The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 iSteve BlogTeasers
The Dunedin Study: Nature v. Nurture Across 40 Years

Whenever I read denunciations of The Bell Curve, I’m struck by how little subsequent data are cited. We hear a lot of a priori arguments that were musty when the late Stephen Jay Gould was trumpeting themand a lot of ad hominem anger, but few references to new data that have emerged in the 20 years since.

It’s not as if there isn’t a lot more data today.

What made The Bell Curve of particular importance was that around 1990 Murray and Herrnstein got their hands on a particularly rich data set: the federal 1979 National Longitudinal Study of Youth tracking of 12,000+ nationally representative youngish people combined with the Pentagon’s 1980 administration of the AFQT/ASVAB enlistment test to the NLSY sample.

This was due to the Pentagon’s 1976 misnorming of AFQT scores that led to the Stripes Era of the Carter Administration military. Non-commissioned officer kept calling up Senator Sam Nunn to tell him that there must be something wrong with the new test because a lot of the new recruits were dumb as a box of rocks. Nunn finally got the brass to look into this and, sure enough, they’d screwed up in determining the passing scores.

Fortunately, there was a nationally representative sample of 15 to 23 year olds already under steam in the NLSY and adding a good cognitive test like the AFQT to it would be of benefit to social scientists as well. So in 1980 most of the NLSY panel sat down and took the AFQT so the Pentagon would finally know how smart the average American youth was. This led to the Top Gun era of the Reagan Administration military. (I’m oversimplifying history, but the misnorming fiasco deserves to be better known.)

So, if Herrnstein and Murray are wrong, we now have 20 more years of data from the NLSY79 tracking, which now includes thousands of children of females in the original study, including both mother and child IQ-like scores. You can access NLSY79 data here. The most recent published update is from 2012.

Plus we have the NLSY97 tracking study from 18 years later that has now been running for 17 years.

And we have lots of other long-term tracking samples, such as ADD Health.

Overseas, there is the Dunedin sample. The medical and dental school in the New Zealand city of Dunedin enrolled virtually every child born in Dunedin over a 12-month period in 1972-73 into this lifelong study. The subjects are now in their early 40s and their children are being enrolled as they reach age 15. A sizable documentary is being prepared on the results called “The Science of Us.” (Above is a brief trailer.)

Here are some selected papers published based on this universe of roughly 1000 individuals. (You can get the links to the papers here.)

Credit Scores, Cardiovascular Disease Risk and Human Capital

Is Chronic Asthma Associated with Shorter Leukocyte Telomere Length at Midlife?

Employment among schoolchildren and its associations with adult substance use, psychological wellbeing, and academic achievement

Community water fluoridation and intelligence: Prospective Study in New Zealand

Smoking Cessation and Subsequent Weight Change

Tobacco Smoking in Adolescence Predicts Maladaptive Coping Styles in Adulthood

Is Obesity Associated With a Decline in Intelligence Quotient During the First Half of the Life Course?

The p Factor: One general psychopathology factor in the structure of psychiatric disorders?

Prospective developmental subtypes of alcohol dependence from age 18 to 32 years: Implications for nosology, etiology, and intervention

Retinal vessel caliber and lifelong neuropsychological functioning: Retinal imaging as an investigative tool for cognitive epidemiology

Stability and change in same-sex attraction, experience, and identity by sex and age in a New Zealand Birth Cohort

Childhood and adolescent television viewing and antisocial behavior in early adulthood

The relationship between multiple sex partners and anxiety, depression, and substance dependence disorders: a cohort study

A 32-Year Longitudinal Study of Child and Adolescent Pathways to Well-Being in Adulthood

Persistent Cannabis Users Show Neuropsychological Decline from Childhood to Midlife

Does Being an Older Parent Attenuate the Intergenerational Transmission of Parenting?

Undercontrolled temperament at age 3 predicts disordered gambling at age 32: a longitudinal study of a complete birth cohort

Can Childhood Factors Predict Workplace Deviance?

Patterns of sexual partnering and reproductive history: Associations with timing of first birth in a birth cohort

Risk factors prospectively associated with adult obsessive-compulsive symptom dimensions and obsessive-compulsive disorder

Adolescent, and their parents, attitudes towards graduated driver licensing and subsequent risky driving and crashes in young adulthood

A gradient of childhood self-control predicts health, wealth, and public safety

The Dunedin Multidisciplinary Health and Development Study: tips and traps from a 40-year longitudinal study

Consistency and reliability of self-reported lifetime number of heterosexual partners by gender and age in a cohort study

Adolescent screen-time and attachment to parents and peers

How common are common mental disorders? Evidence that lifetime prevalence rates are doubled by prospective versus retrospective ascertainment

Adverse childhood experiences and adult risk factors for age-related disease: depression, inflammation, and clustering of metabolic risk markers

Researching genetic versus nongenetic determinants of disease: A comparison and proposed unification

Predictive value of family history on severity of illness: the case for depression, anxiety, alcohol dependence, and drug dependence

And here’s the home page of psychologists Avshalom Caspi and Terrie Moffitt who have written some of the most ambitious papers based on the Dunedin population.

At James Thompson’s Psychological Comments, he summarizes an upcoming Caspi and Moffitt paper based on 40 years of Dunedin data where they look at who are net contributors and who are net consumers of the common weal.

This strikes me as potentially hugely useful in immigration policy. My opinion has been that our immigration system ought to try to exclude individuals (and thus their descendants) who are likely to cost far more than they pay in taxes. Here’s an upcoming study of a first world city over the last 40 years:

Are you a nuisance?

What if we were to take an objective measure? Track a thousand newborns, and keep a close account of the profit and loss ledger. At this point you may feel a trifle uneasy. Who are we to judge these matters? What price the jocular remark of a mute inglorious Milton? How could one possibly assess the wit of someone who lacks a Twitter account?

Furthermore, you may recoil at the possible results of such an enquiry. If some individuals turn out to be a nuisance and a high cost to society, what then? Should they be exiled to some other land whether the natives are even more generous and gullible, or should we intervene as best we can to make them into productive citizens?

The usual strategy of successful institutions these days, such as Harvard University or the New England Patriots, is to devote much care to whom they select.

These are not trivial matters, and the researchers were at pains to highlight the moral choices which arise from a clear headed evaluation of costs and benefits. In particular, their discussion pre-supposes a compassionate society, with redistributive taxation providing educational, health and welfare benefits. The question barely arises outside a welfare states. In such less kindly states, if people are a nuisance they are simply a nuisance, but not a direct cost, since no one will be paying them any benefits.

Terrie E. Moffitt & Avshalom Caspi used the ISIR 2014 conference to test reactions from assembled researchers about the findings so far, and about the issues which arise from them. They presented their data on the Dunedin study, a four-decade longitudinal study of a birth cohort of 1000 New Zealanders. They examined risk factors in childhood and measures of social, health, and economic costs in adulthood.

Adult social and economic outcomes fit the Pareto principle: 20% of the cohort accounted for approximately 80% of every outcome: the cohort’s months of social welfare benefits, years of absent-father childrearing, pack-years of cigarette smoking, hospital admissions, pharmacy prescription fills, criminal court convictions, and injury-related insurance claims. Moreover, high-cost individuals with one problem outcome tended to also have multiple problem outcomes. An ultra-high-cost sub-segment of the cohort was identified who accounted for 80% of multiple problems. …

The authors know all this, and realise that the beguiling Pareto observation is a post-hoc description, which of itself predicts nothing. In this case it simply asserts: there are some troublesome people, and they will account for most social problems. The critical question is: which kids will grow up to be responsible for a disproportionate amount of trouble (and can anything be done to make them behave better)?

The authors say: Risk factors measured in childhood that characterized this ultra-high-cost group were: low family socio-economic status, child maltreatment, low self-control, and low IQ. Effect sizes were very large. Predictive analyses showed that together, SES, maltreatment, self-control, and IQ measured in the first decade of life were able to predict 80% of the individuals who are using 80% of multiple costly services. We developed an index of the integrity of a child’s brain at age three years. This age-3 brain-integrity index was a strong predictor of the cohort members who four decades later became members of the ultra-high-cost population segment.

Implications: Much research has shown that childhood risk ‘X’ can predict poor adult outcome ‘Y’, but modest effect sizes discourage translation of findings into targeted childhood interventions. This study illustrates that the vast bulk of a nation’s social services, crime control, and health-care are expended on a relatively small population segment. During early childhood, this population segment is characterized by a small set of risk factors: low SES, child maltreatment, low self-control, low IQ, and poor brain integrity. Reducing these factors may bring surprisingly good return on investment.

