Immigrants from Northern Africa vs Zimbabwean Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 64,403,975 people shows a poor positive correlation between the proportion of Zimbabweans within Immigrant from Northern Africa communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.113. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Northern Africa within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.011% in Zimbabweans. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Northern Africa corresponds to an increase of 11.3 Zimbabweans.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Northern Africa and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in householder income over 65 years ($62,522 compared to $65,854, a difference of 5.3%), wage/income gap (25.2% compared to 26.3%, a difference of 4.3%), and householder income under 25 years ($53,185 compared to $51,259, a difference of 3.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of median household income ($90,026 compared to $90,618, a difference of 0.66%), householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($99,232 compared to $98,586, a difference of 0.66%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($105,430 compared to $106,849, a difference of 1.3%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Northern Africa and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in married-couple family poverty (5.2% compared to 4.1%, a difference of 27.7%), receiving food stamps (11.0% compared to 9.5%, a difference of 16.0%), and seniors poverty over the age of 65 (11.0% compared to 9.6%, a difference of 14.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single mother poverty (28.0% compared to 27.9%, a difference of 0.18%), single father poverty (15.3% compared to 15.6%, a difference of 1.5%), and single female poverty (20.0% compared to 19.5%, a difference of 2.4%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Northern Africa and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among youth under 25 years (11.5% compared to 10.2%, a difference of 13.3%), unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.8% compared to 4.2%, a difference of 12.9%), and unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (17.4% compared to 15.4%, a difference of 12.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.7% compared to 8.6%, a difference of 0.50%), unemployment among women with children under 6 years (7.4% compared to 7.3%, a difference of 1.1%), and unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.3% compared to 6.4%, a difference of 1.9%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Northern Africa and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (35.9% compared to 38.7%, a difference of 7.8%), in labor force | age 35-44 (84.8% compared to 86.1%, a difference of 1.5%), and in labor force | age 20-24 (74.6% compared to 75.6%, a difference of 1.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 30-34 (85.2% compared to 85.6%, a difference of 0.56%), in labor force | age 20-64 (80.3% compared to 81.0%, a difference of 0.83%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (83.3% compared to 84.0%, a difference of 0.84%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Northern Africa and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.1% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 3.3%), married-couple households (46.0% compared to 47.4%, a difference of 3.1%), and births to unmarried women (29.5% compared to 28.7%, a difference of 2.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households with children (27.8% compared to 27.9%, a difference of 0.36%), average family size (3.22 compared to 3.20, a difference of 0.73%), and divorced or separated (11.5% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 0.76%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Northern Africa and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (12.6% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 39.4%), 4 or more vehicles in household (5.6% compared to 6.4%, a difference of 14.0%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (17.8% compared to 20.3%, a difference of 13.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (87.4% compared to 91.0%, a difference of 4.1%), 2 or more vehicles in household (52.3% compared to 57.2%, a difference of 9.4%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (17.8% compared to 20.3%, a difference of 13.9%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Northern Africa and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (2.2% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 26.8%), doctorate degree (2.1% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 7.3%), and college, under 1 year (67.2% compared to 69.9%, a difference of 4.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (97.8% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.48%), kindergarten (97.8% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.49%), and 1st grade (97.8% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.50%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Northern Africa and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in self-care disability (2.3% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 9.2%), ambulatory disability (5.7% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 5.8%), and disability age 18 to 34 (6.1% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 5.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability (10.9% compared to 10.9%, a difference of 0.10%), disability age under 5 (1.2% compared to 1.2%, a difference of 1.1%), and male disability (10.4% compared to 10.6%, a difference of 1.6%).