Working hard to get ahead [Makers and Takers]

  • Thread starter Thread starter rlg94086
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I’d also recommend reading Charles Murray’s excellent “Losing Ground” on this topic.
Do you recommend the other book by Charles Murray (and Richard Herrnstein) - The Bell Curve? The book with this lovely quotation about how it isn’t hard work that makes one get ahead: “Putting it all together, success and failure in the American economy, and all that goes with it, are increasingly a matter of the genes that people inherit.” The book that claimed that African Americans and Hispanics were more likely to be poor because they allegedly have lower IQs due to genetics.

There are certain issues that I should discuss sparingly and the content of that book is one of those issues. The information in that book disgusted me.
 
I should also stipulate that I heartily wish poverty WERE something the government could end.

Were it so, I would have no problem voting for such a miraculous program.

The best we can do is to promote economic freedom, economic growth, strong families, and virtue.

Most people know this intuitively—it’s why we continue to channel our discretionary income into religious charities as opposed to giving it to the government.

If the government were effective and efficient in such matters, we’d all be plugging money into the Treasury to help our brothers and sisters out.
 
I should also stipulate that I heartily wish poverty WERE something the government could end.

Were it so, I would have no problem voting for such a miraculous program.

The best we can do is to promote economic freedom, economic growth, strong families, and virtue.

Most people know this intuitively—it’s why we continue to channel our discretionary income into religious charities as opposed to giving it to the government.

If the government were effective and efficient in such matters, we’d all be plugging money into the Treasury to help our brothers and sisters out.
Add one more item to the to-do list, education.

The public school system is a failure. About 30% of the children who enter highschool do not graduate – and a recent study shows in the 50 largest cities, the dropout rate is about 50%.

And many of those who do graduate are functually illiterate.

Since the schools are government-run, that should tell us something about government’s ability to lift people out of poverty.
 
Do you recommend the other book by Charles Murray (and Richard Herrnstein) - The Bell Curve? The book with this lovely quotation about how it isn’t hard work that makes one get ahead: “Putting it all together, success and failure in the American economy, and all that goes with it, are increasingly a matter of the genes that people inherit.” The book that claimed that African Americans and Hispanics were more likely to be poor because they allegedly have lower IQs due to genetics.

There are certain issues that I should discuss sparingly and the content of that book is one of those issues. The information in that book disgusted me.
The book is very well-sourced and often miscategorized as a result.

Study after study confirms that IQ does not move significantly over time, and that it is a better predictor of economic success than race, social background, etc.

Unfortunately, people unfamiliar with statistics demagogued the heck out of that book, and missed important public policy information.

One must understand that simply because a population mean is lower for a certain group does not mean that any particular individual within it doesn’t possess a much higher mean. The repulsion to the one chapter on race and IQ is largely due to those who either fear that it would promote racism (an odd conclusion given that it found people of Asian descent to have a higher mean IQ than those of Caucasian descent) or who don’t want to contemplate the notion that increased spending and education will not likely improve economic success in an information economy.

Murray’s point, as someone who’s spent his life working in the social policy arena particularly trying to help people out of poverty, was that we cannot expect to move significant numbers of people out of poverty if they have a low IQ in our increasingly complex and technological society through education or entitlement programs. He was particularly concerned over the dearth of opportunity in the skilled trades which previously allowed hardworking people to advance without having to attain high levels of education.

I do hope that people give “The Bell Curve” a fresh read now that the furor’s died down, and consider that Herrnstein and Murray’s research actually lends credence to the notion that poverty isn’t necessarily a character issue. I think most Catholics would agree with this, and also would suggest, as you do, that such issues must be discussed carefully, lest people misinterpret the evidence.

Such concerns are of course valid, given the evils of Social Darwinism, eugenics, etc. If we really want to see our brothers and sisters liberated from poverty, however, we need to stop doing things which don’t work and figure out alternatives.

And lest anyone misinterpret my post, I remain somewhat skeptical that IQ is the best predictor of economic success, having known too many people who have risen to astonishing levels through the good ol’ Protestant work ethic Americans are rightly renowned for despite less-than-average IQ.

And I know quite a few highly-intelligent slackers, too. 👍
 
Add one more item to the to-do list, education.

The public school system is a failure. About 30% of the children who enter highschool do not graduate – and a recent study shows in the 50 largest cities, the dropout rate is about 50%.

And many of those who do graduate are functually illiterate.