The comments from the audience were that it would be an error to describe the neurological examination as an “index of the integrity of the child’s brain”. Brains are assumed to be present. Better to say that an examination of behaviour, skills and neurological responses shows that many of the troublesome children can be detected at that age.

The assessment is interesting. It includes the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test, which is simple and a good predictor. A word is spoken and the child has only to point to the one of four pictures which best describes the word. It has been doing good work since 1959 and is an excellent example of the power of intelligence measures: simple to do but profound in their implications. …

The core of the argument is a social one, and goes to the heart of policy making. The authors calculate that about 45% of the population are “low cost users”. In other words, they draw very little on community resources, yet pay most of the taxes that provide those services to others. The authors have identified some ultra high cost users who are a net drain on resources.

When you find yourself in a hole, stop digging. Taking care of your own citizenry’s problem children is one thing, taking care of other peoples’ is something else.

 
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
[]
  1. This was due to the Pentagon’s 1976 misnorming of AFQT scores that led to the Stripes Era of the Carter Administration military. Non-commissioned officer kept calling up Senator Sam Nunn to tell him that there must be something wrong with the new test because a lot of the new recruits were dumb as a box of rocks. Nunn finally got the brass to look into this and, sure enough, they’d screwed up in determining the passing scores.

    I am not doubting your claim that the test was misnormed. I am only saying that not many wanted to join the military in the late 1970s. The period following Vietnam was a dark one for the military, and its standing in the public was quite low. Even if the test were correctly applied, they probably wouldn’t have been able to get enough top line recruits. So in the end they would have resorted to scrapping the bottom of the barrel which is what they did with the butchered test in the first place.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are only available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also only be used once per hour.
    Sharing Comment via Twitter
    http://www.unz.com/isteve/the-dunedin-study-nature-nurture-over-40-years/#comment-814953
    More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  2. I got OUT of the Marines in 76.You don’t think…nah I’m just one dude…

    Read More
  3. Isn’t one of the problems with proceeding with these findings the question of where to stop?

    Or, perhaps otherwise stated, the question of knowing when your problems are truly bad enough that it’s time to start?

    That is … okay, let’s accept that 80% of our current problems are caused by 20% of the population.

    But getting rid of that 20% presupposes that our problems were so bad that same was merited, right?

    Okay however, even though of course there’s always going to strong biases to say “yes of course” it pays enough to get rid of that mere 20% (after all, one bias inheres just in the fact that it is 80% judging only 20), you get over your qualms about those biases and get rid of that 20%.

    Well okay further, but you’ve still got some problems, presumably caused by your new lowest 20%.
    So what do you do about them?

    Do you not rid of that group on the mere theory that … once is enough? If indeed you even can persuade the other 80% with all their built-in biases to stop there and not rid themselves of them?

    Or do you get rid of them, and then the next 20% too but stop there somehow on the grounds that the third time is the charm for some reason?

    And so on and so forth.

    And thus, too one might observe, is there really any moral/ethical difference between getting rid of that first 20% and getting rid of the second? Or between the first and the third? Or the fifth?

    No matter how bad things are, you know, they can always get worse. And to a degree anyone suffering any problem whatsoever are always going to tend to think they are much worse than they really are and be enormously tempted to over-emphasize the benefits of getting rid of same.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    How about not letting people in to your country people who are likely to procreate people likely to wind up in bottom 20% of the bottom 20%?
    , @PowerLaw
    So 20% is a pretty big hit to take but if your system is Pareto distributed then 64% of your problems are likely due to 4% of your population and 51.2% of problems are on .8% of the pop. At some point on this curve we are going to hit a level of per capita badness that justifies extraordinary measures, for example about one in a million US citizens are on death row. If these were the correctly identified worst of the worst and the Pareto assumption held they would be responsible for close to 15% of the social ills which looks like a pretty good cost/benefit to me.

    Now prescreening isn't likely to be that accurate and the actual big problems are more likely at the other end of the bell curve, Neville Chamberlain rather than Jack the Ripper, but to put it in Steve's favored terms cutting off the distribution at -1.4 SD would cut out over half of your problems. This would stop around .8% of white Europeans and 34% of African-American similar populations if the test is IQ. However if the test is some kind of composite politesse quotient (PQ) based on these studies the inter-racial breakdown could be different. Obviously if you have developed such a test deciding how far to raise the standard for incoming persons is a perfectly reasonable debate even if some group should decide to raise it to insurmountable levels (see Sentinelese people ) likewise as Steve points out Citizenism precludes a lot of this sort action for current citizens.

    Another interesting point is the diminishing returns on extra 20%s. So you are positing some kind of progressive doom as after the success of the first 20% we lop off a few more 20%s and then there isn't anything left. However it is geometric not linear so two iterations 64% of the population with 4% of the problems and then 51.2% of the population with .8% of the problems. In contrast to being limited to 5 you could actually do 10 of these 20% culls and still have almost 10% of the population and at this point you would have 99.99999% of the trouble out of the system. If you could do this well that might almost be that answer to Steve's observation of the 5 billion people that want to move here. Such a test applied to them would allow us to onboard 500,000,000 useful citizens at the cost of absorbing 500 deadheads. If PQ encompassed cultural compatibility, and at this extreme it would have to, then such a move would be a boon.

    Happily social science will never be precise enough for us to have to worry about the more extreme ends of these implications. For my part losing half your problems with a -1.4 SD tripwire or even a quarter of them with a -2.5 SD gate strikes me as good sense rather than a slippery slope.

    , @Jus' Sayin'...
    By many objective measures -- crime rates, illegitimacy rates, welfare dependence rates among those in the working age population, average academic performance as measured by standardized testing, substance abuse and dependence rates, to name just a few -- this country is in much worse shape now that it was in the period prior to say 1970. Since about the mid 1960s to the present the overall trend has been downward, albeit with some significant fluctuations. The frog in warming water analogy is perfect; we've gotten so used to things being bad that we fail to realize how really bad they are, even when measured by the most objective criteria.

    So I'd suggest that dealing incrementally with the worst members of society first and working upwards until we hit 1960s levels of social functioning might be a good start.

    By the way, this process worked really well for criminal justice starting in the late 1980s. From the 1960s on into the mid to late 1980s declining corrections budgets meant fewer bad people were incarcerated. Starting in the mid 1980s increasing investment in correctuions meant that many more bad people were removed, at least temporarily, from society and crime rates underwent a rather precipitous decline. (Parenthetically, Ed Zedlewski of NIJ and Mark Kleiman, now at UCLA, deserve some credit for providing theoretical/empirical support for this investment in corrections and decline in crime. They deserve credit for bucking the "progressive" agenda.) One might also mention the positive effects of the short-lived welfare reforms of the 1990s that the Clintons fought and then claimed credit for when they proved succesful.
    , @LiveFreeOrDie
    This seems disingenuous, to me. It is of course true that the new lowest quintile will be objectively, well, the lowest. But the problems that the current, non-lowest quintiles present are qualitatively less burdensome that the social problems that we have now.
  4. Anon says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Mencken made fun of the “mute, inglorious Miltons” thing many, many years ago.

    Read More
  5. @TomB
    Isn't one of the problems with proceeding with these findings the question of where to stop?

    Or, perhaps otherwise stated, the question of knowing when your problems are truly bad enough that it's time to start?

    That is ... okay, let's accept that 80% of our current problems are caused by 20% of the population.

    But getting rid of that 20% presupposes that our problems were so bad that same was merited, right?

    Okay however, even though of course there's always going to strong biases to say "yes of course" it pays enough to get rid of that mere 20% (after all, one bias inheres just in the fact that it is 80% judging only 20), you get over your qualms about those biases and get rid of that 20%.

    Well okay further, but you've still got some problems, presumably caused by your new lowest 20%.
    So what do you do about them?

    Do you not rid of that group on the mere theory that ... once is enough? If indeed you even can persuade the other 80% with all their built-in biases to stop there and not rid themselves of them?

    Or do you get rid of them, and then the next 20% too but stop there somehow on the grounds that the third time is the charm for some reason?

    And so on and so forth.

    And thus, too one might observe, is there really any moral/ethical difference between getting rid of that first 20% and getting rid of the second? Or between the first and the third? Or the fifth?

