Costa Rican vs Immigrants from Hong Kong Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 173,278,730 people shows a slight positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Hong Kong within Costa Rican communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.079. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Costa Ricans within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.006% in Immigrants from Hong Kong. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Costa Ricans corresponds to an increase of 5.5 Immigrants from Hong Kong.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Costa Rican and Immigrants from Hong Kong communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($95,565 compared to $128,140, a difference of 34.1%), median male earnings ($54,279 compared to $70,146, a difference of 29.2%), and per capita income ($44,090 compared to $56,709, a difference of 28.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (25.3% compared to 25.5%, a difference of 0.94%), householder income over 65 years ($61,638 compared to $71,567, a difference of 16.1%), and householder income under 25 years ($53,106 compared to $62,083, a difference of 16.9%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Costa Rican and Immigrants from Hong Kong communities in the United States are seen in child poverty under the age of 5 (16.9% compared to 12.4%, a difference of 35.6%), child poverty under the age of 16 (16.0% compared to 12.1%, a difference of 31.7%), and child poverty among girls under 16 (16.2% compared to 12.3%, a difference of 31.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 75 (12.8% compared to 12.8%, a difference of 0.61%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (11.3% compared to 11.1%, a difference of 2.2%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (18.8% compared to 17.5%, a difference of 7.7%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Costa Rican and Immigrants from Hong Kong communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (7.8% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 35.5%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.8% compared to 7.2%, a difference of 23.1%), and unemployment among seniors over 75 years (9.1% compared to 7.6%, a difference of 18.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (17.4% compared to 17.4%, a difference of 0.18%), unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (10.5% compared to 10.5%, a difference of 0.63%), and unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (5.0% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 1.1%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Costa Rican and Immigrants from Hong Kong communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (36.3% compared to 30.5%, a difference of 19.1%), in labor force | age 20-24 (75.2% compared to 71.6%, a difference of 5.0%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (84.6% compared to 85.8%, a difference of 1.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 25-29 (85.0% compared to 85.0%, a difference of 0.020%), in labor force | age > 16 (65.6% compared to 65.7%, a difference of 0.17%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (79.7% compared to 80.4%, a difference of 0.88%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Costa Rican and Immigrants from Hong Kong communities in the United States are seen in births to unmarried women (32.7% compared to 23.6%, a difference of 38.7%), single mother households (6.5% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 34.5%), and single father households (2.3% compared to 1.8%, a difference of 28.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.26 compared to 3.26, a difference of 0.080%), family households (65.9% compared to 66.1%, a difference of 0.32%), and family households with children (28.4% compared to 27.5%, a difference of 3.0%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Costa Rican and Immigrants from Hong Kong communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (9.5% compared to 11.3%, a difference of 18.6%), 2 or more vehicles in household (56.9% compared to 52.6%, a difference of 8.3%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (20.6% compared to 19.2%, a difference of 7.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (90.5% compared to 88.7%, a difference of 2.0%), 4 or more vehicles in household (6.8% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 5.2%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (20.6% compared to 19.2%, a difference of 7.3%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Costa Rican and Immigrants from Hong Kong communities in the United States are seen in doctorate degree (1.8% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 50.2%), professional degree (4.5% compared to 6.4%, a difference of 43.4%), and master's degree (15.0% compared to 20.5%, a difference of 36.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 10th grade (93.1% compared to 93.1%, a difference of 0.0%), 9th grade (94.3% compared to 94.1%, a difference of 0.19%), and 8th grade (95.2% compared to 94.9%, a difference of 0.34%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Costa Rican and Immigrants from Hong Kong communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.4% compared to 0.95%, a difference of 48.1%), disability age 35 to 64 (10.7% compared to 8.2%, a difference of 30.9%), and disability age 5 to 17 (5.6% compared to 4.3%, a difference of 30.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (46.9% compared to 46.5%, a difference of 0.90%), self-care disability (2.4% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 1.4%), and cognitive disability (17.0% compared to 16.0%, a difference of 6.3%).