Czechoslovakian vs Chinese Community Comparison

COMPARE

Czechoslovakian
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNepaleseNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPaiutePakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPimaPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuebloPuerto RicanPuget Sound SalishRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSeminoleSenegaleseSerbianShoshoneSierra LeoneanSiouxSlavicSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSoviet UnionSpaniardSpanishSpanish AmericanSpanish American IndianSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSudaneseSwedishSwissSyrianTaiwaneseThaiTlingit-HaidaTohono O'OdhamTonganTrinidadian and TobagonianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUgandanUkrainianUruguayanVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYumanYup'ikZimbabwean
Immigration
NonimmigrantsImmigrantsAfghanistanAfricaAlbaniaArgentinaArmeniaAsiaAustraliaAustriaBahamasBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBoliviaBosnia and HerzegovinaBrazilBulgariaBurma/MyanmarCambodiaCameroonCanadaCaribbeanCentral AmericaChileChinaColombiaCongoCosta RicaCroatiaCubaCzechoslovakiaDenmarkDominicaDominican RepublicEastern AfricaEastern AsiaEastern EuropeEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEnglandEritreaEthiopiaEuropeFijiFranceGermanyGhanaGreeceGrenadaGuatemalaGuyanaHaitiHondurasHong KongHungaryIndiaIndonesiaIranIraqIrelandIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJordanKazakhstanKenyaKoreaKuwaitLaosLatin AmericaLatviaLebanonLiberiaLithuaniaMalaysiaMexicoMicronesiaMiddle AfricaMoldovaMoroccoNepalNetherlandsNicaraguaNigeriaNorth AmericaNorth MacedoniaNorthern AfricaNorthern EuropeNorwayOceaniaPakistanPanamaPeruPhilippinesPolandPortugalRomaniaRussiaSaudi ArabiaScotlandSenegalSerbiaSierra LeoneSingaporeSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth AmericaSouth Central AsiaSouth Eastern AsiaSouthern EuropeSpainSri LankaSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudanSwedenSwitzerlandSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUruguayUzbekistanVenezuelaVietnamWest IndiesWestern AfricaWestern AsiaWestern EuropeYemenZaireZimbabweAzores
Chinese
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNepaleseNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPaiutePakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPimaPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuebloPuerto RicanPuget Sound SalishRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSeminoleSenegaleseSerbianShoshoneSierra LeoneanSiouxSlavicSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSoviet UnionSpaniardSpanishSpanish AmericanSpanish American IndianSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSudaneseSwedishSwissSyrianTaiwaneseThaiTlingit-HaidaTohono O'OdhamTonganTrinidadian and TobagonianTsimshianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUgandanUkrainianUruguayanUteVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYumanYup'ikZimbabwean
Immigration
NonimmigrantsImmigrantsAfghanistanAfricaAlbaniaArgentinaArmeniaAsiaAustraliaAustriaBahamasBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBoliviaBosnia and HerzegovinaBrazilBulgariaBurma/MyanmarCabo VerdeCambodiaCameroonCanadaCaribbeanCentral AmericaChileChinaColombiaCongoCosta RicaCroatiaCubaCzechoslovakiaDenmarkDominicaDominican RepublicEastern AfricaEastern AsiaEastern EuropeEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEnglandEritreaEthiopiaEuropeFijiFranceGermanyGhanaGreeceGrenadaGuatemalaGuyanaHaitiHondurasHong KongHungaryIndiaIndonesiaIranIraqIrelandIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJordanKazakhstanKenyaKoreaKuwaitLaosLatin AmericaLatviaLebanonLiberiaLithuaniaMalaysiaMexicoMicronesiaMiddle AfricaMoldovaMoroccoNepalNetherlandsNicaraguaNigeriaNorth AmericaNorth MacedoniaNorthern AfricaNorthern EuropeNorwayOceaniaPakistanPanamaPeruPhilippinesPolandPortugalRomaniaRussiaSaudi ArabiaScotlandSenegalSerbiaSierra LeoneSingaporeSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth AmericaSouth Central AsiaSouth Eastern AsiaSouthern EuropeSpainSri LankaSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudanSwedenSwitzerlandSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUruguayUzbekistanVenezuelaVietnamWest IndiesWestern AfricaWestern AsiaWestern EuropeYemenZaireZimbabweAzores
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Income
Poverty
Unemployment
Labor Participation
Family Structure
Vehicle Availability
Education Level
Disability