    No matter how bad things are, you know, they can always get worse. And to a degree anyone suffering any problem whatsoever are always going to tend to think they are much worse than they really are and be enormously tempted to over-emphasize the benefits of getting rid of same.

    How about not letting people in to your country people who are likely to procreate people likely to wind up in bottom 20% of the bottom 20%?

    Read More
    • Replies: @rod1963
    That is what we should be aiming for. No Western nation can import tens of millions of illiterate, impoverished 3rd world peasants with IQ's in the 70 and 80's and whose culture is antithetical to learning and literacy and expect to remain intact.

    I've lived in Los Angeles County all my life and watched how illegals have turned the state into a cess pit in areas where they live. They are not a value enhancement, they are a serious blight and drain of state resources across the board from the hospitals, schools, welfare offices and fill up our prisons with their criminal prone males. The gang population of Los Angeles is that of a small army and mostly composed of Hispanics. Worse, most Hispanics are impossible to educate and become part of a permanent underclass and good for nothing except trouble and being parasites on a system that can barely carry the load.

    God help us should that welfare system stop working. It will make the breakup of Yugoslavia look pleasant.

    Sure it's been a boon to the white Democratic elites and the local business goon who needs disposable labor. But for everyone else, it's been hell.
    , @Peter Akuleyev
    How about not letting people in to your country people who are likely to procreate people likely to wind up in bottom 20% of the bottom 20%?


    That describes European immigration "policy", or lack thereof. But not the US. What makes the US special is the large African-American minority, and no new immigrant group, including Mexicans, is likely to wind up in the bottom 20% of the bottom 20%. That will remain African-American for the foreseeable future. American immigration is hollowing out the middle so that the differences between the top 50% and bottom 50% are likely to become a lot more sharply pronounced over the next 100 years.
    , @TomB
    Oh I definitely agree that not *adding* a lower 20% or adding to your existing 20% is just common sense for sure.

    @ PowerLaw:

    With the exception of seeing character and culture as being far more relevant to a person's "worth" than I.Q. it's hard for me to see any unreason in what you say, and lots reasonableness that's easy to sign on to. Especially your figures noting the exponential effect on eliminating problems. Very interesting, and superbly explained.
  6. “The period following Vietnam was a dark one for the military, and its standing in the public was quite low. Even if the test were correctly applied, they probably wouldn’t have been able to get enough top line recruits.”

    Back in high school in the early 90s I knew an older guy who attended one of the military academies in the ’70s. I asked him how he got in. “I was the only guy from my congressional district who applied,” was his reply.

    Yes, the post-Vietnam military really went to hell. Wouldn’t be shocked if the same thing has happened to today’s military, as well.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Major Problem
    Yes, the post-Vietnam military really went to hell. Wouldn’t be shocked if the same thing has happened to today’s military, as well.

    The late Vietnam War-era military saw a draft army plagued by race riots in the barracks, rampant drug abuse and alcoholism, fragging of NCOs and junior officers. Fully one-third of the 47,000 combat deaths in that war were the result of friendly fire. There were an additional 11,000 deaths due to accidents.
    The post-Vietnam military faced abject demoralization within the ranks as well as civilian disdain. This led to the Abrams reforms and a decades-long effort to produce a highly professional armed force that is a career choice.
    Today, 75 percent of those who apply to enlist cannot qualify and are rejected--this is after almost 15 years of continuous warfare. At present, the waiting list to join the Marines is nine-months long. It has been as long as a year. There is no shortage of motivated, qualified recruits despite the high standards. The result is that we die less and kill more than ever in history.
    There is no tolerance for screw-ups or foul balls in today's armed forces. Any kind of alcohol-related incident will end your chances for promotion. The "O" Club culture of bygone days is dead.
    Of course, the armed forces reflect the society they are part of, including all of its problems, but to assert that they have "gone to hell" is a base canard.

    , @Michelle
    That makes no sense. During Vietnam we had "the Draft". That means every idiot had to serve in the military. I just watched a three part documentary on Brits serving in Afghanistan. The British soldiers came across as very intelligent. Even 18 year olds seemed mature and bright. There is a great essay by a French soldier floating around the net recently, that describes American troops in a glowing light.
    http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/a-french-soldiers-view-of-us-soldiers-in-afghanistan

    Whenever I listen to American troops speak about their experiences of war, I am truly impressed by their intelligence. If we are talking about the quality of education being much lower than it was in the 1960's and before, then I have to agree. My mother, raised in Oakland during the 1950's, could have been a Jeopardy champ. I would match her high school education, with most ivy league college educations of today and she would come out the winner.
  7. Dunedin has Otago University which makes some of the city very international, but by and large Dunedin is white. It won’t tell us much about HBD. It would have made more sense to use Hamilton which is about the same size as Dunedin but with a much large Maori and PI population.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tom Regan
    Would you want to be the one who tells a group of Maoris their comparative group IQ scores?
    , @TGGP
    Human biodiversity is not synonymous with race. Race is a particular manifestation of biodiversity. A whole lot of biodiversity resides within racially homogenous groups. If all the races of the world melded into one with only clinal variation, you could still have the same total amount of biodiversity, it just wouldn't be across groups.
    , @unpc downunder
    Dunedin can be compared with a city like Sheffield in Northern England - white, working class, de-industrialised and dependent on its local university for economic survival.
  8. @22pp22
    Dunedin has Otago University which makes some of the city very international, but by and large Dunedin is white. It won't tell us much about HBD. It would have made more sense to use Hamilton which is about the same size as Dunedin but with a much large Maori and PI population.

    Would you want to be the one who tells a group of Maoris their comparative group IQ scores?

    Read More
  9. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    22pp22 writes: “Dunedin has Otago University which makes some of the city very international, but by and large Dunedin is white. It won’t tell us much about HBD. It would have made more sense to use Hamilton which is about the same size as Dunedin but with a much large Maori and PI population.”

    Not very many Maori (or indeed very many non-whites in general) are to be found anywhere in the South Island. Dunedin’s WASP composition is hardly exceptional by South Island standards. It’s in the North Island (Auckland still more than Hamilton) that most of New Zealand’s non-whites live.

    http://www.stats.govt.nz/Census/2013-census/data-tables/tables-about-a-place.aspx?request_value=24394&tabname=Culturaldiversity

    Read More
    • Replies: @dearieme
    "Not very many Maori... are to be found anywhere in the South Island. " We met a woman from Dunedin, now aged about 70, who told us that she had never seen a Maori until she travelled north for her further education at age 18.
  10. @Steve Sailer
    How about not letting people in to your country people who are likely to procreate people likely to wind up in bottom 20% of the bottom 20%?

    That is what we should be aiming for. No Western nation can import tens of millions of illiterate, impoverished 3rd world peasants with IQ’s in the 70 and 80′s and whose culture is antithetical to learning and literacy and expect to remain intact.

    I’ve lived in Los Angeles County all my life and watched how illegals have turned the state into a cess pit in areas where they live. They are not a value enhancement, they are a serious blight and drain of state resources across the board from the hospitals, schools, welfare offices and fill up our prisons with their criminal prone males. The gang population of Los Angeles is that of a small army and mostly composed of Hispanics. Worse, most Hispanics are impossible to educate and become part of a permanent underclass and good for nothing except trouble and being parasites on a system that can barely carry the load.

    God help us should that welfare system stop working. It will make the breakup of Yugoslavia look pleasant.

    Sure it’s been a boon to the white Democratic elites and the local business goon who needs disposable labor. But for everyone else, it’s been hell.

    Read More
  11. @Wilkey
    "The period following Vietnam was a dark one for the military, and its standing in the public was quite low. Even if the test were correctly applied, they probably wouldn’t have been able to get enough top line recruits."

    Back in high school in the early 90s I knew an older guy who attended one of the military academies in the '70s. I asked him how he got in. "I was the only guy from my congressional district who applied," was his reply.

    Yes, the post-Vietnam military really went to hell. Wouldn't be shocked if the same thing has happened to today's military, as well.

    Yes, the post-Vietnam military really went to hell. Wouldn’t be shocked if the same thing has happened to today’s military, as well.

