Immigrants from Latin America vs Immigrants from China Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 442,101,308 people shows a significant negative correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from China within Immigrant from Latin America communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.689. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from Latin America within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.018% in Immigrants from China. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from Latin America corresponds to a decrease of 17.6 Immigrants from China.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latin America and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in per capita income ($36,823 compared to $54,264, a difference of 47.4%), householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($82,166 compared to $119,756, a difference of 45.8%), and median family income ($86,989 compared to $125,540, a difference of 44.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (23.7% compared to 26.7%, a difference of 12.4%), householder income under 25 years ($51,387 compared to $57,931, a difference of 12.7%), and householder income over 65 years ($53,265 compared to $69,174, a difference of 29.9%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latin America and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in receiving food stamps (15.7% compared to 9.6%, a difference of 63.9%), child poverty under the age of 5 (21.2% compared to 13.6%, a difference of 56.1%), and child poverty under the age of 16 (20.5% compared to 13.3%, a difference of 54.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of female poverty among 18-24 year olds (19.7% compared to 20.2%, a difference of 2.2%), single father poverty (16.4% compared to 14.9%, a difference of 9.7%), and seniors poverty over the age of 75 (15.6% compared to 13.2%, a difference of 18.2%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latin America and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (8.6% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 37.8%), unemployment among women with children under 18 years (6.4% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 30.2%), and unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (9.6% compared to 7.7%, a difference of 25.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (5.3% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 4.9%), unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (5.2% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 5.2%), and unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (11.0% compared to 10.4%, a difference of 5.6%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latin America and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (33.9% compared to 31.1%, a difference of 8.8%), in labor force | age 20-24 (74.1% compared to 71.1%, a difference of 4.2%), and in labor force | age 30-34 (83.1% compared to 85.4%, a difference of 2.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age > 16 (64.8% compared to 65.4%, a difference of 0.86%), in labor force | age 20-64 (78.3% compared to 79.7%, a difference of 1.8%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (82.9% compared to 84.6%, a difference of 2.1%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latin America and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (7.9% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 56.3%), single father households (2.8% compared to 1.8%, a difference of 51.2%), and births to unmarried women (37.1% compared to 24.7%, a difference of 50.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (67.2% compared to 64.7%, a difference of 3.9%), average family size (3.42 compared to 3.23, a difference of 6.1%), and family households with children (29.7% compared to 27.4%, a difference of 8.1%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latin America and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (10.4% compared to 15.2%, a difference of 46.3%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.1% compared to 6.0%, a difference of 18.4%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (20.5% compared to 18.2%, a difference of 12.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 2 or more vehicles in household (54.3% compared to 51.5%, a difference of 5.5%), 1 or more vehicles in household (89.8% compared to 84.9%, a difference of 5.8%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (20.5% compared to 18.2%, a difference of 12.8%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latin America and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in doctorate degree (1.3% compared to 3.1%, a difference of 136.8%), professional degree (3.3% compared to 6.7%, a difference of 104.0%), and master's degree (11.3% compared to 21.2%, a difference of 87.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (96.7% compared to 97.5%, a difference of 0.76%), kindergarten (96.7% compared to 97.4%, a difference of 0.77%), and 1st grade (96.7% compared to 97.4%, a difference of 0.78%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from Latin America and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in vision disability (2.4% compared to 1.8%, a difference of 32.5%), disability age 35 to 64 (11.5% compared to 8.7%, a difference of 32.1%), and disability age under 5 (1.2% compared to 0.96%, a difference of 26.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of cognitive disability (17.6% compared to 16.9%, a difference of 3.7%), disability age over 75 (49.5% compared to 46.3%, a difference of 7.0%), and hearing disability (2.8% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 8.1%).