared to 23.7%, a difference of 5.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($87,255 compared to $87,219, a difference of 0.040%), householder income over 65 years ($53,737 compared to $53,265, a difference of 0.89%), and median household income ($74,279 compared to $75,420, a difference of 1.5%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Iroquois and Immigrants from Latin America communities in the United States are seen in married-couple family poverty (5.5% compared to 7.2%, a difference of 30.8%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (11.9% compared to 14.2%, a difference of 18.8%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (22.9% compared to 19.7%, a difference of 16.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of child poverty among girls under 16 (20.4% compared to 20.6%, a difference of 1.1%), male poverty (13.2% compared to 13.6%, a difference of 3.0%), and child poverty under the age of 16 (19.9% compared to 20.5%, a difference of 3.2%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Iroquois and Immigrants from Latin America communities in the United States are seen in female unemployment (5.4% compared to 6.1%, a difference of 14.1%), unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.7% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 14.1%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.9% compared to 5.6%, a difference of 13.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (7.5% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 1.3%), unemployment among women with children under 6 years (8.7% compared to 8.6%, a difference of 1.8%), and unemployment among ages 45 to 54 years (5.1% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 2.7%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Iroquois and Immigrants from Latin America communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (39.9% compared to 33.9%, a difference of 17.9%), in labor force | age > 16 (63.2% compared to 64.8%, a difference of 2.6%), and in labor force | age 20-24 (75.6% compared to 74.1%, a difference of 2.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 45-54 (80.6% compared to 81.0%, a difference of 0.50%), in labor force | age 35-44 (83.5% compared to 82.8%, a difference of 0.78%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (77.5% compared to 78.3%, a difference of 1.0%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Iroquois and Immigrants from Latin America communities in the United States are seen in family households with children (26.1% compared to 29.7%, a difference of 13.9%), single mother households (7.0% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 13.6%), and average family size (3.16 compared to 3.42, a difference of 8.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of married-couple households (43.7% compared to 44.7%, a difference of 2.1%), currently married (44.7% compared to 43.8%, a difference of 2.2%), and births to unmarried women (38.2% compared to 37.1%, a difference of 2.8%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Iroquois and Immigrants from Latin America communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (6.5% compared to 7.1%, a difference of 10.5%), no vehicles in household (10.9% compared to 10.4%, a difference of 5.7%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (19.4% compared to 20.5%, a difference of 5.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 2 or more vehicles in household (54.7% compared to 54.3%, a difference of 0.67%), 1 or more vehicles in household (89.2% compared to 89.8%, a difference of 0.71%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (19.4% compared to 20.5%, a difference of 5.7%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Iroquois and Immigrants from Latin America communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.9% compared to 3.3%, a difference of 74.7%), doctorate degree (1.6% compared to 1.3%, a difference of 22.5%), and master's degree (12.9% compared to 11.3%, a difference of 14.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (98.2% compared to 96.7%, a difference of 1.5%), kindergarten (98.2% compared to 96.7%, a difference of 1.5%), and 1st grade (98.1% compared to 96.7%, a difference of 1.5%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Iroquois and Immigrants from Latin America communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (3.7% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 30.4%), disability age 18 to 34 (7.9% compared to 6.3%, a difference of 26.2%), and disability age 35 to 64 (14.4% compared to 11.5%, a difference of 24.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age 65 to 74 (25.4% compared to 25.6%, a difference of 0.47%), self-care disability (2.7% compared to 2.7%, a difference of 1.4%), and disability age over 75 (48.4% compared to 49.5%, a difference of 2.3%).