PDA

View Full Version : US unemployment problem in a nutshell



Kaa
07-19-2012, 01:38 PM
http://static.ow.ly/photos/original/MnEr.png


Kaa

Cuyahoga Chuck
07-19-2012, 01:59 PM
And?

switters
07-19-2012, 02:27 PM
That is scary.

B_B
07-19-2012, 02:32 PM
Actually, it shouldn't be scary. What it should do is encourage policy makers to start thinking about ways to "move the country forward" instead of just talking about it and cutting taxes and cutting spending.

This type of problem needs comprehensive policy solutions.

John Smith
07-19-2012, 02:33 PM
Funny looking nut.

I don't think this is rocket science. Automation has taken over much manual work, which is good for quality. A lot of the jobs that have not been automated have been outsourced.

I've read in many places that our schools don't produce people with the skills/knowledge needed to those jobs less likely to be outsourced.

Where do we rank, eduation wise, in math and science?

wardd
07-19-2012, 03:25 PM
We rank below every country with no teacher's unions.

meaning?

maybe it means teachers in other countries get the respect and pay the job deserves

B_B
07-19-2012, 03:58 PM
...Where do we rank, eduation wise, in math and science?
from here (http://www.apa.org/monitor/mar05/scores.aspx)
1. Finland 544
2. South Korea 542
3. Netherlands 538
4. Japan 534
5. Canada 532
6. Belgium 529
7. Switzerland 527
8. Australia 524
9. New Zealand 523
10. Czech Republic 516
11. Iceland 515
12. Denmark 514
13. France 511
14. Sweden 509
15. Austria 506
16. Germany 503
17. Ireland 503
18. Slovak Republic 498
19. Norway 495
20. Luxembourg 493
21. Poland 490
22. Hungary 490
23. Spain 485
24. United States 483
25. Portugal 466
26. Italy 466
27. Greece 445
28. Turkey 423
29. Mexico 385




...Where do we rank, eduation wise, in math and science?We rank below every country with no teacher's unions.
meaning?
It means, wardd, don't feed the trolls.

Canoeyawl
07-19-2012, 04:05 PM
The US ranks 20th out of 29 nations for starting salary and 23rd after 15 years.
(It seems our unions are not doing the job and should be stronger).

Either that or perhaps all teachers should be federal employees

http://www.tnr.com/sites/default/files/McK%20Teacher%20Salaries.jpg

hokiefan
07-19-2012, 04:17 PM
What dropped off the biggest is home construction. These are jobs with decent pay which don't require an education. They will come back in time, but it will be slow and vary widely by region. The charts are accurate but don't tell the whole story.

Cheers,

Bobby

Karl23
11-27-2012, 01:19 AM
What you thing which factor direct affect employment. The factor that causes of unemployment are Corporations going bankrupt ,High gas prices ,High taxes ,No tax breaks for small businesses ,Low amount of people investing.....

Keith Wilson
11-27-2012, 08:32 AM
Where do we rank, eduation wise, in math and science?Note that this varies enormously by state and region. If one considers the northeast and upper midwest only, the US ranks near the top. "Blue states only" gives a much better ranking as well.


The factor that causes of unemployment are Corporations going bankrupt ,High gas prices ,High taxes ,No tax breaks for small businesses ,Low amount of people investing.....LOL! This is a statement of religious faith, not economics. The major factor that cause s unemployment these days is low demand for goods and services. Why this is the case, that we can discuss.

pefjr
11-27-2012, 10:21 AM
Student loans will be the next bust in the US. http://www.doctorhousingbubble.com/education-of-the-housing-market-student-loan-debt-and-falling-birth-rates-slow-demand-for-the-first-time-buyer-market-sallie-mae-debt/http://www.doctorhousingbubble.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/student-loan-debt-sallie-mae.png

Kaa
11-27-2012, 11:00 AM
Note that this varies enormously by state and region.

Primarily this varies by race. It's not a politically correct observation :-) but if you exclude the Black kids from the education statistics, on the global ranking scale the US does *much* better.


