Immigrants from Latvia vs Northern European Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 104,611,037 people shows a mild positive correlation between the proportion of Northern Europeans within Immigrant from Latvia communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.382. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Latvia within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.112% in Northern Europeans. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Latvia corresponds to an increase of 111.6 Northern Europeans.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latvia and Northern European communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($50,914 compared to $47,698, a difference of 6.7%), median female earnings ($43,099 compared to $40,491, a difference of 6.4%), and wage/income gap (26.7% compared to 28.3%, a difference of 5.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($51,737 compared to $51,678, a difference of 0.11%), householder income over 65 years ($64,298 compared to $64,658, a difference of 0.56%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($111,454 compared to $107,870, a difference of 3.3%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latvia and Northern European communities in the United States are seen in seniors poverty over the age of 75 (12.0% compared to 10.7%, a difference of 12.2%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.5% compared to 9.4%, a difference of 11.8%), and single female poverty (19.3% compared to 20.8%, a difference of 7.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of child poverty under the age of 16 (14.5% compared to 14.5%, a difference of 0.20%), family poverty (7.9% compared to 7.8%, a difference of 0.62%), and poverty (11.5% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 0.86%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latvia and Northern European communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.8% compared to 9.1%, a difference of 16.2%), unemployment among women with children under 6 years (6.8% compared to 7.5%, a difference of 10.3%), and unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.9% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 7.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (10.1% compared to 10.1%, a difference of 0.080%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.7% compared to 8.8%, a difference of 0.14%), and unemployment among youth under 25 years (11.2% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 0.29%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latvia and Northern European communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (36.8% compared to 40.2%, a difference of 9.3%), in labor force | age 20-24 (75.0% compared to 76.8%, a difference of 2.4%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (85.9% compared to 84.8%, a difference of 1.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age > 16 (65.1% compared to 64.7%, a difference of 0.60%), in labor force | age 45-54 (83.4% compared to 82.7%, a difference of 0.82%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (85.6% compared to 84.9%, a difference of 0.83%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latvia and Northern European communities in the United States are seen in single father households (1.9% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 16.1%), divorced or separated (11.6% compared to 12.2%, a difference of 5.9%), and married-couple households (46.0% compared to 48.4%, a difference of 5.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.13 compared to 3.13, a difference of 0.18%), family households (62.0% compared to 64.1%, a difference of 3.4%), and currently married (46.7% compared to 48.7%, a difference of 4.2%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latvia and Northern European communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (12.1% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 52.5%), 4 or more vehicles in household (5.5% compared to 7.3%, a difference of 32.7%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (17.4% compared to 22.0%, a difference of 26.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (88.1% compared to 92.2%, a difference of 4.7%), 2 or more vehicles in household (52.2% compared to 59.9%, a difference of 14.6%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (17.4% compared to 22.0%, a difference of 26.5%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latvia and Northern European communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.9% compared to 1.6%, a difference of 17.5%), master's degree (19.1% compared to 16.7%, a difference of 14.2%), and professional degree (5.8% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 12.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of ged/equivalency (88.1% compared to 87.9%, a difference of 0.15%), nursery school (98.2% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.28%), and kindergarten (98.2% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.28%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latvia and Northern European communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.2% compared to 1.6%, a difference of 25.1%), disability age 18 to 34 (6.4% compared to 7.3%, a difference of 14.3%), and disability age 35 to 64 (10.1% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 12.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of ambulatory disability (6.0% compared to 6.0%, a difference of 0.050%), disability age over 75 (46.2% compared to 46.3%, a difference of 0.14%), and self-care disability (2.4% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 1.1%).