Since the schools are government-run, that should tell us something about government’s ability to lift people out of poverty.
I agree with you about the failure of government education, but per “The Bell Curve” post above and more recent work Charles Murray’s done I’d suggest that the problem may be beyond the ability of education to solve. Differences in inherent cognitive ability may result in diminishing returns of education.

To use myself as an example, you could stick me in a cascading series of top math classes and I will never be a mathematician. I simply don’t have the aptitude for it, although hard work and instruction may make me competent in some areas of it given enough of both.

“No Child Left Behind” has been good in that having standards and metrics is a good thing, and bad in that so many teachers and administrators make the numbers by dumbing down the education of the top students.

'Cause There Ain’t No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. 👍

In general, though, we should all strive to the highest level of education we’re capable of, as needed for success and personal development. Education opens doors.
 
I agree with you about the failure of government education, but per “The Bell Curve” post above and more recent work Charles Murray’s done I’d suggest that the problem may be beyond the ability of education to solve. Differences in inherent cognitive ability may result in diminishing returns of education.

To use myself as an example, you could stick me in a cascading series of top math classes and I will never be a mathematician. I simply don’t have the aptitude for it, although hard work and instruction may make me competent in some areas of it given enough of both.

“No Child Left Behind” has been good in that having standards and metrics is a good thing, and bad in that so many teachers and administrators make the numbers by dumbing down the education of the top students.

'Cause There Ain’t No Such Thing As A Free Lunch. 👍

In general, though, we should all strive to the highest level of education we’re capable of, as needed for success and personal development. Education opens doors.
I think The Bell Curve misses a point – population IQ is heavily influenced by society. For example, in Northern Ireland, John Murphy, a Protestant, will have an IQ of 100. His cousing, Sean Murphy, a Catholic, will probably have an IQ of about 85 – showing the same spread as seen between Black and Caucasian in the US.

But Ruari Murphy – also a cousin – who lives in the Irish Republic will have an IQ of about 100, even though he is Catholic.
 
He was particularly concerned over the dearth of opportunity in the skilled trades which previously allowed hardworking people to advance without having to attain high levels of education.
We can always copy some of Sweden’s policies to help those people feel like they are contributing to society.
The headline unemployment rate in Sweden is only 5-5.5%, but this number is extremely misleading as it only includes a small number of the people who the government pays not to work. Many unemployed are sent to so-called “labor market political activities” who have no meaningful purpose then to reduce the headline unemployment number. Including them, unemployment is 8%.
stefanmikarlsson.blogspot.com/2005/11/does-sweden-defy-economic-logic.html
As for unemployment, the seemingly low numbers in Denmark reflect in fact the same kind of manipulation of statistics that the Swedish government have been using. While official unemployment in Denmark was only 133,500 or 4.8% in March 2006, there were in the fourth quarter (latest available number in Denmark’s statistical data bank )some 117,600 people or 4.2% in so-called “arbejdsmarkedspolitiske foranstaltninger(=“labor market political activities”, what in Sweden is refered to as “AMS-åtgärder”)”. This means that Denmark have even more hidden unemployment in that respect than even Sweden, where “only” 3.2% (144,000) were put away in “labor market political activities”
stefanmikarlsson.blogspot.com/2006/05/denmarks-overrated-flexicurity.html
The headline unemployment rate in Sweden is only 5–5.5%, but … [m]any unemployed are sent to so-called “labor market political activities” — activities whose only purpose is to reduce the official unemployment rate. If we ignore this ruse, unemployment is 8%.
mises.org/story/2259
 
I think The Bell Curve misses a point – population IQ is heavily influenced by society. For example, in Northern Ireland, John Murphy, a Protestant, will have an IQ of 100. His cousing, Sean Murphy, a Catholic, will probably have an IQ of about 85 – showing the same spread as seen between Black and Caucasian in the US.

But Ruari Murphy – also a cousin – who lives in the Irish Republic will have an IQ of about 100, even though he is Catholic.
I presume you’re snarking here. 😉

While there have been some sensational claims regarding cultural bias of IQ and other standardized tests, the evidence is to the contrary.

The reason why IQ and similar tests continue to be used is because they are useful. My contention with Murray is that I don’t think they’re destiny.

As a Catholic, I have to note that St Peter was not the brightest bulb in the Lite Brite set, if Scripture is to be relied upon. What apostle was more successful?

I am vitually certain that if we administered IQ tests to the United States Senate or to the attendees of the Academy Awards, we’d find a lower mean IQ than if we did the same with the folks on this board. And yet Senators and Hollywood actors surely have a much higher mean income than those of us on this board.

Success is relative.