LOL! This is a statement of religious faith, not economics. The major factor that cause s unemployment these days is low demand for goods and services.

Double LOL :-) And how about your statement, is it not faith-based? Keynesianism is not scientific truth, it's a limited model, a rather crude way of looking at an economy, one of many such ways. Lots of (smart) people don't think it's adequate.

Kaa

Peter Malcolm Jardine
11-27-2012, 11:28 AM
Primarily this varies by race. It's not a politically correct observation :-) but if you exclude the Black kids from the education statistics, on the global ranking scale the US does *much* better.



Is that because blacks are not as smart? The right wing on here makes much of the equality in American society.

Kaa
11-27-2012, 11:31 AM
The education thing is especially frustrating. We import over 55,000 engineers and scientists from foreign countries each year (using H-1B visas), because we don't graduate enough of them...

Nope, that's not true. We import engineers and scientists from foreign countries because they are their best and brightest and we get them here for free. The IQ curve exists and graduating an engineer from its left half isn't particularly useful. "Importing" a Brazilian or Chinese engineer from the right tail of that curve makes a great deal of sense.

Kaa

Kaa
11-27-2012, 11:32 AM
Is that because blacks are not as smart?

It's a complicated discussion. Some of it is because of genetics, some of it is because of correlation between poverty and educational achievement.

Kaa

pefjr
11-27-2012, 11:42 AM
How did those 'job creating' Bush tax cuts, from 2001 and 2003, work out for us? Duuhhhh!!!!!

We import over 55,000 engineers and scientists from foreign countries each year (using H-1B visas), because we don't graduate enough of them.... Apparently it is working out just fine, if the need is 55,000 more than we have? Duh!

leikec
11-27-2012, 11:49 AM
As a working engineer with nearly 40 years of experience, and exposure to the H-1B technology immigrants, I know that isn't true. There simply aren't enough 'best and brightest' that are home grown, because we don't support higher education to the degree we need to... and not all of the H-1B guys are all that 'best and bright'.... often, they are warm bodies filling a seat, with no better skills than American engineers.


I know a kid with a 4.0 gpa, almost perfect ACT/SAT scores, and he wants to go to MIT or an equivalent school. He has abou a 10 percent chance of being accepted.

Why should MIT be a reach school for a kid like this?

Jeff C

Kaa
11-27-2012, 11:50 AM
As a working engineer with nearly 40 years of experience, and exposure to the H-1B technology immigrants, I know that isn't true. There simply aren't enough 'best and brightest' that are home grown, because we don't support higher education to the degree we need to... and not all of the H-1B guys are all that 'best and bright'.... often, they are warm bodies filling a seat, with no better skills than American engineers.

The US "best and brightest" don't go into STEM any more -- they go into law, finance, architecture, medicine, design, fashion. I don't see any problem with that. And yes, of course not all H-1B guys are very bright, but for the wage you're willing to pay you typically get a better (more qualified, better work ethics) H-1B employee than a recent US college graduate. Again, not always, of course :-)

Kaa

Kaa
11-27-2012, 11:52 AM
I know a kid with a 4.0 gpa, almost perfect ACT/SAT scores, and he wants to go to MIT or an equivalent school. He has abou a 10 percent chance of being accepted.

Why should MIT be a reach school for a kid like this?

Because the number of kids like that is considerably larger than the number of students MIT can accept. But if he really has an "almost perfect" ACT/SAT he'll still be able to get into some elite school.

Kaa

Kaa
11-27-2012, 12:07 PM
I see a big problem with at least part of that... the lure of law and finance, which in at least some senses, are 'non-productive' enterprises. Venture capitalists, hedge funds, and investment banks serve a valuable function in our economy... but are also the source of a lot of the problems.... and they themselves contribute nothing to palpable growth, unless it's the amount of moneydust created.

Non-productive, really? Contribute nothing to palpable growth? :-D Well then, how well do you think you'll do without them all? If they are just parasitic drag, getting rid of all of them would allow the economy to spring, nay, to leap forward to amazing prosperity!