Social Comparison

Czechoslovakians

Chinese

Good
Exceptional
7,027
SOCIAL INDEX
67.8/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
132nd/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
9,296
SOCIAL INDEX
90.4/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
23rd/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Chinese Integration in Czechoslovakian Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 59,392,095 people shows a significant positive correlation between the proportion of Chinese within Czechoslovakian communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.650. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Czechoslovakians within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.578% in Chinese. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Czechoslovakians corresponds to an increase of 577.9 Chinese.
Czechoslovakian Integration in Chinese Communities

Czechoslovakian vs Chinese Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Czechoslovakian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in householder income over 65 years ($60,581 compared to $77,465, a difference of 27.9%), median household income ($84,965 compared to $98,496, a difference of 15.9%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($101,387 compared to $116,156, a difference of 14.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of median male earnings ($55,382 compared to $56,872, a difference of 2.7%), median earnings ($46,658 compared to $48,836, a difference of 4.7%), and per capita income ($43,806 compared to $46,098, a difference of 5.2%).
Czechoslovakian vs Chinese Income
Income MetricCzechoslovakianChinese
Per Capita Income
Average
$43,806
Exceptional
$46,098
Median Family Income
Average
$103,273
Exceptional
$116,188
Median Household Income
Average
$84,965
Exceptional
$98,496
Median Earnings
Average
$46,658
Exceptional
$48,836
Median Male Earnings
Good
$55,382
Exceptional
$56,872
Median Female Earnings
Poor
$38,738
Exceptional
$41,461
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Tragic
$51,224
Exceptional
$58,162
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Average
$95,070
Exceptional
$104,264
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Good
$101,387
Exceptional
$116,156
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Average
$60,581
Exceptional
$77,465
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
28.2%
Average
25.9%

Czechoslovakian vs Chinese Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Czechoslovakian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in single female poverty (21.3% compared to 16.1%, a difference of 32.1%), child poverty among boys under 16 (15.3% compared to 11.9%, a difference of 29.0%), and child poverty under the age of 5 (16.8% compared to 13.1%, a difference of 28.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of receiving food stamps (10.3% compared to 9.8%, a difference of 5.3%), single father poverty (17.1% compared to 15.4%, a difference of 10.8%), and seniors poverty over the age of 65 (9.5% compared to 8.3%, a difference of 13.5%).
Czechoslovakian vs Chinese Poverty
Poverty MetricCzechoslovakianChinese
Poverty
Exceptional
11.4%
Exceptional
9.5%
Families
Exceptional
8.0%
Exceptional
6.5%
Males
Exceptional
10.3%
Exceptional
8.7%
Females
Exceptional
12.4%
Exceptional
10.4%
Females 18 to 24 years
Good
20.0%
Exceptional
16.2%
Females 25 to 34 years
Fair
13.7%
Exceptional
11.0%
Children Under 5 years
Good
16.8%
Exceptional
13.1%
Children Under 16 years
Exceptional
15.1%
Exceptional
11.9%
Boys Under 16 years
Exceptional
15.3%
Exceptional
11.9%
Girls Under 16 years
Excellent
15.5%
Exceptional
12.3%
Single Males
Tragic
13.4%
Exceptional
11.0%
Single Females
Fair
21.3%
Exceptional
16.1%
Single Fathers
Tragic
17.1%
Exceptional
15.4%
Single Mothers
Poor
29.7%
Exceptional
24.6%
Married Couples
Exceptional
4.4%
Exceptional
3.6%
Seniors Over 65 years
Exceptional
9.5%
Exceptional
8.3%
Seniors Over 75 years
Exceptional
10.9%
Exceptional
9.1%
Receiving Food Stamps
Exceptional
10.3%
Exceptional
9.8%

