Immigrants from Caribbean vs Alaskan Athabascan Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 43,145,465 people shows a poor negative correlation between the proportion of Alaskan Athabascans within Immigrant from Caribbean communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.146. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Caribbean within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.001% in Alaskan Athabascans. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Caribbean corresponds to a decrease of 1.1 Alaskan Athabascans.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Caribbean and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in householder income over 65 years ($48,535 compared to $62,330, a difference of 28.4%), wage/income gap (20.4% compared to 25.8%, a difference of 26.4%), and median family income ($83,319 compared to $94,429, a difference of 13.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($50,757 compared to $51,713, a difference of 1.9%), median female earnings ($36,414 compared to $37,905, a difference of 4.1%), and per capita income ($37,254 compared to $39,163, a difference of 5.1%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Caribbean and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in seniors poverty over the age of 65 (16.5% compared to 10.6%, a difference of 55.5%), seniors poverty over the age of 75 (18.2% compared to 13.4%, a difference of 36.5%), and receiving food stamps (19.6% compared to 14.7%, a difference of 33.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of child poverty under the age of 5 (21.4% compared to 21.8%, a difference of 2.0%), single mother poverty (31.1% compared to 30.3%, a difference of 2.8%), and single father poverty (17.4% compared to 18.1%, a difference of 4.2%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Caribbean and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 45 to 54 years (5.2% compared to 8.5%, a difference of 63.5%), unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (5.2% compared to 8.4%, a difference of 61.1%), and unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (5.4% compared to 8.6%, a difference of 60.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female unemployment (6.1% compared to 6.1%, a difference of 0.48%), unemployment among women with children under 18 years (6.4% compared to 6.3%, a difference of 0.49%), and unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (11.8% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 1.8%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Caribbean and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (31.2% compared to 45.2%, a difference of 44.7%), in labor force | age 20-24 (71.9% compared to 79.1%, a difference of 10.0%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (84.2% compared to 81.3%, a difference of 3.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 45-54 (82.1% compared to 81.8%, a difference of 0.41%), in labor force | age > 16 (64.4% compared to 64.8%, a difference of 0.55%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (83.4% compared to 82.3%, a difference of 1.3%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Caribbean and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.5% compared to 3.4%, a difference of 33.1%), single mother households (8.4% compared to 7.3%, a difference of 14.6%), and currently married (41.3% compared to 44.6%, a difference of 8.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.33 compared to 3.27, a difference of 1.9%), family households with children (27.0% compared to 27.6%, a difference of 1.9%), and divorced or separated (13.6% compared to 13.1%, a difference of 3.4%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Caribbean and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (4.4% compared to 8.1%, a difference of 81.9%), 3 or more vehicles in household (14.6% compared to 21.9%, a difference of 50.7%), and no vehicles in household (19.6% compared to 15.6%, a difference of 25.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (80.4% compared to 86.0%, a difference of 6.9%), 2 or more vehicles in household (44.2% compared to 55.2%, a difference of 24.8%), and no vehicles in household (19.6% compared to 15.6%, a difference of 25.8%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Caribbean and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (2.9% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 98.3%), doctorate degree (1.3% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 33.9%), and bachelor's degree (31.4% compared to 28.8%, a difference of 9.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (97.1% compared to 98.8%, a difference of 1.7%), kindergarten (97.1% compared to 98.8%, a difference of 1.8%), and 1st grade (97.0% compared to 98.8%, a difference of 1.8%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Caribbean and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (2.6% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 105.3%), disability age 18 to 34 (6.0% compared to 9.4%, a difference of 58.5%), and disability age 35 to 64 (11.3% compared to 15.7%, a difference of 38.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (17.5% compared to 17.6%, a difference of 0.36%), ambulatory disability (6.7% compared to 6.9%, a difference of 2.6%), and disability age 5 to 17 (5.9% compared to 6.3%, a difference of 8.2%).