Funny how people voluntarily pay a lot of money to people engaged in these non-productive activities, though...


I suspect that's merely your subjective opinion, that you couldn't back up with fact.

Of course it's my subjective opinion, just like yours is :-)

To talk about facts we'd need to formulate the question better. But to start with, do you contest my observation that for a given wage you can attract a better worker on an H-1B visa than a native-born American?

Kaa

wardd
11-27-2012, 12:44 PM
Student loans will be the next bust in the US. http://www.doctorhousingbubble.com/education-of-the-housing-market-student-loan-debt-and-falling-birth-rates-slow-demand-for-the-first-time-buyer-market-sallie-mae-debt/http://www.doctorhousingbubble.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/student-loan-debt-sallie-mae.png

education should be free as it is a social good

wardd
11-27-2012, 12:50 PM
how did this country grow and be productive before wall street became such a major part of the economy?

David G
11-27-2012, 01:01 PM
"In a nutshell" ?? Nope. Stated as such, the assertion is misleading twaddle.

Another example of taking an accurate set of data, not taking the time to understand the history, the projections, and the factors that might be currently affecting what the chart shows... then drawing simple-minded and erroneous conclusions.

Here's just one example of a factor that is germane to this data set (there are more).


What dropped off the biggest is home construction. These are jobs with decent pay which don't require an education. They will come back in time, but it will be slow and vary widely by region. The charts are accurate but don't tell the whole story.

Maybe Kaa would like to take that data set, buttress it somewhat, and offer a hypothesis that is a bit more supportable?

carioca1232001
11-27-2012, 01:16 PM
I see a big problem with at least part of that... the lure of law and finance, which in at least some senses, are 'non-productive' enterprises. Venture capitalists, hedge funds, and investment banks serve a valuable function in our economy... but are also the source of a lot of the problems.... and they themselves contribute nothing to palpable growth, unless it's the amount of moneydust created. Furthermore, medicine and design are STEM careers... architecture might be considered STEM, as well. Fashion? Uhh, I don't think we have any huge output of fashion designers.

As an engineer myself, I believe your intent was to put emphasis on increasing the number of science and engineering graduates in the US economy and not devalue the other professions !

I donīt usually see eye-to-eye with Kaa but this time around his criticism may be valid.

The same goes for his comment about the recruitment of foreign engineering graduates at a lower rate than their US equivalents.

As concerns the latter subject, I met up some two weeks ago with a first cousin of mine whom I havenīt seen for ages (1974), and who is currently a director at a major US arms supplier( not guns and ammo, though !). His take on this subject was that the foreign engineers are usually hungrier too, which does help towards getting things done in record time. ! For the same reason, less likely to be laid off during downturns.

Y Bar Ranch
11-27-2012, 02:13 PM
I know a kid with a 4.0 gpa, almost perfect ACT/SAT scores, and he wants to go to MIT or an equivalent school. He has abou a 10 percent chance of being accepted.

Why should MIT be a reach school for a kid like this?

Jeff C
Because everyone wants to go there, but there's only enough seats for a few.

He'll get in somewhere elite enough. If he applies to 10 schools at 10% chance each, he's got a 2 out of 3 chance of getting into one of them.

Flying Orca
11-27-2012, 02:22 PM
Because everyone wants to go there, but there's only enough seats for a few.

He'll get in somewhere elite enough. If he applies to 10 schools at 10% chance each, he's got a 2 out of 3 chance of getting into one of them.

Just over 65%, anyway.

Flying Orca
11-27-2012, 03:08 PM
I wonder what this graph would look like with a properly formatted Y-axis?

Considerably less alarmist?

Kaa
11-27-2012, 03:11 PM
I wonder what this graph would look like with a properly formatted Y-axis?

