Samoan vs Chinese Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 56,166,778 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Chinese within Samoan communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.048. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Samoans within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.006% in Chinese. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Samoans corresponds to a decrease of 5.7 Chinese.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Samoan and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in householder income over 65 years ($65,427 compared to $77,465, a difference of 18.4%), median family income ($100,344 compared to $116,188, a difference of 15.8%), and per capita income ($39,826 compared to $46,098, a difference of 15.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (26.0% compared to 25.9%, a difference of 0.23%), householder income under 25 years ($54,610 compared to $58,162, a difference of 6.5%), and median earnings ($44,206 compared to $48,836, a difference of 10.5%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Samoan and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in married-couple family poverty (4.9% compared to 3.6%, a difference of 33.9%), child poverty among boys under 16 (15.7% compared to 11.9%, a difference of 32.3%), and family poverty (8.6% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 32.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single male poverty (11.7% compared to 11.0%, a difference of 6.1%), single father poverty (13.8% compared to 15.4%, a difference of 11.6%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (18.2% compared to 16.2%, a difference of 12.7%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Samoan and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (9.1% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 53.5%), unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.3% compared to 4.2%, a difference of 25.7%), and unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (5.5% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 23.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (17.2% compared to 16.0%, a difference of 7.4%), unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.6% compared to 6.1%, a difference of 8.2%), and unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.8% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 9.6%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Samoan and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 45-54 (81.8% compared to 84.1%, a difference of 2.8%), in labor force | age 35-44 (83.2% compared to 85.1%, a difference of 2.3%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (79.0% compared to 80.7%, a difference of 2.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (77.4% compared to 77.3%, a difference of 0.12%), in labor force | age 25-29 (83.3% compared to 84.3%, a difference of 1.3%), and in labor force | age > 16 (65.5% compared to 64.7%, a difference of 1.4%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Samoan and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.6% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 33.0%), single mother households (6.5% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 26.6%), and family households with children (29.5% compared to 26.0%, a difference of 13.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (67.9% compared to 68.1%, a difference of 0.28%), average family size (3.42 compared to 3.34, a difference of 2.4%), and married-couple households (48.7% compared to 50.4%, a difference of 3.5%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Samoan and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.6% compared to 8.2%, a difference of 7.7%), 3 or more vehicles in household (25.0% compared to 23.9%, a difference of 4.6%), and 4 or more vehicles in household (9.2% compared to 8.8%, a difference of 4.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (92.4% compared to 91.9%, a difference of 0.62%), 2 or more vehicles in household (61.5% compared to 60.1%, a difference of 2.3%), and 4 or more vehicles in household (9.2% compared to 8.8%, a difference of 4.2%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Samoan and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (2.3% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 53.5%), professional degree (3.3% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 34.2%), and master's degree (11.5% compared to 14.6%, a difference of 27.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (97.8% compared to 98.6%, a difference of 0.80%), kindergarten (97.8% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.81%), and 1st grade (97.7% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.81%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Samoan and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in disability age 35 to 64 (12.1% compared to 10.3%, a difference of 17.2%), disability age 65 to 74 (25.4% compared to 21.7%, a difference of 17.2%), and disability age 5 to 17 (5.5% compared to 4.7%, a difference of 17.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability (12.2% compared to 12.2%, a difference of 0.29%), female disability (12.4% compared to 12.3%, a difference of 0.56%), and self-care disability (2.6% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 0.67%).