Chinese vs Creek Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 50,398,820 people shows a weak negative correlation between the proportion of Creek within Chinese communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.221. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chinese within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.038% in Creek. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chinese corresponds to a decrease of 38.3 Creek.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chinese and Creek communities in the United States are seen in householder income over 65 years ($77,465 compared to $51,949, a difference of 49.1%), householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($116,156 compared to $78,960, a difference of 47.1%), and median household income ($98,496 compared to $67,715, a difference of 45.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (25.9% compared to 27.1%, a difference of 4.7%), median male earnings ($56,872 compared to $46,594, a difference of 22.1%), and median earnings ($48,836 compared to $39,648, a difference of 23.2%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chinese and Creek communities in the United States are seen in child poverty under the age of 5 (13.1% compared to 24.2%, a difference of 85.4%), child poverty among boys under 16 (11.9% compared to 21.5%, a difference of 81.5%), and child poverty under the age of 16 (11.9% compared to 21.5%, a difference of 80.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 75 (9.1% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 27.5%), single father poverty (15.4% compared to 19.8%, a difference of 28.8%), and seniors poverty over the age of 65 (8.3% compared to 10.9%, a difference of 31.2%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chinese and Creek communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (5.9% compared to 7.8%, a difference of 32.0%), unemployment among women with children under 6 years (6.8% compared to 8.9%, a difference of 31.1%), and unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (5.1% compared to 6.6%, a difference of 28.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (9.3% compared to 9.4%, a difference of 1.6%), unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (9.4% compared to 9.7%, a difference of 3.9%), and unemployment among youth under 25 years (10.7% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 4.4%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chinese and Creek communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 45-54 (84.1% compared to 77.7%, a difference of 8.3%), in labor force | age 20-64 (80.7% compared to 75.1%, a difference of 7.4%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (85.1% compared to 80.0%, a difference of 6.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 16-19 (38.6% compared to 39.1%, a difference of 1.4%), in labor force | age 20-24 (77.3% compared to 74.5%, a difference of 3.7%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (84.3% compared to 80.7%, a difference of 4.5%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chinese and Creek communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (5.2% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 36.1%), single father households (2.0% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 32.0%), and divorced or separated (11.2% compared to 14.4%, a difference of 28.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.34 compared to 3.20, a difference of 4.4%), family households with children (26.0% compared to 27.4%, a difference of 5.3%), and family households (68.1% compared to 64.2%, a difference of 6.2%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chinese and Creek communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (8.8% compared to 7.2%, a difference of 23.0%), 3 or more vehicles in household (23.9% compared to 21.9%, a difference of 8.9%), and no vehicles in household (8.2% compared to 7.8%, a difference of 5.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (91.9% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 0.48%), 2 or more vehicles in household (60.1% compared to 58.3%, a difference of 3.1%), and no vehicles in household (8.2% compared to 7.8%, a difference of 5.7%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chinese and Creek communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (4.5% compared to 3.1%, a difference of 44.1%), master's degree (14.6% compared to 10.5%, a difference of 38.6%), and bachelor's degree (38.5% compared to 28.9%, a difference of 33.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1st grade (98.5% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.14%), nursery school (98.6% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.15%), and kindergarten (98.5% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.15%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chinese and Creek communities in the United States are seen in disability age 35 to 64 (10.3% compared to 16.9%, a difference of 64.0%), vision disability (2.0% compared to 3.2%, a difference of 56.7%), and disability age 5 to 17 (4.7% compared to 6.9%, a difference of 46.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (48.7% compared to 51.5%, a difference of 5.6%), self-care disability (2.6% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 10.3%), and cognitive disability (15.9% compared to 18.3%, a difference of 14.7%).