"Proper" formatting depends on the goal of the exercise. The answer you want is that the wiggles will be squashed and the difference will be harder to see. So? The point is that the employment fortunes of the college graduates over the past four years were radically different from the fortunes of non-college grads. That point won't go away through the reformatting of the Y axis :-)

Kaa

Y Bar Ranch
11-27-2012, 03:18 PM
"Proper" formatting depends on the goal of the exercise. The answer you want is that the wiggles will be squashed and the difference will be harder to see. So? The point is that the employment fortunes of the college graduates over the past four years were radically different from the fortunes of non-college grads. That point won't go away through the reformatting of the Y axis :-)

Kaa
You should plot it log-log so everything will be a straight line.

LeeG
11-27-2012, 03:22 PM
I wonder what this graph would look like with a properly formatted Y-axis?

One went up 5%, one went down 5.5%

And still wondering what the nutshell is.

David G
11-27-2012, 03:44 PM
I wonder what this graph would look like with a properly formatted Y-axis?


"Proper" formatting depends on the goal of the exercise. The answer you want is that the wiggles will be squashed and the difference will be harder to see. So? The point is that the employment fortunes of the college graduates over the past four years were radically different from the fortunes of non-college grads. That point won't go away through the reformatting of the Y axis :-)

Kaa

Yes... reading graphs is a skill. Not one that everyone has. I had no problem seeing the logic behind how it was plotted. For someone not used to constructing graphs, it would be easy, nay likely, for the interpretation to be worse than the data actually suggests.

However... that's not the main issue for me. For me it the 'in a nutshell' characterization. That's dramatically more misleading. Did you just re-read "How to Lie with Statistics"? Or do you need to read it for the first time?

B_B
11-27-2012, 03:45 PM
The REAL US unemployment problem in a nutshell:
1-companies aren't investing their record profits in growth
2-wages are low so people can't spend to get the economy going




Corporate Profits Just Hit An All-Time High, Wages Just Hit An All-Time Low

Henry Blodget (http://www.businessinsider.com/author/henry-blodget) | Jun. 22, 2012, 8:55 AM |
(http://www.businessinsider.com/corporate-profits-just-hit-an-all-time-high-wages-just-hit-an-all-time-low-2012-6#comments)
In case you need more confirmation that the US economy is out of balance, here are three charts for you.
1) Corporate profit margins just hit an all-time high. Companies are making more per dollar of sales than they ever have before. (And some people are still saying that companies are suffering from "too much regulation" and "too many taxes." Maybe little companies are, but big ones certainly aren't).
http://static3.businessinsider.com/image/4fe2807feab8eaca7f00000c-619-464/corporate-profits-as-percent-of-gdp.png (http://static3.businessinsider.com/image/4fe2807feab8eaca7f00000c-960/corporate-profits-as-percent-of-gdp.png)
Business Insider, St. Louis Fed (http://www.businessinsider.com/)

2) Fewer Americans are working than at any time in the past three decades. One reason corporations are so profitable is that they don't employ as many Americans as they used to.
http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/4fe2807deab8eae17f00000d/employment-population-ratio.png (http://static2.businessinsider.com/image/4fe2807deab8eae17f00000d-960/employment-population-ratio.png)
Business Insider, St. Louis Fed (http://www.businessinsider.com/)

3) Wages as a percent of the economy are at an all-time low. This is both cause and effect. One reason companies are so profitable is that they're paying employees less than they ever have as a share of GDP. And that, in turn, is one reason the economy is so weak: Those "wages" are other companies' revenue.
http://static3.businessinsider.com/image/4fe2807e69bedd095c000005/wages-to-gdp.png (http://static3.businessinsider.com/image/4fe2807e69bedd095c000005-960/wages-to-gdp.png)
Business Insider, St. Louis Fed (http://www.businessinsider.com/)

In short, our current system and philosophy is creating a country of a few million overlords and 300+ million serfs.
That's not what has made America a great country. It's also not what most people think America is supposed to be about.
So we might want to rethink that.
Meanwhile, if you want to know more about what's wrong with the economy, flip through these charts:


[/COLOR]


Read more: http://www.businessinsider.com/corporate-profits-just-hit-an-all-time-high-wages-just-hit-an-all-time-low-2012-6#ixzz2DScvucY2

Kaa
11-27-2012, 03:45 PM
I suspect that's probably been true since the advent of the GI bill.

