U.S. Virgin Islander vs Immigrants from China Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 83,847,227 people shows a poor negative correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from China within U.S. Virgin Islander communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.112. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in U.S. Virgin Islanders within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.083% in Immigrants from China. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 U.S. Virgin Islanders corresponds to a decrease of 82.9 Immigrants from China.

When considering income, the most significant differences between U.S. Virgin Islander and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($78,911 compared to $119,756, a difference of 51.8%), householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($82,736 compared to $122,178, a difference of 47.7%), and median family income ($85,294 compared to $125,540, a difference of 47.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($47,448 compared to $57,931, a difference of 22.1%), wage/income gap (21.5% compared to 26.7%, a difference of 23.9%), and median female earnings ($36,424 compared to $46,972, a difference of 29.0%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between U.S. Virgin Islander and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in receiving food stamps (16.5% compared to 9.6%, a difference of 72.9%), child poverty under the age of 5 (23.0% compared to 13.6%, a difference of 69.0%), and child poverty under the age of 16 (22.0% compared to 13.3%, a difference of 65.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female poverty among 18-24 year olds (22.5% compared to 20.2%, a difference of 11.4%), seniors poverty over the age of 75 (15.4% compared to 13.2%, a difference of 16.3%), and single father poverty (18.1% compared to 14.9%, a difference of 21.3%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between U.S. Virgin Islander and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (8.7% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 39.7%), unemployment among women with children under 18 years (6.7% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 35.8%), and unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (8.1% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 29.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (5.1% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 2.5%), unemployment among seniors over 75 years (8.1% compared to 7.8%, a difference of 3.8%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.5% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 5.6%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between U.S. Virgin Islander and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (33.6% compared to 31.1%, a difference of 8.0%), in labor force | age 20-24 (73.0% compared to 71.1%, a difference of 2.8%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (81.2% compared to 83.2%, a difference of 2.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 35-44 (84.0% compared to 84.7%, a difference of 0.85%), in labor force | age 25-29 (83.8% compared to 84.6%, a difference of 0.93%), and in labor force | age > 16 (64.7% compared to 65.4%, a difference of 0.98%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between U.S. Virgin Islander and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (8.6% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 70.2%), births to unmarried women (39.6% compared to 24.7%, a difference of 60.4%), and divorced or separated (13.4% compared to 10.0%, a difference of 33.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households with children (27.1% compared to 27.4%, a difference of 1.1%), average family size (3.29 compared to 3.23, a difference of 2.0%), and family households (62.6% compared to 64.7%, a difference of 3.3%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between U.S. Virgin Islander and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (4.6% compared to 6.0%, a difference of 29.9%), 3 or more vehicles in household (15.4% compared to 18.2%, a difference of 18.3%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (47.5% compared to 51.5%, a difference of 8.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (84.6% compared to 84.9%, a difference of 0.35%), no vehicles in household (15.4% compared to 15.2%, a difference of 1.5%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (47.5% compared to 51.5%, a difference of 8.5%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between U.S. Virgin Islander and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in doctorate degree (1.5% compared to 3.1%, a difference of 108.8%), professional degree (3.7% compared to 6.7%, a difference of 83.7%), and master's degree (13.1% compared to 21.2%, a difference of 61.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 6th grade (96.5% compared to 96.4%, a difference of 0.030%), 8th grade (95.0% compared to 95.0%, a difference of 0.030%), and 5th grade (96.9% compared to 96.8%, a difference of 0.090%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between U.S. Virgin Islander and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in disability age 35 to 64 (12.8% compared to 8.7%, a difference of 47.6%), disability age 5 to 17 (6.3% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 38.5%), and vision disability (2.5% compared to 1.8%, a difference of 33.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (48.9% compared to 46.3%, a difference of 5.7%), hearing disability (2.8% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 7.4%), and cognitive disability (18.7% compared to 16.9%, a difference of 10.6%).