Immigrants from Zimbabwe vs Immigrants from Chile Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 87,450,402 people shows a significant positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Chile within Immigrant from Zimbabwe communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.697. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Zimbabwe within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.523% in Immigrants from Chile. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Zimbabwe corresponds to an increase of 523.0 Immigrants from Chile.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Zimbabwe and Immigrants from Chile communities in the United States are seen in median family income ($108,830 compared to $105,655, a difference of 3.0%), median female earnings ($41,527 compared to $40,353, a difference of 2.9%), and per capita income ($47,394 compared to $46,213, a difference of 2.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($97,880 compared to $97,159, a difference of 0.74%), householder income under 25 years ($51,914 compared to $52,440, a difference of 1.0%), and median household income ($89,496 compared to $88,388, a difference of 1.3%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Zimbabwe and Immigrants from Chile communities in the United States are seen in married-couple family poverty (4.3% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 21.7%), receiving food stamps (9.9% compared to 11.5%, a difference of 15.4%), and seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.3% compared to 11.7%, a difference of 13.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single female poverty (20.0% compared to 20.1%, a difference of 0.54%), single mother poverty (28.1% compared to 28.4%, a difference of 0.95%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (19.8% compared to 19.4%, a difference of 2.0%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Zimbabwe and Immigrants from Chile communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (9.0% compared to 7.8%, a difference of 15.5%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.0% compared to 8.9%, a difference of 11.0%), and unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (16.3% compared to 18.1%, a difference of 10.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.0% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 2.1%), unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (5.1% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 2.8%), and unemployment among women with children under 6 years (7.1% compared to 7.3%, a difference of 2.8%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Zimbabwe and Immigrants from Chile communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (38.0% compared to 34.8%, a difference of 9.2%), in labor force | age 20-24 (75.9% compared to 74.1%, a difference of 2.3%), and in labor force | age > 16 (66.8% compared to 65.9%, a difference of 1.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 30-34 (85.1% compared to 85.0%, a difference of 0.18%), in labor force | age 45-54 (83.4% compared to 83.2%, a difference of 0.19%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (85.2% compared to 84.9%, a difference of 0.35%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Zimbabwe and Immigrants from Chile communities in the United States are seen in births to unmarried women (30.3% compared to 31.2%, a difference of 2.8%), single father households (2.2% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 2.2%), and family households (63.5% compared to 64.6%, a difference of 1.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of married-couple households (46.3% compared to 46.5%, a difference of 0.48%), currently married (46.7% compared to 46.4%, a difference of 0.59%), and family households with children (27.8% compared to 27.7%, a difference of 0.65%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Zimbabwe and Immigrants from Chile communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (9.9% compared to 11.0%, a difference of 11.5%), 2 or more vehicles in household (55.6% compared to 54.2%, a difference of 2.5%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (19.1% compared to 18.8%, a difference of 1.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 4 or more vehicles in household (6.0% compared to 6.1%, a difference of 0.35%), 1 or more vehicles in household (90.2% compared to 89.1%, a difference of 1.3%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (19.1% compared to 18.8%, a difference of 1.5%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Zimbabwe and Immigrants from Chile communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.9% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 16.7%), bachelor's degree (42.6% compared to 40.8%, a difference of 4.2%), and master's degree (17.4% compared to 16.8%, a difference of 4.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of professional degree (5.3% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 0.11%), nursery school (98.2% compared to 97.9%, a difference of 0.33%), and kindergarten (98.2% compared to 97.8%, a difference of 0.33%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Zimbabwe and Immigrants from Chile communities in the United States are seen in disability age 18 to 34 (6.7% compared to 6.1%, a difference of 9.1%), disability age under 5 (1.2% compared to 1.3%, a difference of 6.6%), and self-care disability (2.3% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 5.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of vision disability (2.1% compared to 2.1%, a difference of 0.38%), disability age 65 to 74 (22.3% compared to 22.1%, a difference of 0.88%), and female disability (11.6% compared to 11.5%, a difference of 1.0%).