Immigrants from Greece vs Immigrants from China Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 209,487,980 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from China within Immigrant from Greece communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.226. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Greece within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.543% in Immigrants from China. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Greece corresponds to an increase of 542.5 Immigrants from China.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Greece and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in median household income ($96,675 compared to $105,335, a difference of 9.0%), householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($110,103 compared to $119,756, a difference of 8.8%), and householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($113,548 compared to $122,178, a difference of 7.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($55,727 compared to $57,931, a difference of 4.0%), wage/income gap (25.7% compared to 26.7%, a difference of 4.0%), and median female earnings ($44,976 compared to $46,972, a difference of 4.4%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Greece and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in female poverty among 18-24 year olds (17.9% compared to 20.2%, a difference of 12.7%), single father poverty (16.7% compared to 14.9%, a difference of 12.0%), and married-couple family poverty (4.5% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 9.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single female poverty (18.3% compared to 18.1%, a difference of 0.68%), family poverty (7.7% compared to 7.8%, a difference of 1.3%), and single mother poverty (26.7% compared to 26.1%, a difference of 2.5%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Greece and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.9% compared to 7.7%, a difference of 15.4%), unemployment among women with children under 6 years (7.1% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 13.7%), and unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.7% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 8.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female unemployment (5.2% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 0.080%), unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (5.0% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 1.5%), and unemployment among ages 45 to 54 years (4.6% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 1.8%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Greece and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (34.9% compared to 31.1%, a difference of 12.0%), in labor force | age 20-24 (74.2% compared to 71.1%, a difference of 4.4%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (85.7% compared to 84.6%, a difference of 1.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 30-34 (85.7% compared to 85.4%, a difference of 0.43%), in labor force | age 45-54 (83.6% compared to 83.2%, a difference of 0.46%), and in labor force | age > 16 (65.0% compared to 65.4%, a difference of 0.58%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Greece and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in births to unmarried women (27.8% compared to 24.7%, a difference of 12.6%), divorced or separated (11.1% compared to 10.0%, a difference of 10.7%), and single mother households (5.4% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 6.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of currently married (47.7% compared to 47.9%, a difference of 0.26%), single father households (1.9% compared to 1.8%, a difference of 1.1%), and family households (63.5% compared to 64.7%, a difference of 1.8%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Greece and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in 4 or more vehicles in household (5.1% compared to 6.0%, a difference of 19.4%), 3 or more vehicles in household (16.5% compared to 18.2%, a difference of 10.5%), and no vehicles in household (14.7% compared to 15.2%, a difference of 3.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (85.4% compared to 84.9%, a difference of 0.51%), 2 or more vehicles in household (50.2% compared to 51.5%, a difference of 2.5%), and no vehicles in household (14.7% compared to 15.2%, a difference of 3.1%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Greece and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in doctorate degree (2.3% compared to 3.1%, a difference of 34.4%), no schooling completed (2.0% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 29.6%), and professional degree (5.8% compared to 6.7%, a difference of 15.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of ged/equivalency (87.4% compared to 86.9%, a difference of 0.57%), nursery school (98.1% compared to 97.5%, a difference of 0.60%), and kindergarten (98.0% compared to 97.4%, a difference of 0.60%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Greece and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.3% compared to 0.96%, a difference of 33.0%), disability age 5 to 17 (5.2% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 14.4%), and hearing disability (3.0% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 13.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (45.2% compared to 46.3%, a difference of 2.5%), disability age 65 to 74 (21.0% compared to 20.3%, a difference of 3.7%), and cognitive disability (16.3% compared to 16.9%, a difference of 4.0%).