Taiwanese vs Iroquois Community Comparison

COMPARE

Taiwanese
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican 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
Iroquois
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch 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 AfricanSudaneseSwedishSwissSyrianThaiTlingit-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

Taiwanese

Iroquois

Good
Fair
6,532
SOCIAL INDEX
62.8/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
151st/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
2,526
SOCIAL INDEX
22.8/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
253rd/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Iroquois Integration in Taiwanese Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 28,159,693 people shows a substantial positive correlation between the proportion of Iroquois within Taiwanese communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.564. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Taiwanese within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.153% in Iroquois. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Taiwanese corresponds to an increase of 153.2 Iroquois.
Taiwanese Integration in Iroquois Communities

Taiwanese vs Iroquois Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Taiwanese and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($101,492 compared to $83,682, a difference of 21.3%), median household income ($89,900 compared to $74,279, a difference of 21.0%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($104,180 compared to $87,255, a difference of 19.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (25.1% compared to 25.1%, a difference of 0.27%), householder income under 25 years ($49,804 compared to $47,380, a difference of 5.1%), and median female earnings ($40,576 compared to $36,408, a difference of 11.5%).
Taiwanese vs Iroquois Income
Income MetricTaiwaneseIroquois
Per Capita Income
Exceptional
$46,455
Tragic
$39,104
Median Family Income
Exceptional
$107,295
Tragic
$90,543
Median Household Income
Exceptional
$89,900
Tragic
$74,279
Median Earnings
Excellent
$47,902
Tragic
$42,430
Median Male Earnings
Good
$55,556
Tragic
$49,374
Median Female Earnings
Excellent
$40,576
Tragic
$36,408
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Tragic
$49,804
Tragic
$47,380
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Exceptional
$101,492
Tragic
$83,682
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Excellent
$104,180
Tragic
$87,255
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Excellent
$62,894
Tragic
$53,737
Wage/Income Gap
Excellent
25.1%
Excellent
25.1%

Taiwanese vs Iroquois Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Taiwanese and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in child poverty under the age of 5 (14.5% compared to 22.0%, a difference of 51.9%), female poverty among 25-34 year olds (11.8% compared to 17.5%, a difference of 48.3%), and child poverty among girls under 16 (14.6% compared to 20.4%, a difference of 39.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 65 (11.2% compared to 11.9%, a difference of 6.9%), female poverty among 18-24 year olds (21.2% compared to 22.9%, a difference of 8.0%), and seniors poverty over the age of 75 (12.6% compared to 14.0%, a difference of 11.5%).
Taiwanese vs Iroquois Poverty
Poverty MetricTaiwaneseIroquois
Poverty
Good
12.2%
Tragic
14.5%
Families
Exceptional
8.2%
Tragic
10.7%
Males
Good
11.0%
Tragic
13.2%
Females
Good
13.1%
Tragic
15.8%
Females 18 to 24 years
Tragic
21.2%
Tragic
22.9%
Females 25 to 34 years
Exceptional
11.8%
Tragic
17.5%
Children Under 5 years
Exceptional
14.5%
Tragic
22.0%
Children Under 16 years
Exceptional
14.5%
Tragic
19.9%
Boys Under 16 years
Exceptional
14.8%
Tragic
19.6%
Girls Under 16 years
Exceptional
14.6%
Tragic
20.4%
Single Males
Exceptional
10.9%
Tragic
14.5%
Single Females
Exceptional
19.4%
Tragic
25.7%
Single Fathers
Exceptional
14.3%
Tragic
17.7%
Single Mothers
Exceptional
27.5%
Tragic
34.8%
Married Couples
Exceptional
4.8%
Poor
5.5%
Seniors Over 65 years
Fair
11.2%
Tragic
11.9%
Seniors Over 75 years
Poor
12.6%
Tragic
14.0%
Receiving Food Stamps
Excellent
11.0%
Tragic
13.5%

