Immigrants from Zimbabwe vs Alaska Native Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 47,343,466 people shows a strong positive correlation between the proportion of Alaska Natives within Immigrant from Zimbabwe communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.739. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Zimbabwe within a typical geography, there is an increase of 1.599% in Alaska Natives. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Zimbabwe corresponds to an increase of 1,599.1 Alaska Natives.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Zimbabwe and Alaska Native communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($47,394 compared to $39,558, a difference of 19.8%), median male earnings ($57,352 compared to $49,711, a difference of 15.4%), and median family income ($108,830 compared to $95,573, a difference of 13.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (25.3% compared to 24.4%, a difference of 3.7%), householder income under 25 years ($51,914 compared to $54,000, a difference of 4.0%), and householder income over 65 years ($63,643 compared to $60,748, a difference of 4.8%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Zimbabwe and Alaska Native communities in the United States are seen in receiving food stamps (9.9% compared to 15.6%, a difference of 56.9%), married-couple family poverty (4.3% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 42.7%), and female poverty among 25-34 year olds (12.6% compared to 16.8%, a difference of 33.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.7% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 2.7%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.3% compared to 10.8%, a difference of 5.3%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (19.8% compared to 21.5%, a difference of 8.7%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Zimbabwe and Alaska Native communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.6% compared to 7.6%, a difference of 67.3%), unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.1% compared to 10.2%, a difference of 66.9%), and unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (5.1% compared to 8.5%, a difference of 65.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.0% compared to 6.3%, a difference of 26.6%), unemployment among women with children under 18 years (5.2% compared to 6.7%, a difference of 28.3%), and unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.0% compared to 10.3%, a difference of 28.5%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Zimbabwe and Alaska Native communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 30-34 (85.1% compared to 81.3%, a difference of 4.7%), in labor force | age 20-64 (80.5% compared to 77.0%, a difference of 4.5%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (85.2% compared to 81.6%, a difference of 4.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (75.9% compared to 75.9%, a difference of 0.0%), in labor force | age 45-54 (83.4% compared to 81.8%, a difference of 1.9%), and in labor force | age 16-19 (38.0% compared to 39.1%, a difference of 2.9%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Zimbabwe and Alaska Native communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.2% compared to 3.5%, a difference of 56.2%), births to unmarried women (30.3% compared to 38.3%, a difference of 26.3%), and single mother households (6.2% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 20.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of married-couple households (46.3% compared to 45.6%, a difference of 1.5%), currently married (46.7% compared to 45.5%, a difference of 2.5%), and family households (63.5% compared to 65.1%, a difference of 2.5%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Zimbabwe and Alaska Native communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (9.9% compared to 17.4%, a difference of 76.6%), 4 or more vehicles in household (6.0% compared to 7.3%, a difference of 21.3%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (19.1% compared to 21.0%, a difference of 9.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 2 or more vehicles in household (55.6% compared to 53.6%, a difference of 3.7%), 1 or more vehicles in household (90.2% compared to 83.8%, a difference of 7.6%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (19.1% compared to 21.0%, a difference of 9.8%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Zimbabwe and Alaska Native communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (5.3% compared to 3.5%, a difference of 52.2%), doctorate degree (2.2% compared to 1.4%, a difference of 51.7%), and master's degree (17.4% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 50.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 11th grade (93.4% compared to 93.5%, a difference of 0.080%), high school diploma (90.3% compared to 89.9%, a difference of 0.41%), and 10th grade (94.4% compared to 94.9%, a difference of 0.47%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Zimbabwe and Alaska Native communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.2% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 144.2%), hearing disability (3.0% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 51.8%), and disability age 65 to 74 (22.3% compared to 30.6%, a difference of 37.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (17.5% compared to 17.5%, a difference of 0.040%), self-care disability (2.3% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 7.4%), and disability age 5 to 17 (5.5% compared to 6.0%, a difference of 9.2%).