Immigrants from Lithuania vs Immigrants from Asia Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 117,561,674 people shows a substantial negative correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Asia within Immigrant from Lithuania communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.507. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Lithuania within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 1.593% in Immigrants from Asia. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Lithuania corresponds to a decrease of 1,593.2 Immigrants from Asia.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Lithuania and Immigrants from Asia communities in the United States are seen in wage/income gap (28.6% compared to 27.0%, a difference of 6.1%), per capita income ($51,361 compared to $49,741, a difference of 3.3%), and median household income ($96,836 compared to $99,933, a difference of 3.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of median male earnings ($63,346 compared to $63,240, a difference of 0.17%), median family income ($118,053 compared to $118,291, a difference of 0.20%), and median earnings ($52,769 compared to $53,310, a difference of 1.0%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Lithuania and Immigrants from Asia communities in the United States are seen in married-couple family poverty (4.3% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 12.1%), seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.0% compared to 12.2%, a difference of 11.2%), and family poverty (7.2% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 10.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single male poverty (11.6% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 1.9%), child poverty under the age of 5 (14.1% compared to 14.4%, a difference of 2.1%), and child poverty among boys under 16 (13.5% compared to 13.9%, a difference of 3.4%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Lithuania and Immigrants from Asia communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (7.5% compared to 6.8%, a difference of 11.3%), female unemployment (4.9% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 6.1%), and unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.6% compared to 8.1%, a difference of 5.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among women with children under 18 years (5.2% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 0.17%), unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (17.0% compared to 17.0%, a difference of 0.23%), and male unemployment (5.1% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 0.36%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Lithuania and Immigrants from Asia communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (37.2% compared to 34.1%, a difference of 9.1%), in labor force | age 20-24 (76.1% compared to 73.6%, a difference of 3.4%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (86.1% compared to 84.8%, a difference of 1.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 45-54 (83.9% compared to 83.3%, a difference of 0.65%), in labor force | age 30-34 (85.6% compared to 85.0%, a difference of 0.77%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (80.7% compared to 80.1%, a difference of 0.80%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Lithuania and Immigrants from Asia communities in the United States are seen in single father households (1.9% compared to 2.1%, a difference of 10.6%), family households with children (26.8% compared to 28.8%, a difference of 7.7%), and single mother households (5.3% compared to 5.6%, a difference of 6.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of married-couple households (48.6% compared to 49.1%, a difference of 0.96%), currently married (48.8% compared to 48.3%, a difference of 1.2%), and family households (63.9% compared to 66.1%, a difference of 3.4%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Lithuania and Immigrants from Asia communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (5.6% compared to 6.8%, a difference of 20.1%), no vehicles in household (9.8% compared to 10.9%, a difference of 10.6%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.5% compared to 20.2%, a difference of 9.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 2 or more vehicles in household (55.8% compared to 56.3%, a difference of 0.93%), 1 or more vehicles in household (90.2% compared to 89.3%, a difference of 1.1%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.5% compared to 20.2%, a difference of 9.7%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Lithuania and Immigrants from Asia communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.7% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 43.1%), doctorate degree (2.2% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 9.8%), and high school diploma (91.3% compared to 89.3%, a difference of 2.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of master's degree (18.5% compared to 18.4%, a difference of 0.39%), bachelor's degree (44.6% compared to 44.3%, a difference of 0.74%), and nursery school (98.3% compared to 97.6%, a difference of 0.75%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Lithuania and Immigrants from Asia communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.3% compared to 1.1%, a difference of 19.3%), hearing disability (2.9% compared to 2.7%, a difference of 6.6%), and disability age 5 to 17 (5.1% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 5.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of vision disability (1.9% compared to 1.9%, a difference of 0.12%), disability age 18 to 34 (5.8% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 1.1%), and disability age 35 to 64 (9.6% compared to 9.5%, a difference of 1.1%).