Jordanian vs Chinese Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 48,203,676 people shows a strong positive correlation between the proportion of Chinese within Jordanian communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.798. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Jordanians within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.029% in Chinese. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Jordanians corresponds to an increase of 29.0 Chinese.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Jordanian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in householder income over 65 years ($64,313 compared to $77,465, a difference of 20.4%), householder income under 25 years ($51,796 compared to $58,162, a difference of 12.3%), and median household income ($91,794 compared to $98,496, a difference of 7.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of median female earnings ($41,464 compared to $41,461, a difference of 0.010%), per capita income ($45,605 compared to $46,098, a difference of 1.1%), and median earnings ($49,632 compared to $48,836, a difference of 1.6%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Jordanian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in married-couple family poverty (4.8% compared to 3.6%, a difference of 32.3%), seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.6% compared to 9.1%, a difference of 28.2%), and child poverty among boys under 16 (15.1% compared to 11.9%, a difference of 27.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of receiving food stamps (10.2% compared to 9.8%, a difference of 4.0%), single father poverty (16.1% compared to 15.4%, a difference of 4.6%), and single mother poverty (26.4% compared to 24.6%, a difference of 7.3%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Jordanian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (9.1% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 54.3%), unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.9% compared to 4.2%, a difference of 15.7%), and unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.6% compared to 4.0%, a difference of 15.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (16.0% compared to 16.0%, a difference of 0.050%), unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.3% compared to 4.3%, a difference of 0.26%), and male unemployment (5.0% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 0.77%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Jordanian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (36.4% compared to 38.6%, a difference of 6.1%), in labor force | age > 16 (66.3% compared to 64.7%, a difference of 2.5%), and in labor force | age 20-24 (75.5% compared to 77.3%, a difference of 2.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 30-34 (85.0% compared to 85.0%, a difference of 0.020%), in labor force | age 25-29 (84.2% compared to 84.3%, a difference of 0.13%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (80.1% compared to 80.7%, a difference of 0.68%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Jordanian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (6.0% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 15.3%), family households with children (29.0% compared to 26.0%, a difference of 11.4%), and single father households (2.2% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 11.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of divorced or separated (11.5% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 2.5%), average family size (3.24 compared to 3.34, a difference of 3.0%), and currently married (48.0% compared to 49.5%, a difference of 3.1%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Jordanian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (6.6% compared to 8.8%, a difference of 34.7%), 3 or more vehicles in household (20.1% compared to 23.9%, a difference of 18.6%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (57.6% compared to 60.1%, a difference of 4.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (91.4% compared to 91.9%, a difference of 0.47%), no vehicles in household (8.5% compared to 8.2%, a difference of 3.7%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (57.6% compared to 60.1%, a difference of 4.4%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Jordanian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (2.0% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 33.9%), doctorate degree (2.0% compared to 1.8%, a difference of 13.6%), and master's degree (16.5% compared to 14.6%, a difference of 13.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of college, 1 year or more (62.2% compared to 62.2%, a difference of 0.010%), college, under 1 year (68.0% compared to 68.3%, a difference of 0.44%), and nursery school (98.1% compared to 98.6%, a difference of 0.52%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Jordanian and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (2.8% compared to 3.7%, a difference of 29.4%), ambulatory disability (5.6% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 15.9%), and male disability (10.5% compared to 12.1%, a difference of 15.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age under 5 (1.1% compared to 1.1%, a difference of 1.5%), disability age 35 to 64 (10.1% compared to 10.3%, a difference of 1.5%), and disability age 65 to 74 (22.2% compared to 21.7%, a difference of 2.2%).