Immigrants from South America vs Immigrants from China Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 429,019,132 people shows a poor negative correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from China within Immigrant from South America communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.162. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Immigrants from South America within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.013% in Immigrants from China. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Immigrants from South America corresponds to a decrease of 13.1 Immigrants from China.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Immigrants from South America and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($94,042 compared to $119,756, a difference of 27.3%), median family income ($100,414 compared to $125,540, a difference of 25.0%), and median male earnings ($53,962 compared to $67,353, a difference of 24.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of householder income under 25 years ($54,268 compared to $57,931, a difference of 6.8%), wage/income gap (24.6% compared to 26.7%, a difference of 8.4%), and householder income over 65 years ($59,151 compared to $69,174, a difference of 16.9%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Immigrants from South America and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in receiving food stamps (12.8% compared to 9.6%, a difference of 34.3%), child poverty under the age of 5 (17.1% compared to 13.6%, a difference of 25.3%), and child poverty under the age of 16 (16.4% compared to 13.3%, a difference of 23.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single male poverty (12.1% compared to 11.4%, a difference of 6.1%), male poverty (11.3% compared to 10.7%, a difference of 6.3%), and single father poverty (15.9% compared to 14.9%, a difference of 6.7%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Immigrants from South America and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (9.4% compared to 7.7%, a difference of 22.1%), unemployment among women with children under 6 years (7.6% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 21.5%), and unemployment among women with children under 18 years (5.8% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 17.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (5.0% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 0.25%), unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (4.9% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 1.9%), and unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (10.6% compared to 10.4%, a difference of 2.0%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Immigrants from South America and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (33.3% compared to 31.1%, a difference of 6.9%), in labor force | age 20-24 (73.3% compared to 71.1%, a difference of 3.2%), and in labor force | age > 16 (66.0% compared to 65.4%, a difference of 0.92%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 25-29 (84.6% compared to 84.6%, a difference of 0.020%), in labor force | age 35-44 (84.7% compared to 84.7%, a difference of 0.030%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (83.2% compared to 83.2%, a difference of 0.080%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Immigrants from South America and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (6.7% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 31.7%), births to unmarried women (32.0% compared to 24.7%, a difference of 29.5%), and single father households (2.3% compared to 1.8%, a difference of 23.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of average family size (3.27 compared to 3.23, a difference of 1.3%), family households (65.6% compared to 64.7%, a difference of 1.4%), and family households with children (28.0% compared to 27.4%, a difference of 2.1%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from South America and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (11.3% compared to 15.2%, a difference of 34.5%), 4 or more vehicles in household (5.2% compared to 6.0%, a difference of 16.0%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (16.7% compared to 18.2%, a difference of 9.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 2 or more vehicles in household (50.2% compared to 51.5%, a difference of 2.6%), 1 or more vehicles in household (88.8% compared to 84.9%, a difference of 4.5%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (16.7% compared to 18.2%, a difference of 9.0%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Immigrants from South America and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in doctorate degree (1.8% compared to 3.1%, a difference of 75.6%), professional degree (4.6% compared to 6.7%, a difference of 45.2%), and master's degree (15.5% compared to 21.2%, a difference of 36.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 4th grade (97.0% compared to 97.0%, a difference of 0.030%), 5th grade (96.7% compared to 96.8%, a difference of 0.050%), and 3rd grade (97.3% compared to 97.2%, a difference of 0.070%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Immigrants from South America and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.2% compared to 0.96%, a difference of 26.7%), disability age 5 to 17 (5.4% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 18.4%), and vision disability (2.1% compared to 1.8%, a difference of 16.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (46.7% compared to 46.3%, a difference of 0.84%), cognitive disability (16.7% compared to 16.9%, a difference of 1.1%), and hearing disability (2.7% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 1.1%).