But yeah.... it definitely got a lot worse towards the end of the Bush presidency.

Just looking at the graph, non-college grads did BETTER than college grads in 2004-2008. That is the end of the Bush presidency, by the way.

Kaa

carioca1232001
11-27-2012, 03:56 PM
... Furthermore, I do NOT agree with the proposition that H-1B workers are somehow better than American engineering graduates... that simply seems to be fed by the subjective, unprovable, and prejudicial notion that the foreigners are hungrier and therefore more productive than American engineering graduates. In all my years in engineering, I've never known that to be the case.... .....

Well, if one compares fresh eng graduates straight out from, say, the Indian Institute of Technology or, say, Israelīs Technion, with rank-and-file eng graduates from the US, there is more than a 50% chance that you would notice a huge difference in their ability to attack complex problems.

While visitng the US last week, an old American friend, Stanford-educated and Californian, mentioned to me that current Silicon Valley start-ups are disproportionately Indian or Israeli-owned, which is another feather in the cap for the immigrants, this time for their business savvy, just not technical prowess.

A major psychological factor at work is the inherent drive that immigrants have to want to stay their ground and go forward which is not news at all to an immigrant like myself, even though the work may be run-of-the mill and not very challenging stuff !

It isnīt unusual to see the children of such immigrants perform academically above the median level, mirrored in their parentsī example, especially if both are foreign-born. For instance, my cousinīs son made the grade in chess in the US and was awarded the BS and MS in EE from Stanford at age 20 ! The 17-year old daughter got a load of offers from places like Caltech, Yale etc... but decided to join the freshman program in Biomedical Eng at MIT this Fall.

There is a saying in Brazil that sort of sums it up: 'Santo de casa...... não faz milagre', which translated into English reads something like 'home-grown saints...... do not perform miracles' !

LeeG
11-27-2012, 03:56 PM
What dropped off the biggest is home construction. These are jobs with decent pay which don't require an education. They will come back in time, but it will be slow and vary widely by region. The charts are accurate but don't tell the whole story.

Cheers,

Bobby

Obviously the solution is more college grads doing construction so the unemployment numbers don't look so bad for non grads!

Kaa
11-27-2012, 04:18 PM
Oops, I was wrong :-(

Eyeballing the graph, college grad employment grew from the start of the graph to mid-2007 by about (43.5 / 39) - 1 = 11.5%. For the same period non-college grad employment grew by about (83.5 / 79.7) - 1 = 4.8%. So no, college grads didn't do worse in 2004-2008.

On the other hand, this doesn't change the original point -- that the unemployment problem in the US post-2008 is predominantly the unemployment problem of the non-college grads. Partially that's because home construction collapsed, but partially it's because in the modern economy there's less and less left to do for people who lack formal education.

Kaa

David G
11-27-2012, 04:23 PM
Kaa,

Here's a useful hint --

Step one: assemble the facts

Step two: read and understand the facts

Step three: draw conclusions, or construct a hypothesis

You seem intent on going out of order.

Waddie
11-27-2012, 04:26 PM
I taught in the public schools and at a college for over 25 years. The teachers were well paid and have benefits. Most of them were very competent and ready to teach. The problem isn't money or the teachers. The problem is teachers saddled with some students who dominate their time and energy, are trouble makers and have no interest in learning. While too many students have spotty attendance, and when they do show up it's for social reasons, I never saw a student who took their education seriously fail to get a good education. When both the student AND the parents take it seriously, they get a great education. There just isn't enough of them.

My daughter is now a public school administrator, but during her last year in the classroom she had a 5th grader who threw fits and trashed her room repeatedly. They would remove him for a couple of days, conference with the parents, and then he was back in the classroom. This went on for the entire year. They put an aide in with him. Didn't even slow him down. BTW; you're not allowed to physically restrain a student unless they are about to hurt themselves or others. But if he's just trashing the room, let him play out.

regards,
Waddie

Kaa
11-27-2012, 04:31 PM
You seem intent on going out of order.