    The late Vietnam War-era military saw a draft army plagued by race riots in the barracks, rampant drug abuse and alcoholism, fragging of NCOs and junior officers. Fully one-third of the 47,000 combat deaths in that war were the result of friendly fire. There were an additional 11,000 deaths due to accidents.
    The post-Vietnam military faced abject demoralization within the ranks as well as civilian disdain. This led to the Abrams reforms and a decades-long effort to produce a highly professional armed force that is a career choice.
    Today, 75 percent of those who apply to enlist cannot qualify and are rejected–this is after almost 15 years of continuous warfare. At present, the waiting list to join the Marines is nine-months long. It has been as long as a year. There is no shortage of motivated, qualified recruits despite the high standards. The result is that we die less and kill more than ever in history.
    There is no tolerance for screw-ups or foul balls in today’s armed forces. Any kind of alcohol-related incident will end your chances for promotion. The “O” Club culture of bygone days is dead.
    Of course, the armed forces reflect the society they are part of, including all of its problems, but to assert that they have “gone to hell” is a base canard.

    Read More
    • Replies: @fnn
    Yeah, but what's the point of all those fine troops if the entity they're (supposedly) defending is basically a POS.
    , @Jack Hanson
    It hasn't gone to hell in the same sense, but my friends who are still in have lots of stories involving things like

    - infantry units pulled in from field exercises in order to attend three day workshops on "sexual harassment awareness" and other diversity uberalles exercises.

    - budgets slashed for things like rifle marksmanship but plenty of money to hire Nice White Women to teach men how not to rape

    - male on male sexual assault gets swept under a rug in short order with all involved parties scattered hither and yon throughout the Army, but if a female admin clerk gets drunk and cries rape there's hell to pay.

    I don't know how the other services are but the Army is basically a bunch of officers drinking the kool aid in order to make their OERs look good (think lots of bullet points about "instituting a 21 point plan in order to cut sexual assault incidents 85%") and not a whole lot about combat. Right now the future warfighting capabilities of the Army are in the hands of the NCOs who stayed in through multiple deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan and are seeing things ramp up again.

    Yes the SOCOM units aren't affected by this, but the personnel there are exceptional enough that you're not just going to grab the type of person who can do commando or unconventional warfare operations off the street. These types of people are not easily replaceable and this is one of the few places the military learned a lesson after the mass exodus of special operations troops to PMCs back in the early to mid 2000's. The line infantry might suffer the social petri dish nonsense but not the guys who got Bin Laden.

    Sad to say its likely going to take the destruction of a sizeable maneuver element in order to get the military focused on doing things like winning wars vs. keeping Sen. Gillibrand and the contractor mafia happy (witness the attempts of the AF brass to kill the A-10, probably the most successful airframe we have, to fund the F-35 Sinkhole). I'm sure the Obama/neolib-con view of warfare is playing into this mindset as well. Who the hell needs things like the 82nd ABN or 1st Armored Division when all you need to "win" is the unwieldy three legged stool of commandos, drones, and air strikes?

    Unfortunately these people don't realize that shit won't win you a ground war, but whatever its not their sons going into the poor bloody infantry so why would they care?

  12. @22pp22
    Dunedin has Otago University which makes some of the city very international, but by and large Dunedin is white. It won't tell us much about HBD. It would have made more sense to use Hamilton which is about the same size as Dunedin but with a much large Maori and PI population.

    Human biodiversity is not synonymous with race. Race is a particular manifestation of biodiversity. A whole lot of biodiversity resides within racially homogenous groups. If all the races of the world melded into one with only clinal variation, you could still have the same total amount of biodiversity, it just wouldn’t be across groups.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The most deplorable one
    It is interesting, however, that some people say that because sub-Saharan Africans have the highest genetic diversity among humans, there must be a group of 190 IQ sub-Saharan Africans out there somewhere.
    , @coyote
    you are not paying attention to what HBD science, and history is telling you: all of western civilization was built by dead, white, european males. multiculture, social justice, etc is tearing it all down. stupid is as stupid does, and our "culture" is doing stupid. as we regress to spear-chucking and up into the trees, does that make us "better"?
    , @Former Darfur
    Human biodiversity is not synonymous with race. Race is a particular manifestation of biodiversity. A whole lot of biodiversity resides within racially homogenous groups. If all the races of the world melded into one with only clinal variation, you could still have the same total amount of biodiversity, it just wouldn’t be across groups.

    That would be true at first but pretty soon the stupid tenth and the really smart tenth would both be gone. The stupidest would no longer compete at all and be starved out and the smart tenth would probably be killed off as a tall poppy mentality quickly set in. Neither would have a cohesive set of co-ethnics to protect them.

    Then too, the natural tendency would be to separate out, so one would have to figure in some sort of external force getting them to mix in the first place and keeping them mixed.
  13. Every one of those articles sounds really interesting.

    The titles suggest something I’ve said here before: IQ is correlated with basically every other desirable human train, including morality. That’s not a popular thing to say, and I bet for a lot of people their mind races to recall the many exceptions to this rule.

    What bad traits are associated with IQ? All I can think of is myopia.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Arthur Jensen said musical rhythm is unusual in not being correlated with IQ, which is why drummer jokes are a thing and why obviously smart rock stars like Jagger, Bowie, and Townshend tell them.
    , @Chip Smith
    It's a complicated subject, but most research suggests that suicidality (usually considered an undesirable trait) is positively correlated with IQ. It's also curiously easy to overlook profoundly undesirable developments are that are *contingently* associated with high IQ. It takes very high-functioning brains, for example, to come up with technologies that can annihilate large populations. The practical capacity for mass genocide may not qualify as a "trait," but sub specie aeternitatis, it seems like a pretty big downside for smarts.
    , @HA
    "What bad traits are associated with IQ?"

    Extrapolating from border collies, I would guess epilepsy. Also, neuroses of one form or another - i.e., any kind of idiocy that comes with being an idiot savant.

    And worst of all, nerdiness.

  14. @Lot
    Every one of those articles sounds really interesting.

    The titles suggest something I've said here before: IQ is correlated with basically every other desirable human train, including morality. That's not a popular thing to say, and I bet for a lot of people their mind races to recall the many exceptions to this rule.

    What bad traits are associated with IQ? All I can think of is myopia.

    Arthur Jensen said musical rhythm is unusual in not being correlated with IQ, which is why drummer jokes are a thing and why obviously smart rock stars like Jagger, Bowie, and Townshend tell them.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Former Darfur
    Arthur Jensen said musical rhythm is unusual in not being correlated with IQ, which is why drummer jokes are a thing and why obviously smart rock stars like Jagger, Bowie, and Townshend tell them.

    Drummers are not so much unique in having a better sense of rhythm than the rest of the band as in having to be in better physical shape.

    http://www.clemburkedrummingproject.com/Research.html

    Having worked with a lot of rock musicians as an equipment vendor and repairman (I did not specialize in drums, but you wind up doing everything) I never thought there was a substantial difference in intelligence between drummers and guitarists, keys or bass players.
    , @unpc downunder
    The only high IQ drummer I'm aware of is Neil Peart of Rush. Mind you, he's also the only left-brained libertarian rock star I'm aware of, so he's an outlier on numerous levels.
  15. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    Well in the Netherlands – and actually in almost every single northern European nation ie nations which had mass immigration inflicted upon them by the political class there have been many, many careful, comprehensive fiscal impact studies done by unbiased, uninterested experts on the national profit/loss impact of third world immigration.
    The entirety of these studies unequivocally show that mass third world immigration is an enormous fiscal loss to the receiving nations. There has not been one single exception. If there was, the left would crow about it incessantly.
    A few years back, the left used to bark ‘but we need immigrants to fill job vacancies/do the dirty jobs/pay taxes/pay for ‘our’ pensions’ etc etc etc. Now in the Netherlands the ‘smart’ lefties now cry ‘but you can’t judge a human being by how much money he makes’.
    A new day. A new excuse.

    Read More
    • Replies: @TenD
    " there have been many, many careful, comprehensive fiscal impact studies done"

    A list of these studies, or links, or a good google scholar search quote ("comprehensive fiscal impact" AND "third world immigration" AND EU ?) would be appreciated.
  16. @TomB
    Isn't one of the problems with proceeding with these findings the question of where to stop?

    Or, perhaps otherwise stated, the question of knowing when your problems are truly bad enough that it's time to start?

    That is ... okay, let's accept that 80% of our current problems are caused by 20% of the population.

    But getting rid of that 20% presupposes that our problems were so bad that same was merited, right?

    Okay however, even though of course there's always going to strong biases to say "yes of course" it pays enough to get rid of that mere 20% (after all, one bias inheres just in the fact that it is 80% judging only 20), you get over your qualms about those biases and get rid of that 20%.

