Immigrants from China vs Immigrants from Poland Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 287,550,307 people shows a mild negative correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Poland within Immigrant from China communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.311. 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 Poland. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from China corresponds to a decrease of 4.3 Immigrants from Poland.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Poland communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($119,756 compared to $101,065, a difference of 18.5%), per capita income ($54,264 compared to $45,979, a difference of 18.0%), and median household income ($105,335 compared to $90,549, a difference of 16.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (26.7% compared to 26.7%, a difference of 0.24%), householder income under 25 years ($57,931 compared to $55,474, a difference of 4.4%), and median female earnings ($46,972 compared to $41,630, a difference of 12.8%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Poland communities in the United States are seen in female poverty among 18-24 year olds (20.2% compared to 17.1%, a difference of 17.9%), seniors poverty over the age of 75 (13.2% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 14.5%), and seniors poverty over the age of 65 (11.5% compared to 10.1%, a difference of 14.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family poverty (7.8% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 0.66%), single male poverty (11.4% compared to 11.5%, a difference of 1.5%), and single female poverty (18.1% compared to 18.5%, a difference of 2.1%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Poland communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (6.2% compared to 7.8%, a difference of 24.8%), unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.8% compared to 9.2%, a difference of 18.4%), and unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (7.7% compared to 8.8%, a difference of 14.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 45 to 54 years (4.5% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 0.010%), unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.2% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 0.36%), and unemployment among youth under 25 years (11.6% compared to 11.7%, a difference of 0.80%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Poland communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (31.1% compared to 37.3%, a difference of 19.9%), in labor force | age 20-24 (71.1% compared to 76.1%, a difference of 7.1%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (79.7% compared to 80.6%, a difference of 1.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 30-34 (85.4% compared to 85.5%, a difference of 0.13%), in labor force | age 45-54 (83.2% compared to 83.6%, a difference of 0.50%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (84.7% compared to 85.2%, a difference of 0.62%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Poland communities in the United States are seen in births to unmarried women (24.7% compared to 28.9%, a difference of 17.1%), single mother households (5.1% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 13.6%), and divorced or separated (10.0% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 11.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of currently married (47.9% compared to 48.1%, a difference of 0.50%), married-couple households (48.4% compared to 48.1%, a difference of 0.70%), and average family size (3.23 compared to 3.20, a difference of 0.74%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Poland communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (15.2% compared to 10.6%, a difference of 43.3%), 2 or more vehicles in household (51.5% compared to 54.6%, a difference of 6.0%), and 1 or more vehicles in household (84.9% compared to 89.5%, a difference of 5.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 3 or more vehicles in household (18.2% compared to 18.6%, a difference of 2.0%), 4 or more vehicles in household (6.0% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 3.9%), and 1 or more vehicles in household (84.9% compared to 89.5%, a difference of 5.4%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Poland communities in the United States are seen in doctorate degree (3.1% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 85.0%), professional degree (6.7% compared to 4.3%, a difference of 57.8%), and master's degree (21.2% compared to 15.4%, a difference of 37.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of high school diploma (89.3% compared to 89.5%, a difference of 0.19%), 12th grade, no diploma (91.3% compared to 91.6%, a difference of 0.34%), and nursery school (97.5% compared to 98.0%, a difference of 0.49%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from China and Immigrants from Poland communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (0.96% compared to 1.3%, a difference of 32.4%), disability age 35 to 64 (8.7% compared to 10.0%, a difference of 14.9%), and disability age 5 to 17 (4.5% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 13.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of self-care disability (2.3% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 1.7%), disability age over 75 (46.3% compared to 45.4%, a difference of 2.0%), and cognitive disability (16.9% compared to 16.1%, a difference of 4.8%).