Chinese vs Ethiopian Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 52,000,015 people shows a poor positive correlation between the proportion of Ethiopians within Chinese communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.123. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chinese within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.078% in Ethiopians. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chinese corresponds to an increase of 78.4 Ethiopians.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chinese and Ethiopian communities in the United States are seen in householder income over 65 years ($77,465 compared to $64,989, a difference of 19.2%), wage/income gap (25.9% compared to 21.8%, a difference of 18.6%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($116,156 compared to $103,736, a difference of 12.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of per capita income ($46,098 compared to $46,569, a difference of 1.0%), median male earnings ($56,872 compared to $56,243, a difference of 1.1%), and median earnings ($48,836 compared to $49,572, a difference of 1.5%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chinese and Ethiopian communities in the United States are seen in married-couple family poverty (3.6% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 40.0%), child poverty among boys under 16 (11.9% compared to 16.5%, a difference of 38.8%), and child poverty under the age of 16 (11.9% compared to 16.3%, a difference of 36.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single male poverty (11.0% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 1.7%), receiving food stamps (9.8% compared to 10.6%, a difference of 8.7%), and single mother poverty (24.6% compared to 27.7%, a difference of 12.6%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chinese and Ethiopian communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (5.9% compared to 8.6%, a difference of 45.8%), unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.0% compared to 4.7%, a difference of 17.6%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.2% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 15.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among women with children under 6 years (6.8% compared to 6.8%, a difference of 0.19%), unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.1% compared to 6.1%, a difference of 0.61%), and unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.4% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 1.7%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chinese and Ethiopian communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age > 16 (64.7% compared to 69.3%, a difference of 7.2%), in labor force | age 25-29 (84.3% compared to 86.2%, a difference of 2.2%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (85.0% compared to 86.6%, a difference of 1.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 20-24 (77.3% compared to 77.3%, a difference of 0.060%), in labor force | age 45-54 (84.1% compared to 84.8%, a difference of 0.73%), and in labor force | age 16-19 (38.6% compared to 38.2%, a difference of 0.95%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chinese and Ethiopian communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (5.2% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 25.7%), single father households (2.0% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 22.1%), and married-couple households (50.4% compared to 43.2%, a difference of 16.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of births to unmarried women (30.2% compared to 29.8%, a difference of 1.3%), average family size (3.34 compared to 3.24, a difference of 3.2%), and family households with children (26.0% compared to 27.6%, a difference of 6.2%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chinese and Ethiopian communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (8.8% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 53.1%), 3 or more vehicles in household (23.9% compared to 17.9%, a difference of 33.4%), and no vehicles in household (8.2% compared to 10.5%, a difference of 27.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (91.9% compared to 89.6%, a difference of 2.5%), 2 or more vehicles in household (60.1% compared to 53.1%, a difference of 13.1%), and no vehicles in household (8.2% compared to 10.5%, a difference of 27.3%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chinese and Ethiopian communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.5% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 64.7%), doctorate degree (1.8% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 33.2%), and master's degree (14.6% compared to 18.0%, a difference of 23.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of college, under 1 year (68.3% compared to 68.3%, a difference of 0.030%), nursery school (98.6% compared to 97.6%, a difference of 0.96%), and kindergarten (98.5% compared to 97.6%, a difference of 0.97%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chinese and Ethiopian communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (3.7% compared to 2.7%, a difference of 37.7%), ambulatory disability (6.5% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 21.0%), and male disability (12.1% compared to 10.2%, a difference of 18.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age under 5 (1.1% compared to 1.1%, a difference of 0.030%), disability age 18 to 34 (6.3% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 1.3%), and disability age 35 to 64 (10.3% compared to 10.5%, a difference of 1.5%).