Yep. I prefer a bit more... chaotic approach :-) If I turn out to be wrong, it's good, it means I learned something.

By the way, you're missing step zero (and I don't think it's just an oversight) -- formulate the question you're interested in:-D

Kaa

Dan McCosh
11-27-2012, 04:38 PM
Oops, I was wrong :-(

Eyeballing the graph, college grad employment grew from the start of the graph to mid-2007 by about (43.5 / 39) - 1 = 11.5%. For the same period non-college grad employment grew by about (83.5 / 79.7) - 1 = 4.8%. So no, college grads didn't do worse in 2004-2008.

On the other hand, this doesn't change the original point -- that the unemployment problem in the US post-2008 is predominantly the unemployment problem of the non-college grads. Partially that's because home construction collapsed, but partially it's because in the modern economy there's less and less left to do for people who lack formal education.

Kaa Might add that a formal education is now often mandatory for jobs that don't actually require it. As one example, a four-year degree requirement for an airline pilot, regardless of flight training or experience. Still, the drop noted was specifically related to the collapse of construction plus the contraction of manufacturing jobs.

AndyG
11-27-2012, 05:08 PM
It's a complicated discussion. Some of it is because of genetics...

8-O

No.

Andy

Peter Malcolm Jardine
11-27-2012, 05:20 PM
It's a complicated discussion. Some of it is because of genetics, some of it is because of correlation between poverty and educational achievement.

Kaa


Genetics? Do you believe that African Americans are genetically inferior to whites in terms of iq?

Kaa
11-27-2012, 05:20 PM
8-O

No.

Andy

http://www.amazon.com/Bell-Curve-Intelligence-Structure-Paperbacks/dp/0684824299

and many other sources.

Kaa

Kaa
11-27-2012, 05:22 PM
Genetics? Do you believe that African Americans are genetically inferior to whites in terms of iq?

I believe that the IQ distributions of white and black sub-populations are noticeably different as an empirical fact. The black IQ curve is shifted lower by about one standard deviation.

I think that this effect persists even when you correct for income/wealth.

I recommend reading a conversation between Andrew Sullivan and Ta-Nehisi Coates, here are links to Andrew Sullivan's blog posts:

http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/11/the-study-of-intelligence.html
http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/11/the-study-of-intelligence-ctd-1.html
http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/11/the-study-of-intelligence-ctd-2.html
http://andrewsullivan.thedailybeast.com/2011/12/what-good-is-intelligence-research.html

It's an interesting conversation.

Kaa

Peter Malcolm Jardine
11-27-2012, 05:27 PM
Well, at least we know that racism is truly not dead in America. Congratulations. Must have really pissed you off to see a darkie in the white house huh?

"The Bell curve" .... wow that's hilarious. Surely you can up with better material than that. You might believe this kind of unfounded crap as proof that it's permittable to be a racist. I have read a fair bit on this as well, and the general consensus is while IQ may differ by race and class, there is little proof that genetics are the inherent link. Most of the people who have published race based theories are rabble rousers.
The fact that you endorse their findings is not surprising. Don't try to debate big academic subjects, you ain't up to it.

AndyG
11-27-2012, 05:33 PM
I believe that the IQ distributions of white and black sub-populations are noticeably different as an empirical fact. The black IQ curve is shifted lower by about one standard deviation.

I think that this effect persists even when you correct for income/wealth.


And this is genetics precisely where?

Andy

Kaa
11-27-2012, 05:37 PM
And this is genetics precisely where?

Would you like to offer a hypothesis as to the cause of this IQ difference?

Kaa

B_B
11-27-2012, 05:44 PM
Kaa's a bottom feeding troll, on a good day. This is not a good day.

Kaa
11-27-2012, 05:47 PM
But anyway--- what's your point?

I've said it already a few times but for you I'll repeat :-) The US unemployment problems post-2008 are largely the unemployment problems of people (by the way, predominantly men) who don't have a college education.