Taiwanese vs Iroquois Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Taiwanese and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (6.1% compared to 8.7%, a difference of 43.8%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (6.5% compared to 9.2%, a difference of 42.7%), and unemployment among seniors over 75 years (6.6% compared to 9.3%, a difference of 42.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female unemployment (5.3% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 1.6%), unemployment (5.3% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 3.3%), and unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.6% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 4.7%).
Taiwanese vs Iroquois Unemployment
Unemployment MetricTaiwaneseIroquois
Unemployment
Average
5.3%
Poor
5.4%
Males
Fair
5.3%
Tragic
5.7%
Females
Average
5.3%
Fair
5.4%
Youth < 25
Exceptional
10.8%
Exceptional
11.3%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Exceptional
15.5%
Average
17.6%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
9.4%
Exceptional
10.1%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Exceptional
6.1%
Tragic
7.5%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Good
5.3%
Tragic
5.9%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Exceptional
4.4%
Tragic
5.1%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Good
4.5%
Tragic
5.1%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Exceptional
4.6%
Fair
4.9%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Tragic
5.3%
Exceptional
4.7%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
6.3%
Exceptional
5.1%
Seniors > 65
Tragic
6.0%
Exceptional
4.9%
Seniors > 75
Exceptional
6.6%
Tragic
9.3%
Women w/ Children < 6
Exceptional
6.1%
Tragic
8.7%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
6.5%
Tragic
9.2%
Women w/ Children < 18
Exceptional
4.8%
Tragic
5.7%

Taiwanese vs Iroquois Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Taiwanese and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (33.8% compared to 39.9%, a difference of 18.1%), in labor force | age > 16 (66.2% compared to 63.2%, a difference of 4.8%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (80.2% compared to 77.5%, a difference of 3.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (74.7% compared to 75.6%, a difference of 1.2%), in labor force | age 35-44 (85.1% compared to 83.5%, a difference of 1.9%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (85.4% compared to 83.8%, a difference of 2.0%).
Taiwanese vs Iroquois Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricTaiwaneseIroquois
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Exceptional
66.2%
Tragic
63.2%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Exceptional
80.2%
Tragic
77.5%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Tragic
33.8%
Exceptional
39.9%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Fair
74.7%
Excellent
75.6%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Exceptional
85.4%
Tragic
83.8%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Fair
84.6%
Tragic
81.9%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Exceptional
85.1%
Tragic
83.5%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Exceptional
83.4%
Tragic
80.6%

Taiwanese vs Iroquois Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Taiwanese and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in births to unmarried women (29.0% compared to 38.2%, a difference of 31.8%), single mother households (5.8% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 20.9%), and single father households (2.2% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 18.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (63.3% compared to 62.2%, a difference of 1.8%), average family size (3.23 compared to 3.16, a difference of 2.3%), and currently married (45.8% compared to 44.7%, a difference of 2.4%).
Taiwanese vs Iroquois Family Structure
Family Structure MetricTaiwaneseIroquois
Family Households
Tragic
63.3%
Tragic
62.2%
Family Households with Children
Tragic
26.7%
Tragic
26.1%
Married-couple Households
Fair
45.9%
Tragic
43.7%
Average Family Size
Average
3.23
Tragic
3.16
Single Father Households
Exceptional
2.2%
Tragic
2.6%
Single Mother Households
Exceptional
5.8%
Tragic
7.0%
Currently Married
Poor
45.8%
Tragic
44.7%
Divorced or Separated
Exceptional
11.5%
Tragic
12.9%
Births to Unmarried Women
Exceptional
29.0%
Tragic
38.2%

Taiwanese vs Iroquois Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Taiwanese and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (7.0% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 8.6%), no vehicles in household (11.7% compared to 10.9%, a difference of 6.5%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (20.0% compared to 19.4%, a difference of 3.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (88.4% compared to 89.2%, a difference of 0.87%), 2 or more vehicles in household (53.9% compared to 54.7%, a difference of 1.5%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (20.0% compared to 19.4%, a difference of 3.0%).
Taiwanese vs Iroquois Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricTaiwaneseIroquois
No Vehicles Available
Tragic
11.7%
Poor
10.9%
1+ Vehicles Available
Tragic
88.4%
Poor
89.2%
2+ Vehicles Available
Tragic
53.9%
Fair
54.7%
3+ Vehicles Available
Excellent
20.0%
Average
19.4%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.0%
Good
6.5%

