US unemployment problem in a nutshell

[Peter Malcolm Jardine]

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]

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]

And this is genetics precisely where?

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

Kaa

[B_B]

Kaa's a bottom feeding troll, on a good day. This is not a good day.

[Kaa]

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]

Culture. Opportunity. Racism. How many hypotheses would you like?

Genetics? No.

Andy

[Kaa]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

Anyway, we have the solution:

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

[carioca1232001]

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 it´s use as a measure of a person´s intelligence !

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

[Dan McCosh]

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]

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]

No-one has mentioned the effect of nutrition on foetal and post natal development with intergenerational "carry over". Why?

[pefjr]

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]

...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]

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]

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]

darkie in the white house

Nice