Immigrants from England vs Immigrants from Hong Kong Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 226,386,445 people shows a moderate positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Hong Kong within Immigrant from England communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.419. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from England within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.305% in Immigrants from Hong Kong. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from England corresponds to an increase of 305.0 Immigrants from Hong Kong.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from England and Immigrants from Hong Kong communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($102,020 compared to $128,140, a difference of 25.6%), median household income ($92,098 compared to $111,519, a difference of 21.1%), and median female earnings ($41,277 compared to $49,818, a difference of 20.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income over 65 years ($65,715 compared to $71,567, a difference of 8.9%), wage/income gap (27.9% compared to 25.5%, a difference of 9.3%), and per capita income ($48,844 compared to $56,709, a difference of 16.1%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from England and Immigrants from Hong Kong communities in the United States are seen in child poverty under the age of 5 (16.2% compared to 12.4%, a difference of 30.1%), female poverty among 25-34 year olds (13.0% compared to 10.4%, a difference of 25.6%), and single male poverty (13.0% compared to 10.4%, a difference of 24.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of married-couple family poverty (4.5% compared to 4.7%, a difference of 5.5%), male poverty (10.4% compared to 9.6%, a difference of 8.3%), and poverty (11.4% compared to 10.4%, a difference of 9.1%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from England and Immigrants from Hong Kong communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (7.7% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 32.6%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.9% compared to 7.2%, a difference of 24.3%), and unemployment among seniors over 75 years (9.3% compared to 7.6%, a difference of 21.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (5.3% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 0.030%), unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (17.3% compared to 17.4%, a difference of 0.61%), and unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.1% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 0.67%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from England and Immigrants from Hong Kong communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (38.1% compared to 30.5%, a difference of 25.0%), in labor force | age 20-24 (75.5% compared to 71.6%, a difference of 5.5%), and in labor force | age > 16 (64.2% compared to 65.7%, a difference of 2.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 25-29 (84.7% compared to 85.0%, a difference of 0.35%), in labor force | age 35-44 (84.2% compared to 85.2%, a difference of 1.2%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (82.6% compared to 83.6%, a difference of 1.2%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from England and Immigrants from Hong Kong communities in the United States are seen in births to unmarried women (31.1% compared to 23.6%, a difference of 31.8%), divorced or separated (12.1% compared to 10.0%, a difference of 21.8%), and single mother households (5.8% compared to 4.8%, a difference of 19.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of currently married (48.3% compared to 48.9%, a difference of 1.2%), family households with children (26.9% compared to 27.5%, a difference of 2.2%), and family households (64.4% compared to 66.1%, a difference of 2.7%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from England and Immigrants from Hong Kong communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (8.7% compared to 11.3%, a difference of 30.2%), 2 or more vehicles in household (58.1% compared to 52.6%, a difference of 10.5%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (20.7% compared to 19.2%, a difference of 8.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (91.4% compared to 88.7%, a difference of 3.0%), 4 or more vehicles in household (6.7% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 3.7%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (20.7% compared to 19.2%, a difference of 8.0%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from England and Immigrants from Hong Kong communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.7% compared to 2.7%, a difference of 57.5%), doctorate degree (2.2% compared to 2.8%, a difference of 25.8%), and professional degree (5.3% compared to 6.4%, a difference of 20.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of ged/equivalency (87.6% compared to 86.9%, a difference of 0.73%), nursery school (98.3% compared to 97.4%, a difference of 1.0%), and kindergarten (98.3% compared to 97.3%, a difference of 1.0%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from England 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 44.5%), disability age 35 to 64 (11.0% compared to 8.2%, a difference of 34.1%), and disability age 18 to 34 (6.9% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 32.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (46.0% compared to 46.5%, a difference of 1.1%), self-care disability (2.4% compared to 2.4%, a difference of 1.9%), and cognitive disability (16.6% compared to 16.0%, a difference of 3.5%).