I think this is new phenomenon and this wasn't the case (at the least to the extent it is now) in previous recessions.

Kaa

AndyG
11-27-2012, 05:51 PM
Culture. Opportunity. Racism. How many hypotheses would you like?

Genetics? No.

Andy

Kaa
11-27-2012, 06:02 PM
Culture. Opportunity. Racism. How many hypotheses would you like?

Genetics? No.

Andy

Culture? What do you mean, culture? Racial IQ differences persist across continents, never mind countries. It's not a US phenomenon, it's a global phenomenon. Which aspect of culture would you invoke to explain the IQ difference between, say, the Chinese in China and Nigerians?

Opportunity? What kind? The differences persist if you correct for wealth and/or income. Going back to the global scale, consider again the Chinese and the Nigerians. What do the Chinese have that the Nigerians don't?

Racism? Again, it's not a US phenomenon. It's global. How does racism affect the IQ of the entire population of sub-Saharan Africa? And I seem to recall that in the US the Chinese immigrants were considered sub-human for quite a while.

I would like more hypotheses, please. Preferably with data to support them.

Kaa

Peter Malcolm Jardine
11-27-2012, 06:16 PM
You stated that IQ differences are genetic in nature. That isn't supported by fact. It has been theorized, but no substantive evidence exists.

Yeah, the Bell Curve... a psychologist and a politics professor, they have all the answers. LMAO. That book has been more politely rebuffed than it should have been. What load of crap.

BrianM
11-27-2012, 06:19 PM
http://www.doctorhousingbubble.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/student-loan-debt-sallie-mae.png

http://static.ow.ly/photos/original/MnEr.png


Kaa


If you overlay debt with drops in people with degrees.. you can see an easy correlation. In California, the UC and CSU systems wrote checks they couldn't cash with massive overbuilding, massive faculty administration expansion ("compliance" enforcers), and huge pension obligations.

What's the mystery? The state itself is partially responsible for marginalizing the very people "they" are supposed to serve.. pretty funny until you try and get your kid into a U.C., or CSU as a 3rd Generation Californian, only to see out of state and foreign students displace your kid because they can be charged much higher tuitions...

How f'd up is that?

Kaa
11-27-2012, 06:24 PM
You stated that IQ differences are genetic in nature. That isn't supported by fact. It has been theorized, but no substantive evidence exists.

True in the sense that we can't point to specific gene sequences that affect the intellect.

However the empirical IQ differences have been demonstrated pretty conclusively. You can nibble at the edges via culture, etc. but genetics remain the most plausible (though again, unproved) hypothesis.

I am open to suggestions, but I haven't seen other plausible hypotheses supported by data.


Yeah, the Bell Curve... a psychologist and a politics professor, they have all the answers.

No, they have the data. That data was attacked pretty severely and it survived. So the data is very likely valid.

Kaa

Peter Malcolm Jardine
11-27-2012, 06:29 PM
True in the sense that we can't point to specific gene sequences that affect the intellect.

However the empirical IQ differences have been demonstrated pretty conclusively. You can nibble at the edges via culture, etc. but genetics remain the most plausible (though again, unproved) hypothesis.

I am open to suggestions, but I haven't seen other plausible hypotheses supported by data.

No, they have the data. That data was attacked pretty severely and it survived. So the data is very likely valid.

Kaa


Read a little more. Most of the major associations basically made statements over that book that said the genetic component was unproven.
A lot more of the academic community went after the logic, which was flawed.

Last but not least... Richard whats-his-name was a disciple of Skinner. Now there's a beaut of a guy.... His family had to endure him, and not terribly successfully. Yikes. I read some of his stuff quite a while back, but I found it boring as hell, and absent of almost any human empath whatsoever.

Peter Malcolm Jardine
11-27-2012, 06:30 PM
Anyway, we have the solution:


This message is hidden because Kaa is on your ignore list.

carioca1232001
11-27-2012, 07:41 PM
I have seen cultural phenomenon influencing the capability of young university students to grasp, say, difficult concepts in mathematics, such as 'vector spaces' and 'linear algebra'.