    Well okay further, but you've still got some problems, presumably caused by your new lowest 20%.
    So what do you do about them?

    Do you not rid of that group on the mere theory that ... once is enough? If indeed you even can persuade the other 80% with all their built-in biases to stop there and not rid themselves of them?

    Or do you get rid of them, and then the next 20% too but stop there somehow on the grounds that the third time is the charm for some reason?

    And so on and so forth.

    And thus, too one might observe, is there really any moral/ethical difference between getting rid of that first 20% and getting rid of the second? Or between the first and the third? Or the fifth?

    No matter how bad things are, you know, they can always get worse. And to a degree anyone suffering any problem whatsoever are always going to tend to think they are much worse than they really are and be enormously tempted to over-emphasize the benefits of getting rid of same.

    So 20% is a pretty big hit to take but if your system is Pareto distributed then 64% of your problems are likely due to 4% of your population and 51.2% of problems are on .8% of the pop. At some point on this curve we are going to hit a level of per capita badness that justifies extraordinary measures, for example about one in a million US citizens are on death row. If these were the correctly identified worst of the worst and the Pareto assumption held they would be responsible for close to 15% of the social ills which looks like a pretty good cost/benefit to me.

    Now prescreening isn’t likely to be that accurate and the actual big problems are more likely at the other end of the bell curve, Neville Chamberlain rather than Jack the Ripper, but to put it in Steve’s favored terms cutting off the distribution at -1.4 SD would cut out over half of your problems. This would stop around .8% of white Europeans and 34% of African-American similar populations if the test is IQ. However if the test is some kind of composite politesse quotient (PQ) based on these studies the inter-racial breakdown could be different. Obviously if you have developed such a test deciding how far to raise the standard for incoming persons is a perfectly reasonable debate even if some group should decide to raise it to insurmountable levels (see Sentinelese people ) likewise as Steve points out Citizenism precludes a lot of this sort action for current citizens.

    Another interesting point is the diminishing returns on extra 20%s. So you are positing some kind of progressive doom as after the success of the first 20% we lop off a few more 20%s and then there isn’t anything left. However it is geometric not linear so two iterations 64% of the population with 4% of the problems and then 51.2% of the population with .8% of the problems. In contrast to being limited to 5 you could actually do 10 of these 20% culls and still have almost 10% of the population and at this point you would have 99.99999% of the trouble out of the system. If you could do this well that might almost be that answer to Steve’s observation of the 5 billion people that want to move here. Such a test applied to them would allow us to onboard 500,000,000 useful citizens at the cost of absorbing 500 deadheads. If PQ encompassed cultural compatibility, and at this extreme it would have to, then such a move would be a boon.

    Happily social science will never be precise enough for us to have to worry about the more extreme ends of these implications. For my part losing half your problems with a -1.4 SD tripwire or even a quarter of them with a -2.5 SD gate strikes me as good sense rather than a slippery slope.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Another Canadian

    However it is geometric not linear so two iterations 64% of the population with 4% of the problems and then 51.2% of the population with .8% of the problems. In contrast to being limited to 5 you could actually do 10 of these 20% culls and still have almost 10% of the population and at this point you would have 99.99999% of the trouble out of the system.
     
    Let me guess...you used to be Jack Welch's HR guy?
    , @AnAnon
    That is basically segregation, or as its called these days: gentrification.
    , @SFG
    You're going a little too heavy-quant for something that isn't that obviously quantitative. Death row inmates aren't responsible for 15% of society's ills--they're usually psychos who kill a few people in gruesome ways that shock a jury.
  17. Isn’t one of the problems with proceeding with these findings the question of where to stop?

    And thus, too one might observe, is there really any moral/ethical difference between getting rid of that first 20% and getting rid of the second? Or between the first and the third? Or the fifth?

    Tom, these questions you pose aren’t actually the slightest bit earth shattering.

    First off society is always\already making these sorts of judgments. Example: what behavior lands you in jail? What behavior merits capital punishment?

    Further, this issue of “the next 20%” is precisely what nature does. Sometimes folks don’t seem aware of it–not saying you’re not–but not to evolve, but just for any species to*to stay in place* requires continual selection. For say rabbits to still be capable of eluding foxes (or eagles and coyotes in my neighborhood) the “least fit” (with admittedly a lot of luck) 20% must be culled in every generation. If i get a bunch of rabbits and start raising them, feeding them (welfare), giving them “universal health care” and allowing them to breed like … well … rabbits, in several generations i’m going to have a population that would be absolutely hopeless trying to survive in the wild. Forget building supermen, selection is required just to keep any species fit.

    As to arguments about morals a couple points:
    –> When in comes to criminal costs, you have the criminal behavior which society has every right (usurping the victim’s right) to punish. In our old tribal societies, being a chronic jerk–if it didn’t get you killed–would likely get you banished. No “group” up to and including society has some sort of obligation to carry people who don’t want to abide by the norms and rules of that group.

    –> For non-criminal costs–essentially welfare–there’s an issue of quid pro quo. The current model is there is no quo. You screw up and aren’t taking care of yourself … fine, the taxpayers will pick up the tab. This is ridiculous. As a taxpayer, my reaction when someone comes with there hand out to be supported on the public dime is … fine, but you don’t get to have any kids. I see no moral issue with that. If you don’t like the deal–don’t take it. Take care of yourself.

    I think that pretty much wraps up the moral case. You don’t have to run around inventing new moral logic to handle this, we already have it–criminal behavior and quid pro quo. No one is entitled to be a criminal jackass. No one is actually entitled to the state–meaning the taxpayers–giving him stuff.

    ~~~

    Whether anyone iSteve readers or anyone else approves of dealing with this or not … it’s going to happen.

    The “anything goes” modern Western welfare state is an unsustainable blip in history. It’s already clearly headed toward destruction because the West–under the influence of pernicious ideology–is unable to even police *external* access to its welfare ( much less work on eugenics) and its nations are simply being destroyed.

    But even if that wasn’t going on, the “anything goes”–survival of the unfittest–welfare state is doomed because some people, some nation, will eventually develop *eugenic* polices. And those nations that have eugenic fertility and start making themselves smarter, healthier, stronger will wildly out-compete those that do not.

    Note, i don’t claim to know whether that will occur by old fashioned eugenic policies, or whether the onrush of genetic technology will dominate. But i do know that whichever nations start caring about the quality of their human capital and working to improve it will triumph over those that do not.

    Our current program of survival and subsidized reproduction of the unfittest is an evolutionary dead end–as is obvious to anyone who gives it any thought. You have to basically not believe in biology to think it makes sense.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Laban Tall

    "It’s already clearly headed toward destruction because the West–under the influence of pernicious ideology–is unable to even police *external* access to its welfare ( much less work on eugenics) and its nations are simply being destroyed."
     
    You could almost think it's a deliberate strategy - to encourage dysgenics and welfare abuse as a long-term way of rendering welfare unsustainable and discredited.
    In the UK benefits are being either frozen or restricted to a 1% increase, despite living costs rising by far more.

    "The greatest prize for the very rich would be the total dismantling of the welfare state and the removal of its consequent tax burden ...

    It's a lot easier to justify a welfare state when the recipients are "people like us" and therefore easier to identify with and to think "there but for the grace of God". Social solidarity among working people, whether it be support for a welfare state or a trades union, will always be stronger in the absence of cultural, religious or racial divisions...

    So were I an evil capitalist billionaire looking to reduce the power of trades unions and destroy the welfare state, I'd start by funding Left groups supporting mass immigration.

    I'd encourage such groups, and left-wing lawyers too, to support the most outrageous abuses of the welfare system, knowing that it would discredit welfare in the eyes of ordinary working people - and I'd chuckle to see Telegraph and Mail readers - and BBC commenters, too - getting angry when benefits rise, as they should do, with inflation.

    "The plan is working ... heh heh heh ...""
     
    http://ukcommentators.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/the-end-of-journey-will-soon-be-in-sight.html

    The other salient feature of the UK political landscape is the total triumph of the left social agenda marching in step with the total defeat of the left economic agenda.

    ""The ruling ideas of each age have ever been the ideas of its ruling class"

    The post-68 Left social agenda has almost completely triumphed in the UK - witness Cameron joining Hope Not Hate ("anti-fascist" campaigning group ≡ open borders campaigning group ) and campaigning for gay marriage.