Taiwanese vs Iroquois Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Taiwanese and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (5.0% compared to 3.7%, a difference of 34.7%), no schooling completed (2.5% compared to 1.9%, a difference of 32.3%), and doctorate degree (2.1% compared to 1.6%, a difference of 29.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of ged/equivalency (84.7% compared to 84.6%, a difference of 0.040%), nursery school (97.6% compared to 98.2%, a difference of 0.63%), and kindergarten (97.5% compared to 98.2%, a difference of 0.63%).
Taiwanese vs Iroquois Education Level
Education Level MetricTaiwaneseIroquois
No Schooling Completed
Tragic
2.5%
Exceptional
1.9%
Nursery School
Tragic
97.6%
Exceptional
98.2%
Kindergarten
Tragic
97.5%
Exceptional
98.2%
1st Grade
Tragic
97.5%
Exceptional
98.1%
2nd Grade
Tragic
97.4%
Exceptional
98.1%
3rd Grade
Tragic
97.3%
Exceptional
98.0%
4th Grade
Tragic
97.0%
Exceptional
97.8%
5th Grade
Tragic
96.7%
Exceptional
97.7%
6th Grade
Tragic
96.5%
Exceptional
97.4%
7th Grade
Tragic
94.8%
Exceptional
96.6%
8th Grade
Tragic
94.7%
Exceptional
96.3%
9th Grade
Tragic
93.6%
Exceptional
95.4%
10th Grade
Tragic
92.5%
Exceptional
94.3%
11th Grade
Tragic
91.3%
Good
92.8%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Tragic
90.0%
Average
91.1%
High School Diploma
Tragic
87.9%
Average
89.2%
GED/Equivalency
Tragic
84.7%
Tragic
84.6%
College, Under 1 year
Good
66.4%
Tragic
62.6%
College, 1 year or more
Excellent
60.7%
Tragic
56.2%
Associate's Degree
Excellent
47.7%
Tragic
42.8%
Bachelor's Degree
Exceptional
40.0%
Tragic
33.2%
Master's Degree
Exceptional
16.1%
Tragic
12.9%
Professional Degree
Exceptional
5.0%
Tragic
3.7%
Doctorate Degree
Exceptional
2.1%
Tragic
1.6%

Taiwanese vs Iroquois Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Taiwanese and Iroquois communities in the United States are seen in disability age 35 to 64 (9.8% compared to 14.4%, a difference of 45.8%), disability age 5 to 17 (4.9% compared to 6.9%, a difference of 40.0%), and vision disability (1.9% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 35.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (48.2% compared to 48.4%, a difference of 0.59%), cognitive disability (17.6% compared to 18.2%, a difference of 3.4%), and disability age under 5 (1.3% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 10.5%).
Taiwanese vs Iroquois Disability
Disability MetricTaiwaneseIroquois
Disability
Exceptional
10.8%
Tragic
13.8%
Males
Exceptional
10.3%
Tragic
13.6%
Females
Exceptional
11.4%
Tragic
14.0%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
1.3%
Tragic
1.5%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Exceptional
4.9%
Tragic
6.9%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Exceptional
6.0%
Tragic
7.9%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Exceptional
9.8%
Tragic
14.4%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Excellent
22.7%
Tragic
25.4%
Age | Over 75 years
Tragic
48.2%
Tragic
48.4%
Vision
Exceptional
1.9%
Tragic
2.6%
Hearing
Exceptional
2.8%
Tragic
3.7%
Cognitive
Tragic
17.6%
Tragic
18.2%
Ambulatory
Exceptional
5.6%
Tragic
7.1%
Self-Care
Exceptional
2.4%
Tragic
2.7%