It is also beside the point, since salvation is all that matters in the end, and the higher IQs have no advantage over the lower IQs when it comes to that.
 
I presume you’re snarking here. 😉

While there have been some sensational claims regarding cultural bias of IQ and other standardized tests, the evidence is to the contrary.

The reason why IQ and similar tests continue to be used is because they are useful. My contention with Murray is that I don’t think they’re destiny.
I think it is mostly destiny and the government should fund research into nootropics and make the means of the production of those nootropics public.

You are right that some measures of g are culturally unbiased. Raven’s Progressive Matrices does not have an cultural bias.
 
I presume you’re snarking here. 😉

While there have been some sensational claims regarding cultural bias of IQ and other standardized tests, the evidence is to the contrary.
No, not at all – the point is that there is evidence that IQ can be affected culturally. There is, however, no known way to affect it back again – the Irish Catholics in Northern Ireland and Blacks in the US can’t be “upgraded” from where they are, nor that a “culture blind” test would eliminate the differences. But the evidence is that their disadvantage is not genetic.
The reason why IQ and similar tests continue to be used is because they are useful. My contention with Murray is that I don’t think they’re destiny.
I agree.
I
As a Catholic, I have to note that St Peter was not the brightest bulb in the Lite Brite set, if Scripture is to be relied upon. What apostle was more successful?

I am vitually certain that if we administered IQ tests to the United States Senate or to the attendees of the Academy Awards, we’d find a lower mean IQ than if we did the same with the folks on this board. And yet Senators and Hollywood actors surely have a much higher mean income than those of us on this board.

Success is relative.

It is also beside the point, since salvation is all that matters in the end, and the higher IQs have no advantage over the lower IQs when it comes to that.
That’s correct. It is economic success that is correlated with IQ.
 
I think it is mostly destiny and the government should fund research into nootropics and make the means of the production of those nootropics public.

You are right that some measures of g are culturally unbiased. Raven’s Progressive Matrices does not have an cultural bias.
I haven’t heard of nootropics or Raven’s Progressive Matrices—would you mind elaborating, presuming we’re not too far afield?
 
No, not at all – the point is that there is evidence that IQ can be affected culturally. There is, however, no known way to affect it back again – the Irish Catholics in Northern Ireland and Blacks in the US can’t be “upgraded” from where they are, nor that a “culture blind” test would eliminate the differences. But the evidence is that their disadvantage is not genetic.
That’s interesting—I hadn’t really picked that up from Murray (if it’s in there and not the result of other research) but it’s admittedly been a couple of years since I last read it.
That’s correct. It is economic success that is correlated with IQ.
And fairly well-correlated, although as always there are enough aberrations that one could never presume that a given person was unsuccessful based on a factor such as race alone. The concern when “The Bell Curve” came out was that it would bolster bigotry. Since the key racial finding was how much higher Asian IQ means are, it was a bit of a stretch to think white supremacists would get a charge out of it. 🤷

Part of what keeps the social sciences in the pseudoscience realm is that politics infects the research to such a huge degree. IQ is one of the few relatively-unbiased metrics to be examined.

The irony of “The Bell Curve” is that the economic success of the authors in writing it was severely limited by a factor completely unrelated to their IQs—political correctness.

Maybe someday the well will be less poisoned and researchers can take a fresh look without political correctness dictating the “correct” results from the get-go.

I hope we don’t keep up the same family-destroying public policies in the meantime, though.
 
I hope we don’t keep up the same family-destroying public policies in the meantime, though.
The original programs had no feedback built it (it was considered heresy to suggest that them might not work.) There is no mid-course correction mechanism in the laws. The programs have been there for 40 years, and they will continue to destroy lives for another 40, at least.
 
lad. In saying everyone should pay the same tax, you will note, I stressed comparing people of equal intelligence, health, and so on.
You did, but it’s still making everyone pay the same cash amount as the average earner in the group. If the mean income of 40 year olds of average intelligence is $95,000, and you apply a tax rate of 20% to that, then every 40 year old of average intelligence and good health will be paying $365 a week in tax.
If the bricklayer cannot pay the millionaire’s tax, let the millionaire pay the same as the bricklayer.
And then the government might have enough money to hand out popsicles.
 
And then the government might have enough money to hand out popsicles.
Since the government does not have the Constitutional mandate to hand out popsicles, that wouldn’t be a bad thing.

Indeed, if 300 million Americans making ~$20,000 in per capita income paid 20% tax, that would generate $1,200,000,000,000 in revenue. That’s a lot of popsicles!
 
Halve that to get working age adults, then subtract stay-at-home mothers.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top