Unlock Economic Success: National IQ, Liberality, and Optomism

  • Thread starter Thread starter hitssquad
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Economic Iq
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the relationship between national IQ, economic liberality, political liberality, and their impact on economic success. Participants explore various studies and critiques regarding these factors, examining their roles in explaining differences in per capita income across nations.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Exploratory

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that optimism is a key factor in American economic success, suggesting it is ingrained in American culture.
  • Richard Lynn and Tatu Vanhanen's work is cited, proposing that national IQ, economic liberality, and political liberality explain significant variations in economic success, with national IQ being the most influential factor.
  • Critiques of Lynn and Vanhanen's conclusions are presented, arguing that their statistical methods are flawed and that they confuse IQ with human capital.
  • Another paper is mentioned that claims a link between IQ and wealth but does not support the assertion that IQ accounts for over 50% of income variation.
  • Participants discuss the complexities of measuring economic strength, noting that different metrics (absolute vs. per capita) yield different conclusions about which country has the strongest economy.
  • Concerns are raised about the validity of the IQ data used by Lynn and Vanhanen, with some arguing that it is based on small, outdated, and unrepresentative samples.
  • There is a discussion about the implications of currency printing and economic perception, questioning how these factors interact with national economic performance.
  • Some participants acknowledge a correlation between IQ data and economic indicators but challenge the causal relationship suggested by Lynn and Vanhanen.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the validity of Lynn and Vanhanen's conclusions, with some supporting their findings and others challenging their methodology and assumptions. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing views on the relationship between IQ and economic success.

Contextual Notes

Limitations in the discussion include the reliance on the accuracy of national IQ data and the appropriateness of the statistical methods employed in the studies referenced. The complexity of economic indicators and their interpretations also adds to the uncertainty of the claims made.

  • #31
loseyourname said:
Unless you advocate
Nature abides.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
hitssquad said:
Nature abides.

What the heck are you talking about, beaver boy? Nature abides what? Are you saying that our economy will be fine because nature will select out people with low intelligence? Now you'll need to show me some correlation between SES and reproductive success. You're great at cutting and pasting, but when you put things into your own words, you're as vague as a magic 8-ball.
 
  • #33
By the way, would you mind sharing an account if you want anyone to actually read the links you keep posting? No way I'm paying for something I barely care about.
 
  • #34
Nature abides technology

loseyourname said:
hitssquad said:
Priests and politicians demand that technology (the fruit of science) be helpful. Nature abides.
Nature abides what?
Technology. Nature does not care what you do with it.



Are you saying that our economy will be fine because nature will select out people with low intelligence?
Currently, nature is longitudinally deselecting both populations and subpopulations with high g. This condition is known as dysgenics and its recent trends are documented in a recent book of the same name by Richard Lynn:
http://www.eugenics.net/papers/lynnrev.html

The economy of the United States may suffer.



Now you'll need to show me some correlation between SES and reproductive success.
There is currently a correlation worldwide and within most nations, but it is negative. Lynn, above, has numbers documenting the trend. Jensen, quoting from Vining, also has some numbers:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/e-l/message/12756

The real problem is that the large number of persons with IQ's less than 30 points above the average are having fewer children than the equally large number of persons with IQ's less than 30 points below the average. Together, these two groups are almost 96% of the population. 70% of the population have IQ's between 85 and 115. Vining's study in 1978 found the highest white birthrates in women with IQ's of 86-100, or less than 1 SD below the mean (see Jensen, _g factor_, p. 485). Black women were most fertile with IQ's of 71 and below, or more than 1 SD below the Afro-American mean. Unfortunately, I haven't run across similar data for men, but it is commonly said that the poorest men have the least reproductive success, and presumably this population includes the great majority of the mildly retarded. Criminals are reported to have exceptionally high birthrates, but criminals tend to be of moderately low intelligence; they are typically not morons.

~Alypius
 
  • #35
hitssquad said:
Technology. Nature does not care what you do with it.

Okay, we're beginning to get somewhere hear. Nature abides technology. Now what definition of the word "abide" are you using? Nature waits for technology? Nature puts up with technology? Nature tolerates technology? And technology has what to do with the national IQ?

Currently, nature is longitudinally deselecting both populations and subpopulations with high g. This condition is known as dysgenics and its recent trends are documented in a recent book of the same name by Richard Lynn:
http://www.eugenics.net/papers/lynnrev.html

That's about what I expected.

The economy of the United States may suffer.

I doubt it. There has been a constant influx of poverty since the inception of this nation, yet the economy has always improved.
 
  • #36
Draining brains out

loseyourname said:
hitssquad said:
Technology. Nature does not care what you do with it.
Now what definition of the word "abide" are you using?
"To endure or bear patiently," as in the book Earth Abides by George R. Stewart. You said that that technology cannot be useful "unless you advocate [particular avenue x]." Nature does not care what you do with technology.



And technology has what to do with the national IQ?
The findings of science are fruits, employable technologies. The finding that IQ is the single most powerful explanatory variable in the world today in terms of differences between nations in per capita GDP constitutes a technology. You said that that technology cannot be useful "unless you advocate [particular avenue x]." But nature abides.



There has been a constant influx of poverty since the inception of this nation, yet the economy has always improved.
There has been a historic influx of settlers and immigrants with high IQs. This is called brain drain. (Apparently because of its liberal political atmosphere and liberal economics) the U.S. drained brains from other nations. Currently, and notoriously, Russia is having its brains drained out.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
8K
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
6K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
5K