Immigrants from China vs Immigrants from Middle Africa Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 193,475,236 people shows a moderate negative correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Middle Africa within Immigrant from China communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.468. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from China within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.004% in Immigrants from Middle Africa. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from China corresponds to a decrease of 4.4 Immigrants from Middle Africa.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Middle Africa communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($119,756 compared to $82,254, a difference of 45.6%), per capita income ($54,264 compared to $39,529, a difference of 37.3%), and median male earnings ($67,353 compared to $49,201, a difference of 36.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income over 65 years ($69,174 compared to $58,375, a difference of 18.5%), wage/income gap (26.7% compared to 22.4%, a difference of 19.3%), and householder income under 25 years ($57,931 compared to $47,916, a difference of 20.9%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Middle Africa communities in the United States are seen in child poverty under the age of 5 (13.6% compared to 19.7%, a difference of 45.1%), child poverty among girls under 16 (13.4% compared to 19.2%, a difference of 43.4%), and child poverty under the age of 16 (13.3% compared to 19.0%, a difference of 43.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 65 (11.5% compared to 11.1%, a difference of 3.8%), single father poverty (14.9% compared to 15.6%, a difference of 4.7%), and married-couple family poverty (5.0% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 8.8%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Middle Africa communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (6.2% compared to 8.1%, a difference of 29.7%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (7.7% compared to 9.1%, a difference of 18.8%), and unemployment among women with children under 18 years (4.9% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 17.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (10.4% compared to 10.4%, a difference of 0.55%), unemployment among ages 45 to 54 years (4.5% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 2.1%), and unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (17.5% compared to 17.1%, a difference of 2.1%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Middle Africa communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (31.1% compared to 39.9%, a difference of 28.2%), in labor force | age 20-24 (71.1% compared to 76.6%, a difference of 7.8%), and in labor force | age > 16 (65.4% compared to 67.7%, a difference of 3.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 45-54 (83.2% compared to 83.3%, a difference of 0.11%), in labor force | age 35-44 (84.7% compared to 84.9%, a difference of 0.21%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (85.4% compared to 85.2%, a difference of 0.24%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Middle Africa communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (5.1% compared to 7.7%, a difference of 52.6%), births to unmarried women (24.7% compared to 34.9%, a difference of 41.6%), and single father households (1.8% compared to 2.5%, a difference of 34.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.23 compared to 3.25, a difference of 0.70%), family households with children (27.4% compared to 28.0%, a difference of 1.9%), and family households (64.7% compared to 61.9%, a difference of 4.5%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Middle Africa communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (15.2% compared to 10.2%, a difference of 48.9%), 1 or more vehicles in household (84.9% compared to 89.9%, a difference of 5.8%), and 4 or more vehicles in household (6.0% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 4.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 3 or more vehicles in household (18.2% compared to 18.2%, a difference of 0.13%), 2 or more vehicles in household (51.5% compared to 53.4%, a difference of 3.8%), and 4 or more vehicles in household (6.0% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 4.2%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Middle Africa communities in the United States are seen in doctorate degree (3.1% compared to 1.9%, a difference of 63.2%), professional degree (6.7% compared to 4.2%, a difference of 60.0%), and master's degree (21.2% compared to 14.6%, a difference of 45.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 9th grade (94.3% compared to 94.2%, a difference of 0.050%), 5th grade (96.8% compared to 96.8%, a difference of 0.060%), and 6th grade (96.4% compared to 96.5%, a difference of 0.070%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Middle Africa communities in the United States are seen in disability age 35 to 64 (8.7% compared to 12.0%, a difference of 37.5%), disability age 5 to 17 (4.5% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 31.2%), and disability age 18 to 34 (5.4% compared to 6.9%, a difference of 27.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of self-care disability (2.3% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 0.080%), disability age over 75 (46.3% compared to 47.1%, a difference of 1.8%), and hearing disability (2.6% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 5.3%).