Subsaharan African vs Immigrants from China Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 433,196,584 people shows a substantial negative correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from China within Subsaharan African communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.597. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Sub-Saharan Africans within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.029% in Immigrants from China. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Sub-Saharan Africans corresponds to a decrease of 29.3 Immigrants from China.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Subsaharan African and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($84,235 compared to $119,756, a difference of 42.2%), median household income ($77,631 compared to $105,335, a difference of 35.7%), and per capita income ($40,152 compared to $54,264, a difference of 35.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (22.8% compared to 26.7%, a difference of 16.9%), householder income under 25 years ($48,691 compared to $57,931, a difference of 19.0%), and householder income over 65 years ($56,615 compared to $69,174, a difference of 22.2%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Subsaharan African and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in child poverty under the age of 5 (20.8% compared to 13.6%, a difference of 52.6%), child poverty under the age of 16 (19.9% compared to 13.3%, a difference of 49.9%), and child poverty among girls under 16 (20.1% compared to 13.4%, a difference of 49.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 75 (13.2% compared to 13.2%, a difference of 0.010%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (12.1% compared to 11.5%, a difference of 5.2%), and female poverty among 18-24 year olds (22.0% compared to 20.2%, a difference of 9.1%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Subsaharan African and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among women with children under 6 years (8.4% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 35.4%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (10.0% compared to 7.7%, a difference of 30.1%), and unemployment among women with children under 18 years (6.2% compared to 4.9%, a difference of 25.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among seniors over 65 years (5.2% compared to 5.2%, a difference of 0.010%), unemployment among ages 55 to 59 years (5.0% compared to 5.0%, a difference of 0.060%), and unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (5.4% compared to 5.4%, a difference of 0.53%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Subsaharan African and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (38.4% compared to 31.1%, a difference of 23.4%), in labor force | age 20-24 (75.7% compared to 71.1%, a difference of 6.5%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (82.0% compared to 83.2%, a difference of 1.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 25-29 (84.3% compared to 84.6%, a difference of 0.34%), in labor force | age 20-64 (79.3% compared to 79.7%, a difference of 0.49%), and in labor force | age 35-44 (84.1% compared to 84.7%, a difference of 0.77%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Subsaharan African and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (7.8% compared to 5.1%, a difference of 54.2%), births to unmarried women (36.7% compared to 24.7%, a difference of 48.5%), and single father households (2.4% compared to 1.8%, a difference of 32.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households with children (27.6% compared to 27.4%, a difference of 0.41%), average family size (3.25 compared to 3.23, a difference of 0.68%), and family households (62.1% compared to 64.7%, a difference of 4.3%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Subsaharan African and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (12.2% compared to 15.2%, a difference of 24.1%), 4 or more vehicles in household (5.7% compared to 6.0%, a difference of 5.7%), and 1 or more vehicles in household (87.9% compared to 84.9%, a difference of 3.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 2 or more vehicles in household (51.9% compared to 51.5%, a difference of 0.79%), 3 or more vehicles in household (17.9% compared to 18.2%, a difference of 2.0%), and 1 or more vehicles in household (87.9% compared to 84.9%, a difference of 3.5%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Subsaharan African and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in doctorate degree (1.8% compared to 3.1%, a difference of 74.9%), professional degree (4.1% compared to 6.7%, a difference of 64.2%), and master's degree (14.2% compared to 21.2%, a difference of 48.7%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 10th grade (93.1% compared to 93.2%, a difference of 0.050%), 9th grade (94.4% compared to 94.3%, a difference of 0.12%), and 5th grade (97.0% compared to 96.8%, a difference of 0.21%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Subsaharan African and Immigrants from China communities in the United States are seen in disability age 35 to 64 (12.6% compared to 8.7%, a difference of 45.3%), disability age 5 to 17 (6.2% compared to 4.5%, a difference of 36.1%), and disability age under 5 (1.3% compared to 0.96%, a difference of 35.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age over 75 (48.2% compared to 46.3%, a difference of 4.1%), cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 16.9%, a difference of 9.5%), and hearing disability (2.9% compared to 2.6%, a difference of 9.9%).