Puerto Rican vs Immigrants from Czechoslovakia Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 193,746,651 people shows a weak negative correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Czechoslovakia within Puerto Rican communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.236. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Puerto Ricans within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.001% in Immigrants from Czechoslovakia. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Puerto Ricans corresponds to a decrease of 0.9 Immigrants from Czechoslovakia.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Puerto Rican and Immigrants from Czechoslovakia communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($31,268 compared to $51,770, a difference of 65.6%), median family income ($70,423 compared to $116,165, a difference of 64.9%), and householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($65,996 compared to $106,888, a difference of 62.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($39,726 compared to $54,352, a difference of 36.8%), median female earnings ($31,560 compared to $43,571, a difference of 38.1%), and wage/income gap (18.7% compared to 27.3%, a difference of 45.7%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Puerto Rican and Immigrants from Czechoslovakia communities in the United States are seen in married-couple family poverty (12.6% compared to 4.6%, a difference of 175.7%), receiving food stamps (26.0% compared to 9.6%, a difference of 169.3%), and family poverty (20.3% compared to 7.7%, a difference of 165.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female poverty among 18-24 year olds (29.8% compared to 19.1%, a difference of 56.2%), single mother poverty (44.5% compared to 27.4%, a difference of 62.9%), and single female poverty (34.1% compared to 19.0%, a difference of 79.2%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Puerto Rican and Immigrants from Czechoslovakia communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (12.5% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 78.2%), unemployment among women with children under 18 years (9.0% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 71.7%), and unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (7.6% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 69.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among seniors over 75 years (9.4% compared to 8.4%, a difference of 11.6%), unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.9% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 16.0%), and unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (6.4% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 19.5%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Puerto Rican and Immigrants from Czechoslovakia communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (30.3% compared to 36.6%, a difference of 20.5%), in labor force | age > 16 (58.1% compared to 64.8%, a difference of 11.5%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (75.9% compared to 83.4%, a difference of 9.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 35-44 (80.7% compared to 84.8%, a difference of 5.1%), in labor force | age 30-34 (81.2% compared to 85.4%, a difference of 5.1%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (80.4% compared to 85.4%, a difference of 6.2%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Puerto Rican and Immigrants from Czechoslovakia communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (8.7% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 64.2%), births to unmarried women (45.7% compared to 28.4%, a difference of 60.9%), and single father households (2.6% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 28.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (64.2% compared to 63.4%, a difference of 1.1%), family households with children (25.6% compared to 26.2%, a difference of 2.5%), and average family size (3.28 compared to 3.14, a difference of 4.3%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Puerto Rican and Immigrants from Czechoslovakia communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (15.5% compared to 11.8%, a difference of 31.4%), 4 or more vehicles in household (4.7% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 22.4%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (15.6% compared to 18.5%, a difference of 18.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (84.6% compared to 88.3%, a difference of 4.4%), 2 or more vehicles in household (47.1% compared to 54.1%, a difference of 14.9%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (15.6% compared to 18.5%, a difference of 18.3%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Puerto Rican and Immigrants from Czechoslovakia communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (3.2% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 79.4%), doctorate degree (1.4% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 68.8%), and master's degree (11.2% compared to 18.5%, a difference of 66.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (97.7% compared to 98.2%, a difference of 0.53%), kindergarten (97.7% compared to 98.2%, a difference of 0.53%), and 1st grade (97.7% compared to 98.2%, a difference of 0.53%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Puerto Rican and Immigrants from Czechoslovakia communities in the United States are seen in vision disability (3.9% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 92.2%), disability age 35 to 64 (15.9% compared to 10.0%, a difference of 59.9%), and disability age 5 to 17 (8.3% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 59.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of hearing disability (3.5% compared to 3.1%, a difference of 13.5%), disability age over 75 (52.9% compared to 45.1%, a difference of 17.2%), and cognitive disability (19.2% compared to 16.2%, a difference of 18.5%).