Navajo vs Chinese Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 54,307,526 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Chinese within Navajo communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.296. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Navajo within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.044% in Chinese. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Navajo corresponds to an increase of 44.2 Chinese.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Navajo and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($69,759 compared to $116,156, a difference of 66.5%), median household income ($59,159 compared to $98,496, a difference of 66.5%), and median family income ($70,989 compared to $116,188, a difference of 63.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (22.4% compared to 25.9%, a difference of 15.8%), median female earnings ($33,046 compared to $41,461, a difference of 25.5%), and median earnings ($36,999 compared to $48,836, a difference of 32.0%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Navajo and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in married-couple family poverty (11.9% compared to 3.6%, a difference of 225.0%), family poverty (18.8% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 189.1%), and male poverty (22.3% compared to 8.7%, a difference of 156.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single mother poverty (40.2% compared to 24.6%, a difference of 63.3%), female poverty among 18-24 year olds (30.3% compared to 16.2%, a difference of 87.6%), and single father poverty (29.2% compared to 15.4%, a difference of 89.7%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Navajo and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 35 to 44 years (9.3% compared to 4.3%, a difference of 117.3%), unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (10.6% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 106.6%), and unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (12.2% compared to 6.1%, a difference of 100.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (6.7% compared to 4.4%, a difference of 52.6%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (14.2% compared to 9.3%, a difference of 52.9%), and unemployment among seniors over 75 years (9.1% compared to 5.9%, a difference of 53.4%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Navajo and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (32.1% compared to 38.6%, a difference of 20.3%), in labor force | age 20-24 (64.8% compared to 77.3%, a difference of 19.2%), and in labor force | age 20-64 (69.2% compared to 80.7%, a difference of 16.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 25-29 (74.6% compared to 84.3%, a difference of 13.0%), in labor force | age > 16 (56.6% compared to 64.7%, a difference of 14.3%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (73.8% compared to 85.1%, a difference of 15.2%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Navajo and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (8.8% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 71.3%), births to unmarried women (51.5% compared to 30.2%, a difference of 70.3%), and single father households (3.2% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 61.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (66.4% compared to 68.1%, a difference of 2.7%), family households with children (26.9% compared to 26.0%, a difference of 3.6%), and divorced or separated (12.0% compared to 11.2%, a difference of 7.2%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Navajo and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (9.4% compared to 8.2%, a difference of 14.6%), 2 or more vehicles in household (55.3% compared to 60.1%, a difference of 8.6%), and 4 or more vehicles in household (8.2% compared to 8.8%, a difference of 7.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (90.8% compared to 91.9%, a difference of 1.2%), 3 or more vehicles in household (22.3% compared to 23.9%, a difference of 7.0%), and 4 or more vehicles in household (8.2% compared to 8.8%, a difference of 7.6%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Navajo and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in bachelor's degree (23.6% compared to 38.5%, a difference of 62.9%), professional degree (2.9% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 55.3%), and master's degree (9.4% compared to 14.6%, a difference of 54.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1st grade (97.9% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.58%), kindergarten (98.0% compared to 98.5%, a difference of 0.59%), and nursery school (98.0% compared to 98.6%, a difference of 0.60%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Navajo and Chinese communities in the United States are seen in vision disability (3.1% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 53.7%), disability age 65 to 74 (33.3% compared to 21.7%, a difference of 53.6%), and disability age 35 to 64 (15.5% compared to 10.3%, a difference of 50.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of self-care disability (2.9% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 11.4%), female disability (14.2% compared to 12.3%, a difference of 14.8%), and ambulatory disability (7.5% compared to 6.5%, a difference of 15.7%).