Pennsylvania German vs Immigrants from Congo Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 67,088,368 people shows a substantial positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Congo within Pennsylvania German communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.519. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Pennsylvania Germans within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.067% in Immigrants from Congo. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Pennsylvania Germans corresponds to an increase of 66.6 Immigrants from Congo.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Pennsylvania German and Immigrants from Congo communities in the United States are seen in wage/income gap (30.7% compared to 21.7%, a difference of 41.6%), householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($85,836 compared to $72,178, a difference of 18.9%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($91,956 compared to $77,850, a difference of 18.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of median female earnings ($34,802 compared to $34,317, a difference of 1.4%), householder income over 65 years ($52,888 compared to $51,393, a difference of 2.9%), and per capita income ($37,842 compared to $35,720, a difference of 5.9%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Pennsylvania German and Immigrants from Congo communities in the United States are seen in family poverty (8.8% compared to 11.9%, a difference of 35.0%), poverty (12.2% compared to 16.1%, a difference of 32.4%), and female poverty (13.2% compared to 17.4%, a difference of 31.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single mother poverty (33.2% compared to 33.8%, a difference of 1.6%), seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.8% compared to 12.5%, a difference of 5.8%), and single female poverty (23.6% compared to 25.3%, a difference of 7.3%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Pennsylvania German and Immigrants from Congo communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (10.2% compared to 6.7%, a difference of 51.1%), unemployment among women with children under 6 years (10.8% compared to 8.5%, a difference of 27.2%), and unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (6.3% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 24.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (16.2% compared to 16.3%, a difference of 0.27%), unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.7% compared to 4.7%, a difference of 1.4%), and unemployment among youth under 25 years (10.6% compared to 10.9%, a difference of 2.2%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Pennsylvania German and Immigrants from Congo communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (46.4% compared to 41.7%, a difference of 11.4%), in labor force | age > 16 (63.4% compared to 67.1%, a difference of 5.9%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (82.6% compared to 84.6%, a difference of 2.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 45-54 (81.6% compared to 81.6%, a difference of 0.090%), in labor force | age 25-29 (83.6% compared to 84.2%, a difference of 0.73%), and in labor force | age 20-24 (78.0% compared to 77.4%, a difference of 0.74%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Pennsylvania German and Immigrants from Congo communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (5.8% compared to 8.1%, a difference of 39.6%), married-couple households (50.4% compared to 39.0%, a difference of 29.0%), and currently married (49.6% compared to 41.1%, a difference of 20.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households with children (27.4% compared to 27.3%, a difference of 0.22%), average family size (3.19 compared to 3.23, a difference of 1.1%), and single father households (2.4% compared to 2.5%, a difference of 3.3%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Pennsylvania German and Immigrants from Congo communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (7.6% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 45.1%), 3 or more vehicles in household (22.3% compared to 17.0%, a difference of 31.6%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (58.5% compared to 52.1%, a difference of 12.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (89.3% compared to 90.0%, a difference of 0.83%), no vehicles in household (11.0% compared to 10.1%, a difference of 9.4%), and 2 or more vehicles in household (58.5% compared to 52.1%, a difference of 12.3%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Pennsylvania German and Immigrants from Congo communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.5% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 61.1%), professional degree (3.0% compared to 3.6%, a difference of 22.6%), and bachelor's degree (28.4% compared to 33.6%, a difference of 18.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of high school diploma (87.0% compared to 87.0%, a difference of 0.050%), ged/equivalency (82.9% compared to 83.1%, a difference of 0.27%), and 12th grade, no diploma (88.7% compared to 89.0%, a difference of 0.43%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Pennsylvania German and Immigrants from Congo communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.9% compared to 1.1%, a difference of 82.4%), hearing disability (3.7% compared to 2.9%, a difference of 28.7%), and cognitive disability (16.6% compared to 19.7%, a difference of 18.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (47.2% compared to 48.7%, a difference of 3.3%), disability age 35 to 64 (12.8% compared to 13.3%, a difference of 3.6%), and vision disability (2.2% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 3.8%).