Immigrants from China vs Immigrants from Asia Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 457,130,971 people shows a near-perfect positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Asia within Immigrant from China communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.912. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from China within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.884% in Immigrants from Asia. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from China corresponds to an increase of 883.6 Immigrants from Asia.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Asia communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($54,264 compared to $49,741, a difference of 9.1%), householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($119,756 compared to $110,787, a difference of 8.1%), and median male earnings ($67,353 compared to $63,240, a difference of 6.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (26.7% compared to 27.0%, a difference of 1.1%), householder income over 65 years ($69,174 compared to $67,594, a difference of 2.3%), and householder income under 25 years ($57,931 compared to $56,379, a difference of 2.8%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Asia communities in the United States are seen in female poverty among 18-24 year olds (20.2% compared to 18.6%, a difference of 8.7%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (11.5% compared to 10.6%, a difference of 8.5%), and seniors poverty over the age of 75 (13.2% compared to 12.2%, a difference of 8.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single male poverty (11.4% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 0.070%), single mother poverty (26.1% compared to 26.3%, a difference of 0.75%), and family poverty (7.8% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 1.3%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Asia communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (6.2% compared to 6.8%, a difference of 8.9%), unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.8% compared to 8.3%, a difference of 7.1%), and unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (7.7% compared to 8.1%, a difference of 5.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.4% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 0.56%), unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (5.1% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 0.61%), and unemployment (5.2% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 0.66%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Asia communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (31.1% compared to 34.1%, a difference of 9.6%), in labor force | age 20-24 (71.1% compared to 73.6%, a difference of 3.6%), and in labor force | age > 16 (65.4% compared to 66.1%, a difference of 1.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 25-29 (84.6% compared to 84.8%, a difference of 0.17%), in labor force | age 45-54 (83.2% compared to 83.3%, a difference of 0.17%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (84.7% compared to 84.5%, a difference of 0.19%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Asia communities in the United States are seen in single father households (1.8% compared to 2.1%, a difference of 13.0%), single mother households (5.1% compared to 5.6%, a difference of 10.7%), and births to unmarried women (24.7% compared to 26.8%, a difference of 8.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of currently married (47.9% compared to 48.3%, a difference of 0.87%), average family size (3.23 compared to 3.27, a difference of 1.3%), and married-couple households (48.4% compared to 49.1%, a difference of 1.3%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Asia communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (15.2% compared to 10.9%, a difference of 39.5%), 4 or more vehicles in household (6.0% compared to 6.8%, a difference of 12.3%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.2% compared to 20.2%, a difference of 11.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (84.9% compared to 89.3%, a difference of 5.1%), 2 or more vehicles in household (51.5% compared to 56.3%, a difference of 9.4%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.2% compared to 20.2%, a difference of 11.1%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Asia communities in the United States are seen in doctorate degree (3.1% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 27.3%), professional degree (6.7% compared to 5.5%, a difference of 22.2%), and master's degree (21.2% compared to 18.4%, a difference of 15.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 12th grade, no diploma (91.3% compared to 91.3%, a difference of 0.010%), high school diploma (89.3% compared to 89.3%, a difference of 0.030%), and nursery school (97.5% compared to 97.6%, a difference of 0.14%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Asia communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (0.96% compared to 1.1%, a difference of 10.3%), disability age 35 to 64 (8.7% compared to 9.5%, a difference of 9.0%), and disability age 18 to 34 (5.4% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 7.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (16.9% compared to 16.8%, a difference of 0.77%), disability age over 75 (46.3% compared to 47.0%, a difference of 1.5%), and self-care disability (2.3% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 1.5%).