Ethnic Groups in America

1. Poverty by selected European ancestry, 1989

Poverty rates among the ten selected European ancestry groups range from 5.8% for Scottish ancestry to 9.3% for French ancestry. Irish and Dutch ancestry groups also sit toward the upper end of this comparison, while Scots-Irish and Polish ancestry groups record lower rates. The spread is meaningful, but every group contains people living both above and below the poverty threshold.

These figures describe economic circumstances at a particular moment in American history. Families differed in age, household structure, education, occupation and where they lived, all of which could affect their resources. A national ancestry average brings together communities with different local conditions rather than identifying a single shared experience. The results therefore show uneven economic security within a broadly European-origin population, not a simple divide between immigrant and established communities. They also remind us that poverty was present across all the groups shown, including those with the lowest overall rates.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, CPH-L-149 ancestry profiles. Values checked against individual Census tables. Poverty rate for persons, income year 1989.

2. Poverty by selected Middle Eastern ancestry, 1989

Iranian ancestry has the highest recorded poverty rate among these five groups, at 13.3%, followed by Egyptian and Turkish ancestry. Lebanese and Syrian ancestry have somewhat lower rates, although both remain close to ten per cent. The contrast is particularly interesting alongside the educational figures: the group with the highest graduate-degree share is also the one with the highest poverty rate in this selection.

Education and household resources do not always move together at the same point in time. A community can contain highly qualified professionals alongside students, recent arrivals, older people and households facing difficulty finding suitable work. Different ages, family responsibilities and local labour markets can produce very different experiences within the same ancestry group. The combination of educational attainment and poverty therefore challenges any assumption that one average captures a community’s economic position. Looking at several outcomes together gives a fuller picture of the opportunities and difficulties experienced by different households.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, CPH-L-149 ancestry profiles. Values checked against individual Census tables. Poverty rate for persons, income year 1989.

3. Graduate degrees by European ancestry, 1990

Scottish ancestry has the highest graduate-degree share among the selected European groups, at 12.2%. English and Scots-Irish ancestry follow at just over ten per cent. French and Dutch ancestry sit at the other end, with shares around six per cent. The difference between the highest and lowest values is roughly a doubling, indicating substantial variation in advanced educational attainment.

Several of the groups with higher graduate-degree shares also have relatively low poverty rates in the preceding comparison. That broad association is consistent with the importance of education in access to professional employment, but individual communities are far from uniform. People with the same ancestry may differ in age, occupation, region and family background. Graduate education is also only one part of economic life: many people build secure livelihoods through vocational training, business ownership or occupations that do not require an advanced degree. The figures reveal one dimension of opportunity rather than a complete ranking of community wellbeing.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, CPH-L-149 ancestry profiles. Values checked against individual Census tables. Graduate degree or higher, persons aged 25 and over, 1990.

4. Graduate degrees by Middle Eastern ancestry, 1990

Iranian and Egyptian ancestry groups have very similar graduate-degree shares, at around one-quarter of adults aged twenty-five and over. Turkish ancestry also exceeds twenty per cent, while Lebanese and Syrian ancestry have lower shares in this five-group comparison. These are substantial advanced-education populations, but the variation shows why the broad label “Middle Eastern ancestry” cannot describe one uniform educational experience.

The contrast with the poverty figures is especially revealing. Iranian ancestry leads this educational comparison while also recording the highest poverty rate among the same five groups. High qualifications and financial hardship can therefore coexist within one population. Households may be at different stages of settlement or working life, and a qualification does not guarantee immediate access to suitable employment. The educational profile is best understood as one resource available within a community, alongside employment opportunities, family circumstances and other conditions that influence how that resource translates into everyday economic security.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, CPH-L-149 ancestry profiles. Values checked against individual Census tables. Graduate degree or higher, persons aged 25 and over, 1990.

5. Unemployment by race and sex, 2023

MenWomen

American Indian and Alaska Native workers have the highest unemployment rates among these groups, while Asian and White workers have lower rates. Men have a higher rate than women in each displayed category, although the size of that difference varies. The gap is particularly large for American Indian and Alaska Native workers, at 1.8 percentage points, compared with 0.3 points for Black and White workers.

The results describe different labour-market experiences within the same year. They do not mean that every person in a higher-rate group faced unemployment or that everyone in a lower-rate group enjoyed secure work. Employment conditions vary across industries, places and stages of working life. Unemployment also leaves out people who are outside the labour force, including some who have stopped looking for work. Understanding economic opportunity therefore requires attention to job access, participation, pay and stability as well as the share of active jobseekers who are unemployed.

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, annual averages for 2023. Civilian labour force aged 16 and over; rates are not seasonally adjusted. Race categories include people of Hispanic origin. Smaller groups have greater sampling uncertainty. AI = American Indian; NH = Native Hawaiian.

6. Racial composition across three censuses, 2000–2020

WhiteBlackAI / Alaska NativeAsianNH / Pacific IslanderOther raceTwo or more

The share of residents reporting White alone declined across these three censuses, while the shares reporting Asian alone, another race or more than one race increased. The multiracial category shows a particularly large rise between 2010 and 2020. Black-alone population share remained much closer to its earlier level, even as the number of people in that population changed.

These shifts reflect both demographic change and how people describe their identities. More residents identifying with multiple races can change the balance between categories without representing a straightforward movement from one fixed community to another. The United States also contains substantial variation between generations and places, so a national composition conceals very different local patterns. The broader picture is of a population whose reported identities are becoming less concentrated in one category. At the same time, the continuity of large communities alongside growing smaller categories shows that diversity develops through several overlapping changes rather than a single replacement process.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census demographic and housing characteristics. Race-alone categories include people of Hispanic origin unless explicitly stated otherwise. Hispanic origin may be of any race. Shares calculated from official 2000, 2010 and 2020 counts. Replaces the longer inconsistent historical series with three comparable published tables. Changes in questions, coding and self-identification affect comparisons, especially multiracial responses.

