Immigrants from Jordan vs Immigrants from Hong Kong Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 138,884,651 people shows a slight positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Hong Kong within Immigrant from Jordan communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.078. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Jordan within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.021% in Immigrants from Hong Kong. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Jordan corresponds to an increase of 20.6 Immigrants from Hong Kong.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Jordan and Immigrants from Hong Kong communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($97,185 compared to $128,140, a difference of 31.9%), per capita income ($45,066 compared to $56,709, a difference of 25.8%), and median household income ($89,412 compared to $111,519, a difference of 24.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (26.3% compared to 25.5%, a difference of 3.0%), householder income over 65 years ($63,041 compared to $71,567, a difference of 13.5%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($106,164 compared to $127,500, a difference of 20.1%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Jordan and Immigrants from Hong Kong communities in the United States are seen in child poverty under the age of 5 (16.1% compared to 12.4%, a difference of 29.2%), child poverty among boys under 16 (15.8% compared to 12.3%, a difference of 28.9%), and child poverty under the age of 16 (15.6% compared to 12.1%, a difference of 28.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.2% compared to 11.1%, a difference of 8.2%), married-couple family poverty (5.1% compared to 4.7%, a difference of 8.3%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (19.1% compared to 17.5%, a difference of 9.4%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Jordan and Immigrants from Hong Kong communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (7.5% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 29.3%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (9.0% compared to 7.2%, a difference of 25.2%), and unemployment among seniors over 75 years (9.0% compared to 7.6%, a difference of 18.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.3% compared to 6.3%, a difference of 0.42%), female unemployment (5.1% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 0.47%), and unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.4% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 0.55%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Jordan and Immigrants from Hong Kong communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (36.9% compared to 30.5%, a difference of 21.2%), in labor force | age 20-24 (75.6% compared to 71.6%, a difference of 5.6%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (84.4% compared to 85.2%, a difference of 0.97%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-64 (80.0% compared to 80.4%, a difference of 0.49%), in labor force | age > 16 (66.1% compared to 65.7%, a difference of 0.54%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (83.1% compared to 83.6%, a difference of 0.65%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Jordan and Immigrants from Hong Kong communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (6.0% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 25.1%), births to unmarried women (29.0% compared to 23.6%, a difference of 22.8%), and single father households (2.2% compared to 1.8%, a difference of 19.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.24 compared to 3.26, a difference of 0.42%), family households (65.0% compared to 66.1%, a difference of 1.7%), and currently married (47.4% compared to 48.9%, a difference of 3.2%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Jordan and Immigrants from Hong Kong communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (8.7% compared to 11.3%, a difference of 30.7%), 2 or more vehicles in household (57.2% compared to 52.6%, a difference of 8.8%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (19.9% compared to 19.2%, a difference of 3.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 4 or more vehicles in household (6.5% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 0.18%), 1 or more vehicles in household (91.4% compared to 88.7%, a difference of 3.0%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (19.9% compared to 19.2%, a difference of 3.9%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Jordan and Immigrants from Hong Kong communities in the United States are seen in doctorate degree (2.0% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 36.4%), professional degree (4.7% compared to 6.4%, a difference of 35.2%), and no schooling completed (2.0% compared to 2.7%, a difference of 33.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of ged/equivalency (86.8% compared to 86.9%, a difference of 0.21%), 12th grade, no diploma (91.8% compared to 91.3%, a difference of 0.54%), and high school diploma (89.8% compared to 89.3%, a difference of 0.59%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Jordan and Immigrants from Hong Kong communities in the United States are seen in disability age 35 to 64 (10.4% compared to 8.2%, a difference of 26.7%), disability age 5 to 17 (5.3% compared to 4.3%, a difference of 22.8%), and disability age 18 to 34 (6.3% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 20.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (46.2% compared to 46.5%, a difference of 0.59%), self-care disability (2.4% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 1.4%), and cognitive disability (17.0% compared to 16.0%, a difference of 6.0%).