Australian vs Bhutanese Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 213,959,289 people shows a poor positive correlation between the proportion of Bhutanese within Australian communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.125. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Australians within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.087% in Bhutanese. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Australians corresponds to an increase of 86.8 Bhutanese.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Australian and Bhutanese communities in the United States are seen in householder income over 65 years ($66,891 compared to $72,288, a difference of 8.1%), householder income under 25 years ($53,739 compared to $57,078, a difference of 6.2%), and wage/income gap (28.2% compared to 27.0%, a difference of 4.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of median earnings ($52,294 compared to $52,297, a difference of 0.010%), median female earnings ($43,308 compared to $43,648, a difference of 0.79%), and median family income ($118,440 compared to $119,800, a difference of 1.1%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Australian and Bhutanese communities in the United States are seen in child poverty among boys under 16 (14.7% compared to 12.6%, a difference of 16.3%), child poverty among girls under 16 (14.8% compared to 12.7%, a difference of 16.1%), and child poverty under the age of 5 (15.5% compared to 13.4%, a difference of 16.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of receiving food stamps (9.6% compared to 9.2%, a difference of 4.4%), single father poverty (15.7% compared to 15.0%, a difference of 5.0%), and married-couple family poverty (4.3% compared to 4.1%, a difference of 5.3%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Australian and Bhutanese communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (8.7% compared to 8.0%, a difference of 8.6%), unemployment among women with children under 6 years (7.2% compared to 6.7%, a difference of 7.4%), and unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.8% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 6.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment (4.9% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 0.36%), female unemployment (4.9% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 0.84%), and male unemployment (5.0% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 1.4%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Australian and Bhutanese communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (37.8% compared to 36.3%, a difference of 4.1%), in labor force | age 45-54 (82.5% compared to 83.5%, a difference of 1.2%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (79.5% compared to 80.2%, a difference of 0.88%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 25-29 (84.9% compared to 84.8%, a difference of 0.090%), in labor force | age 30-34 (85.0% compared to 85.0%, a difference of 0.090%), and in labor force | age 20-24 (75.5% compared to 75.4%, a difference of 0.10%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Australian and Bhutanese communities in the United States are seen in divorced or separated (11.9% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 6.3%), births to unmarried women (29.5% compared to 27.9%, a difference of 5.9%), and single mother households (5.6% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 5.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households with children (26.9% compared to 27.3%, a difference of 1.4%), currently married (47.6% compared to 48.6%, a difference of 2.2%), and single father households (2.2% compared to 2.1%, a difference of 3.0%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Australian and Bhutanese communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (6.6% compared to 7.8%, a difference of 19.0%), no vehicles in household (10.1% compared to 8.7%, a difference of 15.9%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (20.1% compared to 22.2%, a difference of 10.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (90.0% compared to 91.4%, a difference of 1.5%), 2 or more vehicles in household (56.7% compared to 59.1%, a difference of 4.2%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (20.1% compared to 22.2%, a difference of 10.7%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Australian and Bhutanese communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.6% compared to 1.8%, a difference of 11.3%), professional degree (5.9% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 8.2%), and master's degree (18.4% compared to 17.2%, a difference of 7.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of high school diploma (91.2% compared to 91.2%, a difference of 0.010%), college, 1 year or more (64.6% compared to 64.6%, a difference of 0.010%), and college, under 1 year (70.4% compared to 70.3%, a difference of 0.020%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Australian and Bhutanese communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.4% compared to 1.2%, a difference of 18.0%), disability age 5 to 17 (5.5% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 12.6%), and disability age 35 to 64 (10.8% compared to 9.8%, a difference of 9.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of ambulatory disability (5.8% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 0.0%), hearing disability (3.2% compared to 3.2%, a difference of 1.3%), and female disability (11.7% compared to 11.5%, a difference of 2.0%).