Chinese vs Zimbabwean Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 31,334,661 people shows a slight positive correlation between the proportion of Zimbabweans within Chinese communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.079. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chinese within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.053% in Zimbabweans. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chinese corresponds to an increase of 53.0 Zimbabweans.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chinese and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in householder income over 65 years ($77,465 compared to $65,854, a difference of 17.6%), householder income under 25 years ($58,162 compared to $51,259, a difference of 13.5%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($116,156 compared to $106,849, a difference of 8.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of per capita income ($46,098 compared to $45,804, a difference of 0.64%), median male earnings ($56,872 compared to $56,302, a difference of 1.0%), and median earnings ($48,836 compared to $48,229, a difference of 1.3%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chinese and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in female poverty among 18-24 year olds (16.2% compared to 20.4%, a difference of 26.4%), seniors poverty over the age of 75 (9.1% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 23.0%), and single female poverty (16.1% compared to 19.5%, a difference of 20.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single father poverty (15.4% compared to 15.6%, a difference of 1.2%), receiving food stamps (9.8% compared to 9.5%, a difference of 3.0%), and female poverty among 25-34 year olds (11.0% compared to 11.7%, a difference of 6.4%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chinese and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (5.9% compared to 8.7%, a difference of 47.6%), unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (4.4% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 33.6%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (4.2% compared to 5.6%, a difference of 32.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (4.3% compared to 4.3%, a difference of 0.62%), unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (9.4% compared to 9.2%, a difference of 1.7%), and unemployment (4.7% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 2.4%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chinese and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age > 16 (64.7% compared to 67.3%, a difference of 4.1%), in labor force | age 20-24 (77.3% compared to 75.6%, a difference of 2.2%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (85.1% compared to 86.1%, a difference of 1.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 45-54 (84.1% compared to 84.0%, a difference of 0.13%), in labor force | age 25-29 (84.3% compared to 84.5%, a difference of 0.19%), and in labor force | age 16-19 (38.6% compared to 38.7%, a difference of 0.29%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chinese and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (5.2% compared to 6.1%, a difference of 17.5%), single father households (2.0% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 12.1%), and family households with children (26.0% compared to 27.9%, a difference of 7.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of divorced or separated (11.2% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 3.5%), average family size (3.34 compared to 3.20, a difference of 4.4%), and currently married (49.5% compared to 47.0%, a difference of 5.3%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chinese and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (8.8% compared to 6.4%, a difference of 37.4%), 3 or more vehicles in household (23.9% compared to 20.3%, a difference of 17.8%), and no vehicles in household (8.2% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 9.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (91.9% compared to 91.0%, a difference of 0.93%), 2 or more vehicles in household (60.1% compared to 57.2%, a difference of 5.0%), and no vehicles in household (8.2% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 9.9%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chinese and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in doctorate degree (1.8% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 28.7%), master's degree (14.6% compared to 17.7%, a difference of 21.6%), and no schooling completed (1.5% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 17.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (98.6% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.26%), kindergarten (98.5% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.26%), and 1st grade (98.5% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.26%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chinese and Zimbabwean communities in the United States are seen in hearing disability (3.7% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 29.5%), ambulatory disability (6.5% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 20.3%), and self-care disability (2.6% compared to 2.2%, a difference of 19.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age 65 to 74 (21.7% compared to 21.5%, a difference of 0.72%), disability age over 75 (48.7% compared to 48.1%, a difference of 1.4%), and disability age 35 to 64 (10.3% compared to 10.4%, a difference of 1.5%).