Czechoslovakian vs Chinese Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Czechoslovakian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (9.4% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 59.8%), unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.0% compared to 4.2%, a difference of 19.4%), and unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (5.3% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 18.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of male unemployment (5.0% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 0.88%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (9.1% compared to 9.3%, a difference of 1.7%), and unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (16.5% compared to 16.0%, a difference of 2.5%).
Czechoslovakian vs Chinese Unemployment
Unemployment MetricCzechoslovakianChinese
Unemployment
Exceptional
4.8%
Exceptional
4.7%
Males
Exceptional
5.0%
Exceptional
4.9%
Females
Exceptional
4.8%
Exceptional
4.5%
Youth < 25
Exceptional
11.0%
Exceptional
10.7%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Exceptional
16.5%
Exceptional
16.0%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
9.9%
Exceptional
9.4%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Average
6.7%
Exceptional
6.1%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Good
5.4%
Exceptional
5.1%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Excellent
4.6%
Exceptional
4.3%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.2%
Exceptional
4.0%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Exceptional
4.6%
Exceptional
4.4%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
4.6%
Exceptional
4.0%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Excellent
5.3%
Exceptional
4.4%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
5.0%
Exceptional
4.2%
Seniors > 75
Tragic
9.4%
Exceptional
5.9%
Women w/ Children < 6
Fair
7.7%
Exceptional
6.8%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Fair
9.1%
Tragic
9.3%
Women w/ Children < 18
Exceptional
5.1%
Exceptional
4.9%

Czechoslovakian vs Chinese Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Czechoslovakian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (41.9% compared to 38.6%, a difference of 8.5%), in labor force | age 20-64 (79.5% compared to 80.7%, a difference of 1.4%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (83.0% compared to 84.1%, a difference of 1.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (77.5% compared to 77.3%, a difference of 0.29%), in labor force | age 30-34 (84.8% compared to 85.0%, a difference of 0.29%), and in labor force | age > 16 (64.3% compared to 64.7%, a difference of 0.47%).
Czechoslovakian vs Chinese Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricCzechoslovakianChinese
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Tragic
64.3%
Tragic
64.7%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Average
79.5%
Exceptional
80.7%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
41.9%
Exceptional
38.6%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Exceptional
77.5%
Exceptional
77.3%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Exceptional
85.0%
Poor
84.3%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Good
84.8%
Excellent
85.0%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Excellent
84.6%
Exceptional
85.1%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Good
83.0%
Exceptional
84.1%

Czechoslovakian vs Chinese Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Czechoslovakian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.3% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 17.8%), single mother households (5.9% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 14.0%), and divorced or separated (12.3% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 9.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of currently married (48.8% compared to 49.5%, a difference of 1.4%), married-couple households (48.5% compared to 50.4%, a difference of 3.7%), and family households with children (27.0% compared to 26.0%, a difference of 4.0%).
Czechoslovakian vs Chinese Family Structure
Family Structure MetricCzechoslovakianChinese
Family Households
Excellent
64.6%
Exceptional
68.1%
Family Households with Children
Tragic
27.0%
Tragic
26.0%
Married-couple Households
Exceptional
48.5%
Exceptional
50.4%
Average Family Size
Tragic
3.13
Exceptional
3.34
Single Father Households
Average
2.3%
Exceptional
2.0%
Single Mother Households
Exceptional
5.9%
Exceptional
5.2%
Currently Married
Exceptional
48.8%
Exceptional
49.5%
Divorced or Separated
Poor
12.3%
Exceptional
11.2%
Births to Unmarried Women
Fair
32.0%
Excellent
30.2%