It all came down to how the subject of numbers and mensuration were introduced to these particularly 'gifted students' at a very young age, right at the outset (primary school level).

It would be best to not mention their nationality, although anyone with minimum knowledge of western history should easily be able to guess it.

There has been a lot of debate on IQ testing and itīs use as a measure of a personīs intelligence !

Similarly for ethnic groups who have bagged the largest number of Nobel prizes !

Dan McCosh
11-27-2012, 07:45 PM
True in the sense that we can't point to specific gene sequences that affect the intellect.

However the empirical IQ differences have been demonstrated pretty conclusively. You can nibble at the edges via culture, etc. but genetics remain the most plausible (though again, unproved) hypothesis.

I am open to suggestions, but I haven't seen other plausible hypotheses supported by data.



No, they have the data. That data was attacked pretty severely and it survived. So the data is very likely valid.

Kaa The data appears to support the thesis that the group with the inferior intellect ends up at the top of the social and economic spectrum.

David G
11-27-2012, 09:35 PM
Kaa's a bottom feeding troll, on a good day. This is not a good day.

Yes, but at least he's CONSISTENTLY (some might even say stubbornly) a bottom feeding troll.

purri
11-27-2012, 10:18 PM
No-one has mentioned the effect of nutrition on foetal and post natal development with intergenerational "carry over". Why?

pefjr
11-28-2012, 12:16 PM
You can nibble at the edges via culture, etc. but genetics remain the most plausible (though again, unproved) hypothesis.

I am open to suggestions, but I haven't seen other plausible hypotheses supported by data.



No, they have the data. That data was attacked pretty severely and it survived. So the data is very likely valid.

Kaa Sure it's genetic. There are many genetic differences. The problems with these studies is the difficulty in defining race. You can group people and sub group them, but the last remaining group that comes closest to a race definition is the Jews, and only a sub group of those. Chinese fair the best on IQ test, if you don't question the bias of the IQ tests. Chinese are also shorter too, sub Saharan groups have longer limbs, except for the pygmy. Southern Aficans also have less body hair, but does that mean they are more highly evolved from the ape than those hairy Italians? Look at the sports of Basketball, and Football, those are genetic differences, and Jimmy the Greek spoke the truth, and was fired for it. White men can't jump, blacks can't swim, I can sub group a bunch from the hollars of the Appalachian Mountains that couldn't get past 100 on an IQ test, but can play three musical instruments by ear, and write classical music. Now, take all this and a lot more not mentioned.....and add cultural and ethnic group differences to it....put in your pipe and smoke it, cause it don't mean shinola, what will come out of the mixture is the Human Race and all it's variety.

Kaa
11-28-2012, 12:24 PM
...what will come out of the mixture is the Human Race and all it's variety.

Yep. A lot of people immediately jump from statistical IQ differences to "inferiority" or "superiority" of some subgroup (I wonder what it says about them :-D). However IQ is not the measure of a man (and even less it is the measure of a woman). People are diverse and varied, in different situations different strengths come to the fore. "Scores high on an IQ test" is not a good basis to judge anyone.

Kaa

Y Bar Ranch
11-28-2012, 12:35 PM
Kaa,Here's a useful hint --
Step one: assemble the facts
Step two: read and understand the facts
Step three: draw conclusions, or construct a hypothesis
You seem intent on going out of order.Actually you have it out of order. You start with the hypothesis.

You then design the experiment or observation to prove or disprove it, and then execute the experiment (gather the facts) and analyze. I'll agree a conclusion comes at the end.

Kaa
11-28-2012, 12:39 PM
Actually you have it out of order. You start with the hypothesis.

It's a chicken-and-egg thing, you can't formulate a hypothesis if you don't have any data. That's why I think you should start with a question, then get some data, and then get into the hypothesize-test-adjust-test-etc. loop.

Kaa

Y Bar Ranch
11-28-2012, 01:31 PM
darkie in the white houseNice