Latvian vs Hmong Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 22,579,968 people shows a very strong positive correlation between the proportion of Hmong within Latvian communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.882. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Latvians within a typical geography, there is an increase of 2.431% in Hmong. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Latvians corresponds to an increase of 2,431.1 Hmong.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Latvian and Hmong communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($52,649 compared to $38,120, a difference of 38.1%), median family income ($120,301 compared to $91,296, a difference of 31.8%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($115,957 compared to $88,115, a difference of 31.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (27.9% compared to 27.7%, a difference of 0.64%), householder income under 25 years ($52,783 compared to $49,364, a difference of 6.9%), and householder income over 65 years ($67,326 compared to $56,339, a difference of 19.5%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Latvian and Hmong communities in the United States are seen in child poverty under the age of 16 (13.2% compared to 17.1%, a difference of 29.7%), child poverty among girls under 16 (13.5% compared to 17.5%, a difference of 29.2%), and family poverty (7.1% compared to 9.1%, a difference of 28.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female poverty among 18-24 year olds (19.5% compared to 20.0%, a difference of 2.9%), single father poverty (16.5% compared to 15.9%, a difference of 3.7%), and seniors poverty over the age of 65 (9.5% compared to 10.4%, a difference of 10.0%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Latvian and Hmong communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (8.6% compared to 13.7%, a difference of 60.0%), unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.6% compared to 5.7%, a difference of 22.9%), and unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (5.1% compared to 4.2%, a difference of 22.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.6% compared to 8.7%, a difference of 0.96%), unemployment among women with children under 6 years (6.8% compared to 6.7%, a difference of 1.7%), and unemployment among youth under 25 years (11.0% compared to 10.8%, a difference of 2.0%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Latvian and Hmong communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 30-34 (86.0% compared to 82.4%, a difference of 4.4%), in labor force | age 35-44 (85.4% compared to 82.6%, a difference of 3.4%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (80.5% compared to 77.9%, a difference of 3.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 16-19 (38.9% compared to 38.7%, a difference of 0.42%), in labor force | age 20-24 (76.1% compared to 76.5%, a difference of 0.60%), and in labor force | age > 16 (65.5% compared to 64.1%, a difference of 2.2%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Latvian and Hmong communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (5.3% compared to 6.4%, a difference of 20.8%), single father households (2.0% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 18.1%), and family households with children (26.4% compared to 28.6%, a difference of 8.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of births to unmarried women (27.7% compared to 27.7%, a difference of 0.040%), married-couple households (47.9% compared to 47.0%, a difference of 2.0%), and currently married (48.5% compared to 47.1%, a difference of 3.0%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Latvian and Hmong communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (6.1% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 14.0%), 3 or more vehicles in household (19.3% compared to 21.0%, a difference of 8.8%), and no vehicles in household (9.8% compared to 10.4%, a difference of 5.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (90.3% compared to 89.6%, a difference of 0.78%), 2 or more vehicles in household (56.2% compared to 57.8%, a difference of 2.8%), and no vehicles in household (9.8% compared to 10.4%, a difference of 5.9%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Latvian and Hmong communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (6.2% compared to 3.7%, a difference of 66.7%), doctorate degree (2.6% compared to 1.6%, a difference of 64.1%), and master's degree (19.8% compared to 13.4%, a difference of 47.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of kindergarten (98.5% compared to 98.1%, a difference of 0.46%), 1st grade (98.5% compared to 98.0%, a difference of 0.46%), and nursery school (98.5% compared to 98.1%, a difference of 0.47%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Latvian and Hmong communities in the United States are seen in disability age 35 to 64 (10.2% compared to 13.1%, a difference of 29.2%), disability age 65 to 74 (21.2% compared to 25.7%, a difference of 20.9%), and disability age 18 to 34 (6.8% compared to 8.1%, a difference of 17.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of self-care disability (2.3% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 4.6%), disability age over 75 (45.1% compared to 48.2%, a difference of 6.8%), and hearing disability (3.2% compared to 3.4%, a difference of 7.2%).