7. Hispanic and non-Hispanic population, 2020

Hispanic or Latino — 62080044Not Hispanic or Latino — 269369237

Hispanic or Latino residents accounted for about 18.7% of the United States population in 2020, or just over sixty-two million people. The remaining population was non-Hispanic, but that much larger category contains many different racial, cultural and ancestry communities. Neither side of this division represents a single uniform background.

Hispanic identity also crosses racial categories. People may identify as both Hispanic and White, Black, American Indian, multiracial or another race. This helps explain why the Hispanic population cannot simply be added to a separate total for all racial groups. Its size makes Hispanic communities an important part of national demographic change, yet their presence differs greatly by state and generation. Some families have deep roots in places that became part of the United States, while others have more recent migration histories. Shared Hispanic identification therefore connects diverse experiences rather than describing one route into American society or one pattern of daily life.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census demographic and housing characteristics. Race-alone categories include people of Hispanic origin unless explicitly stated otherwise. Hispanic origin may be of any race. These two categories are mutually exclusive and sum to the national population of 331,449,281. Includes the fifty states and DC.

8. Median age by race and Hispanic origin, 2020

The White-alone population has the highest median age among these selected groups, at 43.1 years. Asian and Black-alone populations are younger on this measure, while the Hispanic population has a median age of thirty. People reporting two or more races have the youngest median age in the comparison, at 29.5 years. These differences are substantial enough to shape the needs of communities.

An older population is more likely to include people approaching retirement or already needing later-life services. A younger population has a different balance of education, early-career employment and family formation. Neither profile is inherently better, but they create different demands on institutions and household resources. National growth patterns can also be influenced by age structure, because populations with more young adults may have more people entering the years when families are formed. The age differences add context to economic comparisons by showing that groups are not simply identical populations with different labels.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census demographic and housing characteristics. Race-alone categories include people of Hispanic origin unless explicitly stated otherwise. Hispanic origin may be of any race. Median age in years; Hispanic population overlaps the race categories. These groups do not form a partition.

9. Children, working-age adults and older residents, 2020

Under 1818–6465+

Children form a much larger share of the multiracial and Hispanic populations than of the White-alone population. At the other end of the age range, residents aged sixty-five and over make up about one-fifth of the White-alone population, compared with less than one-tenth of several of the younger groups. Most residents in every group still fall between eighteen and sixty-four.

The contrast matters for how resources are used across generations. Communities with many children need schools, childcare and opportunities for young people entering work. Those with larger older populations have greater demand for retirement income, accessible housing and health services. Working-age residents support both ends of this spectrum through paid work, care and family relationships. The balance therefore affects households as well as public services. It also helps explain why broad economic comparisons can change when age is taken into account: groups with different numbers of students, parents and retirees face different circumstances.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census demographic and housing characteristics. Race-alone categories include people of Hispanic origin unless explicitly stated otherwise. Hispanic origin may be of any race. Ages 18–64 are calculated as the remainder after the published under-18 and 65+ shares. Categories within each bar sum to 100%; Hispanic overlaps race categories across bars.

10. State population size and median age, 2020

● West · ● South · ● Northeast

Large states can have very different age profiles. Florida has an older population than Texas, even though both contain tens of millions of residents. California and New York also differ in median age, while much smaller Maine is older than any of these large states. Utah stands out toward the younger end of the comparison.

These contrasts show that population size alone says little about the balance between generations. Migration, births, deaths and the movement of people at different stages of life all contribute to a state’s age structure. Hispanic population size adds another dimension: Texas and California contain large Hispanic communities, but that does not mean their overall age profiles are identical. Hawaii provides a smaller western-state comparison, with an age profile distinct from Utah’s. Looking across these examples helps separate the scale of a state from the composition of its population, two features that matter differently for schools, housing, employment and older-age services.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census demographic and housing characteristics. Race-alone categories include people of Hispanic origin unless explicitly stated otherwise. Hispanic origin may be of any race. Seven selected states. X: total population, millions; Y: median age. Bubble size: Hispanic population, millions, visibility-adjusted rather than area-proportional. Colours indicate Census regions.

11. States with the largest rises in Hispanic population share, 2010–2020

20102020

The Hispanic share increased across the states shown, but the starting points differ considerably. A state with a large established Hispanic population can gain several percentage points, while another experiences a similarly sized increase from a much smaller base. Both changes alter the local demographic balance, even though the resulting population shares remain very different.

This is why growth in population share should be considered alongside the number of people involved. A modest percentage-point change in a populous state can represent many residents, while a substantial change in a smaller state may involve fewer people. Population change also occurs through several routes, including births, deaths and movement within the United States as well as immigration from abroad. The changing shares therefore describe a demographic outcome rather than one single cause. They show how Hispanic communities have become a larger part of life across a range of states, extending the national story beyond only the largest population centres.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2020 Census demographic and housing characteristics. Race-alone categories include people of Hispanic origin unless explicitly stated otherwise. Hispanic origin may be of any race. States ranked by percentage-point increase in Hispanic share between the 2010 and 2020 censuses; DC eligible as a state equivalent. Change in share is not the same as percentage growth in headcount.

12. State population and demographic reference table

Fifty states and DC, 2020 Census. Scroll across and down. Race-alone columns include Hispanic residents; Hispanic origin and non-Hispanic White are separate measures, so the displayed percentage columns must not be added together.