Czechoslovakian vs Chinese Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Czechoslovakian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (7.1% compared to 8.8%, a difference of 24.4%), 3 or more vehicles in household (21.7% compared to 23.9%, a difference of 9.9%), and no vehicles in household (7.8% compared to 8.2%, a difference of 5.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 2 or more vehicles in household (59.8% compared to 60.1%, a difference of 0.49%), 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 91.9%, a difference of 0.50%), and no vehicles in household (7.8% compared to 8.2%, a difference of 5.0%).
Czechoslovakian vs Chinese Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricCzechoslovakianChinese
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.8%
Exceptional
8.2%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
92.3%
Exceptional
91.9%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
59.8%
Exceptional
60.1%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
21.7%
Exceptional
23.9%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.1%
Exceptional
8.8%

Czechoslovakian vs Chinese Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Czechoslovakian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.6% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 10.1%), professional degree (4.2% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 6.1%), and associate's degree (46.0% compared to 48.5%, a difference of 5.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 7th grade (97.1% compared to 97.1%, a difference of 0.040%), 8th grade (96.9% compared to 96.9%, a difference of 0.060%), and nursery school (98.5% compared to 98.6%, a difference of 0.10%).
Czechoslovakian vs Chinese Education Level
Education Level MetricCzechoslovakianChinese
No Schooling Completed
Exceptional
1.6%
Exceptional
1.5%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.5%
Exceptional
98.6%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.4%
Exceptional
98.5%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.4%
Exceptional
98.5%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.4%
Exceptional
98.5%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Exceptional
98.4%
4th Grade
Exceptional
98.1%
Exceptional
98.3%
5th Grade
Exceptional
98.0%
Exceptional
98.1%
6th Grade
Exceptional
97.8%
Exceptional
97.9%
7th Grade
Exceptional
97.1%
Exceptional
97.1%
8th Grade
Exceptional
96.9%
Exceptional
96.9%
9th Grade
Exceptional
96.1%
Exceptional
96.3%
10th Grade
Exceptional
95.1%
Exceptional
95.5%
11th Grade
Exceptional
94.0%
Exceptional
94.6%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Exceptional
92.6%
Exceptional
93.6%
High School Diploma
Exceptional
90.9%
Exceptional
92.0%
GED/Equivalency
Exceptional
87.4%
Exceptional
89.0%
College, Under 1 year
Good
65.8%
Exceptional
68.3%
College, 1 year or more
Average
59.4%
Exceptional
62.2%
Associate's Degree
Average
46.0%
Exceptional
48.5%
Bachelor's Degree
Fair
37.0%
Good
38.5%
Master's Degree
Fair
14.5%
Fair
14.6%
Professional Degree
Fair
4.2%
Average
4.5%
Doctorate Degree
Fair
1.8%
Fair
1.8%

Czechoslovakian vs Chinese Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Czechoslovakian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.5% compared to 1.1%, a difference of 32.5%), disability age 5 to 17 (5.9% compared to 4.7%, a difference of 26.6%), and disability age 18 to 34 (7.4% compared to 6.3%, a difference of 17.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of ambulatory disability (6.4% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 1.7%), male disability (12.3% compared to 12.1%, a difference of 1.8%), and disability (12.5% compared to 12.2%, a difference of 2.5%).
Czechoslovakian vs Chinese Disability
Disability MetricCzechoslovakianChinese
Disability
Tragic
12.5%
Tragic
12.2%
Males
Tragic
12.3%
Tragic
12.1%
Females
Tragic
12.7%
Fair
12.3%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
1.5%
Exceptional
1.1%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Tragic
5.9%
Exceptional
4.7%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
7.4%
Exceptional
6.3%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Tragic
11.8%
Exceptional
10.3%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Good
23.0%
Exceptional
21.7%
Age | Over 75 years
Exceptional
46.6%
Tragic
48.7%
Vision
Fair
2.2%
Exceptional
2.0%
Hearing
Tragic
3.6%
Tragic
3.7%
Cognitive
Exceptional
16.6%
Exceptional
15.9%
Ambulatory
Tragic
6.4%
Tragic
6.5%
Self-Care
Average
2.5%
Tragic
2.6%