    At the same time the Left economic agenda has been so utterly defeated that terms and conditions for the average worker are being driven down remorselessly - even as total remuneration for the top few percent accelerates into the distance.

    Haven't any of these educated lefties wondered why this might be? So much success in one sphere, so little in another?

    Why, it's almost as if there's an inverse relationship between the two!"
     
    http://ukcommentators.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/the-uk-left-are-lapdogs-of-capitalist.html
  18. I could understand Townshend telling drummer jokes, but Charlie Watts always seemed the most sensible of the Stones.

    Read More
  19. One wonders whether the relatively long history of capital punishment in the UK for quite a few offences led to a eugenic improvement through getting rid of the most criminal percentage of the populace.

    http://www.capitalpunishmentuk.org/timeline.html

    Read More
  20. @PowerLaw
    So 20% is a pretty big hit to take but if your system is Pareto distributed then 64% of your problems are likely due to 4% of your population and 51.2% of problems are on .8% of the pop. At some point on this curve we are going to hit a level of per capita badness that justifies extraordinary measures, for example about one in a million US citizens are on death row. If these were the correctly identified worst of the worst and the Pareto assumption held they would be responsible for close to 15% of the social ills which looks like a pretty good cost/benefit to me.

    Now prescreening isn't likely to be that accurate and the actual big problems are more likely at the other end of the bell curve, Neville Chamberlain rather than Jack the Ripper, but to put it in Steve's favored terms cutting off the distribution at -1.4 SD would cut out over half of your problems. This would stop around .8% of white Europeans and 34% of African-American similar populations if the test is IQ. However if the test is some kind of composite politesse quotient (PQ) based on these studies the inter-racial breakdown could be different. Obviously if you have developed such a test deciding how far to raise the standard for incoming persons is a perfectly reasonable debate even if some group should decide to raise it to insurmountable levels (see Sentinelese people ) likewise as Steve points out Citizenism precludes a lot of this sort action for current citizens.

    Another interesting point is the diminishing returns on extra 20%s. So you are positing some kind of progressive doom as after the success of the first 20% we lop off a few more 20%s and then there isn't anything left. However it is geometric not linear so two iterations 64% of the population with 4% of the problems and then 51.2% of the population with .8% of the problems. In contrast to being limited to 5 you could actually do 10 of these 20% culls and still have almost 10% of the population and at this point you would have 99.99999% of the trouble out of the system. If you could do this well that might almost be that answer to Steve's observation of the 5 billion people that want to move here. Such a test applied to them would allow us to onboard 500,000,000 useful citizens at the cost of absorbing 500 deadheads. If PQ encompassed cultural compatibility, and at this extreme it would have to, then such a move would be a boon.

    Happily social science will never be precise enough for us to have to worry about the more extreme ends of these implications. For my part losing half your problems with a -1.4 SD tripwire or even a quarter of them with a -2.5 SD gate strikes me as good sense rather than a slippery slope.

    However it is geometric not linear so two iterations 64% of the population with 4% of the problems and then 51.2% of the population with .8% of the problems. In contrast to being limited to 5 you could actually do 10 of these 20% culls and still have almost 10% of the population and at this point you would have 99.99999% of the trouble out of the system.

    Let me guess…you used to be Jack Welch’s HR guy?

    Read More
  21. Too bad Obama and his gang of hipster libsters have exactly the opposite idea.

    Read More
  22. @Lot
    Every one of those articles sounds really interesting.

    The titles suggest something I've said here before: IQ is correlated with basically every other desirable human train, including morality. That's not a popular thing to say, and I bet for a lot of people their mind races to recall the many exceptions to this rule.

    What bad traits are associated with IQ? All I can think of is myopia.

    It’s a complicated subject, but most research suggests that suicidality (usually considered an undesirable trait) is positively correlated with IQ. It’s also curiously easy to overlook profoundly undesirable developments are that are *contingently* associated with high IQ. It takes very high-functioning brains, for example, to come up with technologies that can annihilate large populations. The practical capacity for mass genocide may not qualify as a “trait,” but sub specie aeternitatis, it seems like a pretty big downside for smarts.

    Read More
  23. @Anonymous
    22pp22 writes: "Dunedin has Otago University which makes some of the city very international, but by and large Dunedin is white. It won’t tell us much about HBD. It would have made more sense to use Hamilton which is about the same size as Dunedin but with a much large Maori and PI population."

    Not very many Maori (or indeed very many non-whites in general) are to be found anywhere in the South Island. Dunedin's WASP composition is hardly exceptional by South Island standards. It's in the North Island (Auckland still more than Hamilton) that most of New Zealand's non-whites live.

    http://www.stats.govt.nz/Census/2013-census/data-tables/tables-about-a-place.aspx?request_value=24394&tabname=Culturaldiversity

    “Not very many Maori… are to be found anywhere in the South Island. ” We met a woman from Dunedin, now aged about 70, who told us that she had never seen a Maori until she travelled north for her further education at age 18.

    Read More
  24. @Major Problem
    Yes, the post-Vietnam military really went to hell. Wouldn’t be shocked if the same thing has happened to today’s military, as well.

    The late Vietnam War-era military saw a draft army plagued by race riots in the barracks, rampant drug abuse and alcoholism, fragging of NCOs and junior officers. Fully one-third of the 47,000 combat deaths in that war were the result of friendly fire. There were an additional 11,000 deaths due to accidents.
    The post-Vietnam military faced abject demoralization within the ranks as well as civilian disdain. This led to the Abrams reforms and a decades-long effort to produce a highly professional armed force that is a career choice.
    Today, 75 percent of those who apply to enlist cannot qualify and are rejected--this is after almost 15 years of continuous warfare. At present, the waiting list to join the Marines is nine-months long. It has been as long as a year. There is no shortage of motivated, qualified recruits despite the high standards. The result is that we die less and kill more than ever in history.
    There is no tolerance for screw-ups or foul balls in today's armed forces. Any kind of alcohol-related incident will end your chances for promotion. The "O" Club culture of bygone days is dead.
    Of course, the armed forces reflect the society they are part of, including all of its problems, but to assert that they have "gone to hell" is a base canard.

    Yeah, but what’s the point of all those fine troops if the entity they’re (supposedly) defending is basically a POS.

    Read More
  25. @Steve Sailer
    How about not letting people in to your country people who are likely to procreate people likely to wind up in bottom 20% of the bottom 20%?

    How about not letting people in to your country people who are likely to procreate people likely to wind up in bottom 20% of the bottom 20%?

    That describes European immigration “policy”, or lack thereof. But not the US. What makes the US special is the large African-American minority, and no new immigrant group, including Mexicans, is likely to wind up in the bottom 20% of the bottom 20%. That will remain African-American for the foreseeable future. American immigration is hollowing out the middle so that the differences between the top 50% and bottom 50% are likely to become a lot more sharply pronounced over the next 100 years.

    Read More
  26. I appreciate the New England Patriots are a good team, but they did after all draft Aaron Hernandez, who has been indicted in three murders

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Hernandez

    The list of possible negatives associated with low intelligence, including everything from tobacco use to obesity, is slightly absurd. I know a number of 1% in intelligence people who have those problems, and others.

    The #1 thing I associate with high intelligence is mental illness, running the gamut from various neuroses like OCD all the way up to schizophrenia.

    I was also in the Marines for 4 years in the early to mid 70′s and I can attest to the mal-adaptive nature of the services in those days, but I have nothing to compare it to. My father, who was in the Marines in WW2 and Korea (and also interestingly spent some time in New Zealand) did not think that the intellectual niveau of the infantry in which I served was dissimilar to his own generation’s. Since I know 3 veterans from my son’s generation I can also attest that things haven’t changed much, although I am willing to believe that there is less racial discord, drug abuse, and criminality. However, all 3 chose not to continue their service, the repeal of DADT had something to do with that in 2 cases at least. (For whatever that’s worth.)

    However, to the main point, it is probably correct, the US should be looking for brighter people who will be less of a social drain than less bright people who are likely to become dependent. But that doesn’t explain why less bright people are continually getting into this country: they are only doing so because someone is willing to give them jobs. That’s where you have to shut it off. Because after these people have been here 20 years, you aren’t going to get them to leave, amnesty or not. The American people are not going to abide a “cleansing” of illegals. It just isn’t going to happen.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonym
    I wouldn't be so sure. 25% of British would repatriate immigrants. 10 years ago I wouldn't have thought you'd get 1%. 25% of British must be what, 30-40% of the white population?

    http://www.amren.com/news/2014/11/british-future-report-says-25-of-british-adults-want-all-immigrants-repatriated/
    , @Anonym
    The #1 thing I associate with high intelligence is mental illness, running the gamut from various neuroses like OCD all the way up to schizophrenia.

