White/Caucasian vs Pima Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 61,523,352 people shows a mild negative correlation between the proportion of Pima within White/Caucasian communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.341. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Whites/Caucasians within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.041% in Pima. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Whites/Caucasians corresponds to a decrease of 41.2 Pima.

When considering income, the most significant differences between White/Caucasian and Pima communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($42,180 compared to $30,644, a difference of 37.7%), wage/income gap (28.5% compared to 21.1%, a difference of 35.1%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($98,091 compared to $73,365, a difference of 33.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($50,336 compared to $51,503, a difference of 2.3%), median female earnings ($37,531 compared to $35,326, a difference of 6.2%), and householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($91,668 compared to $82,821, a difference of 10.7%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between White/Caucasian and Pima communities in the United States are seen in married-couple family poverty (4.8% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 136.5%), family poverty (8.8% compared to 18.4%, a difference of 109.4%), and seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.4% compared to 23.9%, a difference of 108.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single mother poverty (31.2% compared to 38.6%, a difference of 23.8%), single father poverty (18.4% compared to 14.8%, a difference of 24.3%), and single female poverty (22.7% compared to 30.3%, a difference of 33.6%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between White/Caucasian and Pima communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.6% compared to 11.8%, a difference of 153.6%), unemployment among women with children under 18 years (5.3% compared to 11.7%, a difference of 120.8%), and unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (9.6% compared to 18.9%, a difference of 95.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.7% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 1.8%), unemployment among seniors over 75 years (10.1% compared to 9.2%, a difference of 9.2%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.1% compared to 6.3%, a difference of 23.4%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between White/Caucasian and Pima communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (41.3% compared to 34.1%, a difference of 21.2%), in labor force | age 20-64 (78.5% compared to 69.0%, a difference of 13.7%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (84.2% compared to 74.3%, a difference of 13.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 30-34 (83.9% compared to 79.0%, a difference of 6.1%), in labor force | age > 16 (63.6% compared to 57.4%, a difference of 10.8%), and in labor force | age 20-24 (76.9% compared to 69.0%, a difference of 11.5%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between White/Caucasian and Pima communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.4% compared to 4.2%, a difference of 74.7%), births to unmarried women (33.3% compared to 51.5%, a difference of 54.8%), and married-couple households (48.6% compared to 35.6%, a difference of 36.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households with children (27.4% compared to 27.1%, a difference of 1.3%), family households (65.1% compared to 65.9%, a difference of 1.3%), and divorced or separated (12.6% compared to 12.9%, a difference of 2.1%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between White/Caucasian and Pima communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.0% compared to 14.1%, a difference of 100.9%), 2 or more vehicles in household (60.8% compared to 52.0%, a difference of 17.0%), and 1 or more vehicles in household (93.1% compared to 86.3%, a difference of 7.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 3 or more vehicles in household (22.6% compared to 22.0%, a difference of 2.5%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 6.8%), and 1 or more vehicles in household (93.1% compared to 86.3%, a difference of 7.9%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between White/Caucasian and Pima communities in the United States are seen in bachelor's degree (35.3% compared to 23.2%, a difference of 52.0%), master's degree (13.8% compared to 9.2%, a difference of 49.4%), and associate's degree (44.2% compared to 30.2%, a difference of 46.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of kindergarten (98.4% compared to 98.2%, a difference of 0.21%), 1st grade (98.4% compared to 98.2%, a difference of 0.21%), and 2nd grade (98.4% compared to 98.2%, a difference of 0.21%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between White/Caucasian and Pima communities in the United States are seen in disability age 65 to 74 (24.2% compared to 38.6%, a difference of 59.3%), disability age under 5 (1.7% compared to 1.1%, a difference of 56.5%), and vision disability (2.4% compared to 3.3%, a difference of 40.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of male disability (12.8% compared to 12.8%, a difference of 0.090%), disability age 5 to 17 (6.2% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 0.42%), and hearing disability (3.7% compared to 3.7%, a difference of 0.77%).