Immigrants from Oceania vs Immigrants from Caribbean Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 276,297,621 people shows a poor negative correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Caribbean within Immigrant from Oceania communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.183. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Oceania within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.018% in Immigrants from Caribbean. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Oceania corresponds to a decrease of 18.0 Immigrants from Caribbean.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Immigrants from Caribbean communities in the United States are seen in householder income over 65 years ($64,416 compared to $48,535, a difference of 32.7%), median family income ($106,453 compared to $83,319, a difference of 27.8%), and wage/income gap (25.6% compared to 20.4%, a difference of 25.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($53,680 compared to $50,757, a difference of 5.8%), median female earnings ($40,297 compared to $36,414, a difference of 10.7%), and median earnings ($47,617 compared to $41,119, a difference of 15.8%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Immigrants from Caribbean communities in the United States are seen in receiving food stamps (11.4% compared to 19.6%, a difference of 72.3%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.4% compared to 16.5%, a difference of 58.0%), and seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.7% compared to 18.2%, a difference of 56.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female poverty among 18-24 year olds (19.7% compared to 19.1%, a difference of 3.2%), single male poverty (12.4% compared to 13.3%, a difference of 7.2%), and single mother poverty (28.7% compared to 31.1%, a difference of 8.5%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Immigrants from Caribbean communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.1% compared to 10.1%, a difference of 24.5%), unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (17.2% compared to 20.9%, a difference of 21.2%), and unemployment among women with children under 18 years (5.3% compared to 6.4%, a difference of 20.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.0% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 6.9%), unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (5.2% compared to 5.5%, a difference of 7.1%), and unemployment among seniors over 75 years (9.0% compared to 8.2%, a difference of 9.5%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Immigrants from Caribbean communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (37.9% compared to 31.2%, a difference of 21.3%), in labor force | age 20-24 (76.1% compared to 71.9%, a difference of 5.8%), and in labor force | age > 16 (65.5% compared to 64.4%, a difference of 1.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 45-54 (82.1% compared to 82.1%, a difference of 0.0%), in labor force | age 30-34 (84.0% compared to 84.0%, a difference of 0.010%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (83.9% compared to 84.2%, a difference of 0.41%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Immigrants from Caribbean communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (6.3% compared to 8.4%, a difference of 33.4%), births to unmarried women (30.6% compared to 39.8%, a difference of 30.2%), and married-couple households (46.9% compared to 40.8%, a difference of 15.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (64.9% compared to 65.3%, a difference of 0.64%), average family size (3.29 compared to 3.33, a difference of 1.0%), and single father households (2.5% compared to 2.5%, a difference of 3.2%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Immigrants from Caribbean communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (9.7% compared to 19.6%, a difference of 101.6%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.6% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 71.8%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (21.8% compared to 14.6%, a difference of 49.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (90.4% compared to 80.4%, a difference of 12.3%), 2 or more vehicles in household (57.5% compared to 44.2%, a difference of 30.1%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (21.8% compared to 14.6%, a difference of 49.7%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Immigrants from Caribbean communities in the United States are seen in doctorate degree (1.9% compared to 1.3%, a difference of 49.0%), no schooling completed (2.2% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 29.5%), and professional degree (4.6% compared to 3.5%, a difference of 28.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (97.8% compared to 97.1%, a difference of 0.73%), kindergarten (97.8% compared to 97.1%, a difference of 0.74%), and 1st grade (97.8% compared to 97.0%, a difference of 0.74%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Oceania and Immigrants from Caribbean communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (3.2% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 22.7%), self-care disability (2.5% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 13.4%), and vision disability (2.2% compared to 2.5%, a difference of 13.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age under 5 (1.2% compared to 1.2%, a difference of 0.16%), disability age 35 to 64 (11.4% compared to 11.3%, a difference of 0.17%), and cognitive disability (17.6% compared to 17.5%, a difference of 0.31%).