    I think it's in the family as much as anything... the mentally ill could be a brother or sister as the highly intelligent. Swing for the fences and you either hit a home run or strike out.

    Interesting re: OCD, it's something fairly common in pilots. Not really that surprising considering how many aircraft crashes are due to pilot error and how much is at stake if they screw up. Pilots are certainly of above average intelligence, and a compulsion to check things goes hand in hand with getting higher scores in anything, really. The more you are compelled to check, the longer it will take but the more correct your answer is, generally speaking. If it is a complex problem.

    http://www.human-memory.net/disorders_ocd.html

    Emphasis mine:
    Although there is no scientific evidence to suggest that people with OCD have any problems with verbal memory (remembering information that has been stored verbally or in the form of words), it has been consistently found that people with OCD show deficits in non-verbal, visual or spacial memory. Also, people with OCD (particularly those whose symptoms involve compulsive checking) tend to have less confidence in their memory than those without OCD, even if this level of confidence is not actually related to their actual performance on memory tasks, and the worse the OCD symptoms are, the worse this confidence in memory seems to be. This may explain to some extent the repetitive nature of many OCD symptoms.
    , @Brutusale
    There's a reason why the Mackey Award winner (best college tight end) fell all the way to the 4th round. Nobody had any illusions about Hernandez.

    The Patriots have always been willing to take a chance on marginal characters, leaning on a locker room with proven leaders and winners to keep the dicey guys in line. The did it TWICE in the 2010 Draft, taking the emotional manchild Gronkowski and proto-thug Hernandez.

    I blame Spinal Tap for the drummer thing.
    , @Anonymous
    It is going to happen.
  27. The usual strategy of successful institutions these days, such as Harvard University or the New England Patriots, is to devote much care to whom they select.

    We know you’re being clever and suggesting that the US is not devoting much care to selecting new immigrants, and thus not successful, but that isn’t the case at all. Immigrants are very carefully selected (just not on an individual basis, ie, classes of people are selected) to ensure they contribute to the “success” of the US. The problem is that the criteria for US “success” have been re-normed by the people who run the place. “Success” from their point of view means “cementing our power, privilege, money, control, etc for generations to come”. And by these re-normed standards, the US has been extremely successful the last couple decades.

    Read More
  28. @Steve Sailer
    How about not letting people in to your country people who are likely to procreate people likely to wind up in bottom 20% of the bottom 20%?

    Oh I definitely agree that not *adding* a lower 20% or adding to your existing 20% is just common sense for sure.

    @ PowerLaw:

    With the exception of seeing character and culture as being far more relevant to a person’s “worth” than I.Q. it’s hard for me to see any unreason in what you say, and lots reasonableness that’s easy to sign on to. Especially your figures noting the exponential effect on eliminating problems. Very interesting, and superbly explained.

    Read More
  29. @TomB
    Isn't one of the problems with proceeding with these findings the question of where to stop?

    Or, perhaps otherwise stated, the question of knowing when your problems are truly bad enough that it's time to start?

    That is ... okay, let's accept that 80% of our current problems are caused by 20% of the population.

    But getting rid of that 20% presupposes that our problems were so bad that same was merited, right?

    Okay however, even though of course there's always going to strong biases to say "yes of course" it pays enough to get rid of that mere 20% (after all, one bias inheres just in the fact that it is 80% judging only 20), you get over your qualms about those biases and get rid of that 20%.

    Well okay further, but you've still got some problems, presumably caused by your new lowest 20%.
    So what do you do about them?

    Do you not rid of that group on the mere theory that ... once is enough? If indeed you even can persuade the other 80% with all their built-in biases to stop there and not rid themselves of them?

    Or do you get rid of them, and then the next 20% too but stop there somehow on the grounds that the third time is the charm for some reason?

    And so on and so forth.

    And thus, too one might observe, is there really any moral/ethical difference between getting rid of that first 20% and getting rid of the second? Or between the first and the third? Or the fifth?

    No matter how bad things are, you know, they can always get worse. And to a degree anyone suffering any problem whatsoever are always going to tend to think they are much worse than they really are and be enormously tempted to over-emphasize the benefits of getting rid of same.

    By many objective measures — crime rates, illegitimacy rates, welfare dependence rates among those in the working age population, average academic performance as measured by standardized testing, substance abuse and dependence rates, to name just a few — this country is in much worse shape now that it was in the period prior to say 1970. Since about the mid 1960s to the present the overall trend has been downward, albeit with some significant fluctuations. The frog in warming water analogy is perfect; we’ve gotten so used to things being bad that we fail to realize how really bad they are, even when measured by the most objective criteria.

    So I’d suggest that dealing incrementally with the worst members of society first and working upwards until we hit 1960s levels of social functioning might be a good start.

    By the way, this process worked really well for criminal justice starting in the late 1980s. From the 1960s on into the mid to late 1980s declining corrections budgets meant fewer bad people were incarcerated. Starting in the mid 1980s increasing investment in correctuions meant that many more bad people were removed, at least temporarily, from society and crime rates underwent a rather precipitous decline. (Parenthetically, Ed Zedlewski of NIJ and Mark Kleiman, now at UCLA, deserve some credit for providing theoretical/empirical support for this investment in corrections and decline in crime. They deserve credit for bucking the “progressive” agenda.) One might also mention the positive effects of the short-lived welfare reforms of the 1990s that the Clintons fought and then claimed credit for when they proved succesful.

    Read More
  30. The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doorman of the apocalypse"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @TGGP
    Human biodiversity is not synonymous with race. Race is a particular manifestation of biodiversity. A whole lot of biodiversity resides within racially homogenous groups. If all the races of the world melded into one with only clinal variation, you could still have the same total amount of biodiversity, it just wouldn't be across groups.

    It is interesting, however, that some people say that because sub-Saharan Africans have the highest genetic diversity among humans, there must be a group of 190 IQ sub-Saharan Africans out there somewhere.

    Read More
  31. The biggest study of all is underway affecting all three-hundred plus million Americans to see who is cognitively fit for survival in today’s increasingly competitive economy. The majority aren’t.

    Read More
  32. @TGGP
    Human biodiversity is not synonymous with race. Race is a particular manifestation of biodiversity. A whole lot of biodiversity resides within racially homogenous groups. If all the races of the world melded into one with only clinal variation, you could still have the same total amount of biodiversity, it just wouldn't be across groups.

    you are not paying attention to what HBD science, and history is telling you: all of western civilization was built by dead, white, european males. multiculture, social justice, etc is tearing it all down. stupid is as stupid does, and our “culture” is doing stupid. as we regress to spear-chucking and up into the trees, does that make us “better”?

    Read More
  33. Off-topic,

    TNC offers his take on the NYC cop killings:

    For activists and protesters radicalized by the killings of Michael Brown and Eric Garner, this weekend’s killing may seem to pose a great obstacle. In fact, it merely points to the monumental task in front of them. The response to Garner’s death, particularly, seemed to offer some hope. But the very fact that this opening originated in the most extreme case—the on-camera choking of a man for a minor offense—points to the shaky ground on which such hope took root. It was only a matter of time before some criminal shot a police officer in New York. If that’s all it takes to turn Americans away from police reform, the efforts were likely doomed from the start.

    http://www.theatlantic.com/ta-nehisi-coates/

    You can’t let a little thing like murdering cops get in the way, people!

    Read More
    • Replies: @NOTA
    Are you suggesting that we should care less about police misconduct because some nut shot a couple of cops? I don't see any way for that to make sense. We already give crazy people too much power over our policy debates.
  34. Almost impossibly off-topic–but then again maybe not: I was informed last night of the existence of a drinking…experience, I guess?…called the Paul Walker.

    It’s an Irish Car-Bomb chased by a Fireball shot, and then it gets complicated. Urban Dictionary:

    “An alcoholic beverage in tribute to the great Paul Walker consisting of a car bomb followed by a fireball shot. Each round of the drink is equivalent to a movie in the Fast and the Furious series, with the goal being to complete the entire 7 part series in one night. The third round – Tokyo Drift – is completed with a sake bomb instead of a car bomb (or whatever Asian ingredient you can find).”

