Russian vs Pima Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 60,870,001 people shows a slight positive correlation between the proportion of Pima within Russian communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.100. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Russians within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.002% in Pima. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Russians corresponds to an increase of 2.5 Pima.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Russian and Pima communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($53,154 compared to $30,644, a difference of 73.5%), householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($116,328 compared to $73,365, a difference of 58.6%), and median family income ($120,487 compared to $77,431, a difference of 55.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($54,389 compared to $51,503, a difference of 5.6%), median female earnings ($44,169 compared to $35,326, a difference of 25.0%), and wage/income gap (28.0% compared to 21.1%, a difference of 32.6%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Russian and Pima communities in the United States are seen in married-couple family poverty (4.3% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 164.0%), family poverty (7.5% compared to 18.4%, a difference of 146.4%), and child poverty among boys under 16 (13.8% compared to 29.7%, a difference of 115.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single father poverty (16.4% compared to 14.8%, a difference of 11.4%), single mother poverty (27.3% compared to 38.6%, a difference of 41.3%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (19.5% compared to 28.4%, a difference of 45.6%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Russian and Pima communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.5% compared to 11.8%, a difference of 163.4%), unemployment among women with children under 18 years (5.1% compared to 11.7%, a difference of 129.6%), and unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.8% compared to 18.9%, a difference of 114.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.9% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 2.9%), unemployment among seniors over 75 years (8.9% compared to 9.2%, a difference of 3.8%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.2% compared to 6.3%, a difference of 21.5%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Russian and Pima communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 20-64 (80.0% compared to 69.0%, a difference of 15.9%), in labor force | age 25-29 (85.3% compared to 74.3%, a difference of 14.9%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (83.4% compared to 72.8%, a difference of 14.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 16-19 (36.7% compared to 34.1%, a difference of 7.7%), in labor force | age 30-34 (85.5% compared to 79.0%, a difference of 8.2%), and in labor force | age 20-24 (74.8% compared to 69.0%, a difference of 8.5%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Russian and Pima communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.0% compared to 4.2%, a difference of 108.2%), births to unmarried women (28.0% compared to 51.5%, a difference of 83.7%), and single mother households (5.3% compared to 8.3%, a difference of 56.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households with children (26.5% compared to 27.1%, a difference of 2.2%), family households (63.4% compared to 65.9%, a difference of 4.0%), and divorced or separated (11.5% compared to 12.9%, a difference of 11.8%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Russian and Pima communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (6.0% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 31.6%), no vehicles in household (11.6% compared to 14.1%, a difference of 21.8%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.8% compared to 22.0%, a difference of 17.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (88.7% compared to 86.3%, a difference of 2.8%), 2 or more vehicles in household (54.8% compared to 52.0%, a difference of 5.3%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.8% compared to 22.0%, a difference of 17.0%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Russian and Pima communities in the United States are seen in master's degree (19.5% compared to 9.2%, a difference of 111.3%), bachelor's degree (45.3% compared to 23.2%, a difference of 95.4%), and doctorate degree (2.6% compared to 1.3%, a difference of 93.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of kindergarten (98.4% compared to 98.2%, a difference of 0.15%), 1st grade (98.3% compared to 98.2%, a difference of 0.15%), and 2nd grade (98.3% compared to 98.2%, a difference of 0.15%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Russian and Pima communities in the United States are seen in disability age 65 to 74 (21.2% compared to 38.6%, a difference of 82.5%), vision disability (2.0% compared to 3.3%, a difference of 64.8%), and disability age 35 to 64 (10.2% compared to 16.1%, a difference of 58.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (16.4% compared to 18.8%, a difference of 14.5%), self-care disability (2.4% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 15.5%), and male disability (11.1% compared to 12.8%, a difference of 15.7%).