Chippewa vs Immigrants from Eastern Asia Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 7,844,394 people shows a poor positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Eastern Asia within Chippewa communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.191. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chippewa within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.003% in Immigrants from Eastern Asia. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chippewa corresponds to an increase of 3.4 Immigrants from Eastern Asia.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chippewa and Immigrants from Eastern Asia communities in the United States are seen in median household income ($70,539 compared to $104,796, a difference of 48.6%), householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($80,005 compared to $118,056, a difference of 47.6%), and per capita income ($36,631 compared to $53,806, a difference of 46.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (25.0% compared to 27.1%, a difference of 8.4%), householder income under 25 years ($47,015 compared to $57,123, a difference of 21.5%), and householder income over 65 years ($53,847 compared to $69,872, a difference of 29.8%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chippewa and Immigrants from Eastern Asia communities in the United States are seen in child poverty under the age of 5 (23.4% compared to 13.5%, a difference of 73.1%), female poverty among 25-34 year olds (18.0% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 60.7%), and receiving food stamps (14.7% compared to 9.3%, a difference of 57.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 75 (13.1% compared to 12.8%, a difference of 2.1%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (12.1% compared to 11.1%, a difference of 9.7%), and married-couple family poverty (5.4% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 13.3%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chippewa and Immigrants from Eastern Asia communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (13.3% compared to 6.3%, a difference of 111.5%), unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (7.8% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 51.1%), and unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (11.1% compared to 7.7%, a difference of 43.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.9% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 1.3%), unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (18.0% compared to 17.4%, a difference of 3.4%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.4% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 5.3%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chippewa and Immigrants from Eastern Asia communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (43.8% compared to 32.0%, a difference of 36.8%), in labor force | age 20-24 (77.1% compared to 71.8%, a difference of 7.3%), and in labor force | age > 16 (63.1% compared to 65.7%, a difference of 4.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 35-44 (82.9% compared to 84.7%, a difference of 2.2%), in labor force | age 25-29 (82.9% compared to 84.8%, a difference of 2.3%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (81.3% compared to 83.4%, a difference of 2.6%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chippewa and Immigrants from Eastern Asia communities in the United States are seen in births to unmarried women (42.6% compared to 25.0%, a difference of 70.2%), single father households (3.1% compared to 1.9%, a difference of 63.7%), and single mother households (8.0% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 56.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.20 compared to 3.22, a difference of 0.69%), family households with children (26.7% compared to 27.7%, a difference of 3.5%), and family households (62.1% compared to 64.9%, a difference of 4.5%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chippewa and Immigrants from Eastern Asia communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (9.4% compared to 13.5%, a difference of 43.4%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.6% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 21.8%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (21.5% compared to 18.8%, a difference of 14.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (90.7% compared to 86.5%, a difference of 4.8%), 2 or more vehicles in household (57.2% compared to 53.2%, a difference of 7.5%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (21.5% compared to 18.8%, a difference of 14.3%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chippewa and Immigrants from Eastern Asia communities in the United States are seen in doctorate degree (1.5% compared to 3.0%, a difference of 94.4%), professional degree (3.5% compared to 6.6%, a difference of 89.3%), and master's degree (11.4% compared to 20.8%, a difference of 82.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of high school diploma (89.7% compared to 89.9%, a difference of 0.12%), 12th grade, no diploma (91.5% compared to 91.8%, a difference of 0.25%), and 11th grade (93.5% compared to 92.7%, a difference of 0.80%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chippewa and Immigrants from Eastern Asia communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.9% compared to 1.0%, a difference of 84.1%), disability age 35 to 64 (15.0% compared to 8.8%, a difference of 70.4%), and disability age 18 to 34 (9.0% compared to 5.6%, a difference of 60.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (48.4% compared to 46.2%, a difference of 4.9%), cognitive disability (18.1% compared to 16.8%, a difference of 7.6%), and self-care disability (2.6% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 14.7%).