Immigrants from China vs Immigrants from Indonesia Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 210,805,379 people shows a substantial positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Indonesia within Immigrant from China communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.520. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from China within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.011% in Immigrants from Indonesia. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from China corresponds to an increase of 11.1 Immigrants from Indonesia.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Indonesia communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($54,264 compared to $48,195, a difference of 12.6%), householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($119,756 compared to $107,627, a difference of 11.3%), and median male earnings ($67,353 compared to $60,935, a difference of 10.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (26.7% compared to 26.1%, a difference of 2.3%), householder income over 65 years ($69,174 compared to $66,694, a difference of 3.7%), and householder income under 25 years ($57,931 compared to $55,521, a difference of 4.3%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Indonesia communities in the United States are seen in female poverty among 18-24 year olds (20.2% compared to 18.9%, a difference of 7.0%), child poverty among girls under 16 (13.4% compared to 14.4%, a difference of 6.9%), and seniors poverty over the age of 65 (11.5% compared to 10.8%, a difference of 6.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female poverty (12.5% compared to 12.5%, a difference of 0.48%), poverty (11.6% compared to 11.5%, a difference of 1.3%), and single father poverty (14.9% compared to 14.7%, a difference of 1.7%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Indonesia communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (6.2% compared to 6.7%, a difference of 7.4%), unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.4% compared to 4.7%, a difference of 6.2%), and unemployment among women with children under 18 years (4.9% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 5.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of male unemployment (5.2% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 0.070%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (7.7% compared to 7.7%, a difference of 0.38%), and unemployment among ages 45 to 54 years (4.5% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 0.65%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Indonesia communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (31.1% compared to 33.5%, a difference of 7.6%), in labor force | age 20-24 (71.1% compared to 73.4%, a difference of 3.3%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (84.7% compared to 84.2%, a difference of 0.57%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-64 (79.7% compared to 79.6%, a difference of 0.060%), in labor force | age 45-54 (83.2% compared to 82.9%, a difference of 0.31%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (84.6% compared to 84.4%, a difference of 0.32%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Indonesia communities in the United States are seen in single father households (1.8% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 18.2%), single mother households (5.1% compared to 5.7%, a difference of 12.7%), and births to unmarried women (24.7% compared to 27.7%, a difference of 12.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of married-couple households (48.4% compared to 48.5%, a difference of 0.27%), currently married (47.9% compared to 47.6%, a difference of 0.57%), and average family size (3.23 compared to 3.27, a difference of 1.2%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Indonesia communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (15.2% compared to 10.1%, a difference of 49.8%), 4 or more vehicles in household (6.0% compared to 7.2%, a difference of 19.8%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.2% compared to 21.1%, a difference of 15.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (84.9% compared to 90.0%, a difference of 5.9%), 2 or more vehicles in household (51.5% compared to 57.6%, a difference of 11.8%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (18.2% compared to 21.1%, a difference of 15.9%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Indonesia communities in the United States are seen in doctorate degree (3.1% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 30.4%), professional degree (6.7% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 25.8%), and master's degree (21.2% compared to 17.6%, a difference of 20.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 12th grade, no diploma (91.3% compared to 91.2%, a difference of 0.080%), 11th grade (92.3% compared to 92.4%, a difference of 0.10%), and 5th grade (96.8% compared to 96.9%, a difference of 0.16%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Indonesia communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (0.96% compared to 1.1%, a difference of 16.1%), disability age 35 to 64 (8.7% compared to 9.7%, a difference of 11.0%), and disability age 5 to 17 (4.5% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 10.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (16.9% compared to 17.1%, a difference of 0.99%), self-care disability (2.3% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 2.3%), and disability age over 75 (46.3% compared to 47.8%, a difference of 3.3%).