Immigrants from Hungary vs Alaskan Athabascan Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 32,721,168 people shows a near-perfect positive correlation between the proportion of Alaskan Athabascans within Immigrant from Hungary communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.943. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Hungary within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.434% in Alaskan Athabascans. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Hungary corresponds to an increase of 433.5 Alaskan Athabascans.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Hungary and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($49,303 compared to $39,163, a difference of 25.9%), median household income ($92,094 compared to $76,383, a difference of 20.6%), and median male earnings ($59,806 compared to $49,748, a difference of 20.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($52,798 compared to $51,713, a difference of 2.1%), householder income over 65 years ($64,277 compared to $62,330, a difference of 3.1%), and wage/income gap (27.0% compared to 25.8%, a difference of 4.9%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Hungary and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in female poverty among 25-34 year olds (13.0% compared to 19.1%, a difference of 47.4%), receiving food stamps (10.3% compared to 14.7%, a difference of 41.9%), and child poverty under the age of 5 (16.5% compared to 21.8%, a difference of 32.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.4% compared to 10.6%, a difference of 1.8%), single mother poverty (28.9% compared to 30.3%, a difference of 4.9%), and child poverty among boys under 16 (15.7% compared to 17.6%, a difference of 12.3%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Hungary and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in male unemployment (5.2% compared to 9.8%, a difference of 87.9%), unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.6% compared to 8.6%, a difference of 87.9%), and unemployment among ages 45 to 54 years (4.5% compared to 8.5%, a difference of 87.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (17.5% compared to 17.7%, a difference of 1.0%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.9% compared to 8.5%, a difference of 5.3%), and unemployment among youth under 25 years (11.4% compared to 12.2%, a difference of 7.2%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Hungary and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (36.2% compared to 45.2%, a difference of 25.0%), in labor force | age 20-24 (74.9% compared to 79.1%, a difference of 5.7%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (85.1% compared to 81.7%, a difference of 4.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age > 16 (64.5% compared to 64.8%, a difference of 0.40%), in labor force | age 45-54 (82.7% compared to 81.8%, a difference of 1.1%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (84.8% compared to 82.3%, a difference of 3.1%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Hungary and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.1% compared to 3.4%, a difference of 60.9%), single mother households (5.7% compared to 7.3%, a difference of 29.1%), and births to unmarried women (29.7% compared to 37.7%, a difference of 26.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (63.6% compared to 61.8%, a difference of 2.9%), average family size (3.17 compared to 3.27, a difference of 3.0%), and family households with children (26.7% compared to 27.6%, a difference of 3.3%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Hungary and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (11.1% compared to 15.6%, a difference of 40.6%), 4 or more vehicles in household (5.8% compared to 8.1%, a difference of 38.3%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.5% compared to 21.9%, a difference of 19.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 2 or more vehicles in household (54.2% compared to 55.2%, a difference of 1.8%), 1 or more vehicles in household (89.0% compared to 86.0%, a difference of 3.5%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.5% compared to 21.9%, a difference of 19.0%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Hungary and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in master's degree (17.5% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 51.6%), bachelor's degree (42.3% compared to 28.8%, a difference of 46.8%), and professional degree (5.5% compared to 3.8%, a difference of 43.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 12th grade, no diploma (92.1% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 0.14%), 11th grade (93.4% compared to 93.9%, a difference of 0.60%), and nursery school (98.1% compared to 98.8%, a difference of 0.67%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Hungary and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (3.1% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 70.0%), disability age 35 to 64 (10.4% compared to 15.7%, a difference of 50.7%), and vision disability (2.1% compared to 3.1%, a difference of 50.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of self-care disability (2.4% compared to 2.5%, a difference of 5.3%), cognitive disability (16.7% compared to 17.6%, a difference of 5.6%), and disability age under 5 (1.4% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 5.9%).