    People actually do this, by the way–not that I’d recommend it.

    Read More
  35. More “wisdom” from TNC:

    We are the ones who designed the criminogenic ghettos. We are the ones who barred black people from leaving those ghettos. We are the ones who treat black men without criminal records as though they are white men with criminal records. We are the ones who send black girls to juvenile detention homes for fighting in school. We are the masters of the American gulag, a penal system “so vast,” writes sociologist Bruce Western, “as to draw entire demographic groups into the web.” And we are the ones who send in police to make sure it all goes according to plan.

    http://www.theatlantic.com/ta-nehisi-coates/

    Read More
  36. “This study illustrates that the vast bulk of a nation’s social services, crime control, and health-care are expended on a relatively small population segment. During early childhood, this population segment is characterized by a small set of risk factors: low SES, child maltreatment, low self-control, low IQ, and poor brain integrity. Reducing these factors may bring surprisingly good return on investment.”

    Or, as an alternative, we could just stop subsidizing their high reproduction rates and wait for the inevitable results.


    The fine line between genius and insanity?

    Read More
  37. Interesting article about the link between being cold and fat loss:

    During the swimmer Michael Phelps’s 2008 Olympic gold-medal streak, Cronise heard the widely circulated claim that Phelps was eating 12,000 calories a day. Having been fastidiously trying to lose weight, he was incredulous. Phelps’s intake was more than five times what the average American eats daily, and many thousands of calories more than what most elite athletes in training need. Running a marathon burns only about 2,500 calories. Phelps would have to be aggressively swimming during every waking hour to keep from gaining weight. But then Cronise—who knows enough about heat transfer to have been employed keeping astronauts alive in the sub-zero depths of space—figured it out: Phelps must be burning extra calories simply by being immersed in cool water.

    The lead researcher in that study, Francesco Celi, published more research in June, finding that when people cool their bedrooms from 75 degrees to 66 degrees, they gain brown fat, the metabolically active fat that burns calories to generate heat. (Having brown fat is considered a good thing; white fat, by contrast, stores calories.) Another 2014 study found that, even after controlling for diet, lifestyle, and other factors, people who live in warmer parts of Spain are more likely to be obese than people who live in the cooler parts.

    http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/01/does-global-warming-make-me-look-fat/383509/

    Read More
    • Replies: @dearieme
    "when people cool their bedrooms from 75 degrees ...": good God, do people really try to sleep at 75F? Why?
    , @WhatEvvs
    Phelps could also be overestimating his caloric intake. Numerous studies have shown that self-reporting caloric intake is useless. The only studies that matter are metabolic ward studies.

    That said I don't doubt that Phelps eats loads of food.
  38. @TomB
    Isn't one of the problems with proceeding with these findings the question of where to stop?

    Or, perhaps otherwise stated, the question of knowing when your problems are truly bad enough that it's time to start?

    That is ... okay, let's accept that 80% of our current problems are caused by 20% of the population.

    But getting rid of that 20% presupposes that our problems were so bad that same was merited, right?

    Okay however, even though of course there's always going to strong biases to say "yes of course" it pays enough to get rid of that mere 20% (after all, one bias inheres just in the fact that it is 80% judging only 20), you get over your qualms about those biases and get rid of that 20%.

    Well okay further, but you've still got some problems, presumably caused by your new lowest 20%.
    So what do you do about them?

    Do you not rid of that group on the mere theory that ... once is enough? If indeed you even can persuade the other 80% with all their built-in biases to stop there and not rid themselves of them?

    Or do you get rid of them, and then the next 20% too but stop there somehow on the grounds that the third time is the charm for some reason?

    And so on and so forth.

    And thus, too one might observe, is there really any moral/ethical difference between getting rid of that first 20% and getting rid of the second? Or between the first and the third? Or the fifth?

    No matter how bad things are, you know, they can always get worse. And to a degree anyone suffering any problem whatsoever are always going to tend to think they are much worse than they really are and be enormously tempted to over-emphasize the benefits of getting rid of same.

    This seems disingenuous, to me. It is of course true that the new lowest quintile will be objectively, well, the lowest. But the problems that the current, non-lowest quintiles present are qualitatively less burdensome that the social problems that we have now.

    Read More
  39. “about 45% of the population are “low cost users”.”

    45%, where have I heard that before? 45…45…

    Oh yeah, wasn’t there a two minutes hate that had something to do with the number 47% a while back?

    Read More
  40. There is plenty of new data form the UK and they have closed a massive amount of the gaps there, in most(all?) age cohorts and on different tests. Some data now show no gaps at all especially in 11 year olds from the millennium cohort. There is one sample I saw that had literally erased the gap between African blacks and White Brit 11 year olds in Verbal Sims IQ test… and mixed race.

    They have closed the main Maths and English GCSE gaps to trivial amounts between blacks and whites.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    There is plenty of new data form the UK and they have closed a massive amount of the gaps there, in most(all?) age cohorts and on different tests. Some data now show no gaps at all especially in 11 year olds from the millennium cohort. There is one sample I saw that had literally erased the gap between African blacks and White Brit 11 year olds in Verbal Sims IQ test… and mixed race.

    They have closed the main Maths and English GCSE gaps to trivial amounts between blacks and whites.
     
    Care to link/quote the data? After all, if the British have really found a way to raise the Black mean IQ to 100, that would be useful knowledge to spread around.At the very least, perhaps we could subsidize the immigration of America's Blacks to the UK, seeing as how they have licked the problem of low Black IQ.....
    , @syonredux
    Here's an old discussion from Steve on the topic:

    http://isteve.blogspot.com/2012/02/is-white-black-cognitive-gap-smaller-in.html

    Chuck at Occidentalist assembles a bunch of test reports, here and here. It's not as well-studied of a subject as it is in the U.S., so it's hard to make sense of all the data, but most point toward the white-black gap in the U.K. being well under a standard deviation.

    I haven't seen a good meta-analyses by a British researcher who knows the ins and outs of all these acronyms like GCSE. (For example, a few years ago a British researcher slipped up on writing about regional differences in performance on the SAT in the U.S. because he didn't know that only the most ambitious students in the Midwest take the SAT instead of the ACT -- so what pitfalls await American kibbitzers among British test scores?) But most of the data seems to suggest a smaller cognitive and/or achievement gap in the U.K. than in the U.S.

    It has been apparent for some time now (see this post at Racial Reality) that in Britain, the lads are not all right. In the U.S., we've become familiar with gender gaps on school achievement tests favoring black and Hispanic girls over their brothers, but we see less of this among whites and Asians. This is among the better evidence that culture -- fear of being put down by your co-ethnics for Acting White, etc. -- is depressing NAM performance.

    On a lot of tests, in Britain, there's even a bigger gender gap favoring the distaff side, but it seems to go across all ethnicities, even Chinese. We see weird things like girls whose parents are from Africa outscoring white boys and maybe even East Asian boys on some tests.

    As I pointed out in a couple of articles in 2005, class is the big divide in Britain rather than race. "Class" is a 1500-year-long project to civilize the Conan the Barbarian warlords who inundated the Roman Empire to act like "gentlemen." By the late 20th Century, all that politeness, all that studying, all that self-discipline, was striking young males of the lower classes as pretty gay. Thus, chavism.

    In contrast, there isn't all that much of an oppositional culture among blacks in Britain, since assimilating into the white working class isn't terribly hard: You like 'aving a pint while watching footie on the telly, too? The proportion of mixed race children appears much larger than in the U.S. As historian David Starkey pointed out during the English looting last summer, that blacks were in the lead, but whites were right behind in the looting -- something you don't see in the U.S much at all.

    Moreover, blacks in Britain are of immigrant origin: West Indian and African, with the Africans doing better on tests, typically. Some not insignificant fraction of Africans in Britain were brain-drained from Anglophone ex-colonies to work in National Health as nurses and doctors. In the U.S., West Indians and African immigrants tend to outperform native blacks. The Bell Curve found that in the NLSY79 longitudinal study, blacks who were immigrants or the children of immigrants outscored native African-Americans by an average of 5 IQ points.

    But, those are just a few speculations. It's an interesting question that, as far as I know, hasn't been studied terribly systematically.

    Update: lots of good stuff in the comments from people who know more about what they are talking about when it comes to Britain than I know.
     
  41. The problem here is that the overall standard of living in the west is now so high, relative to our evolutionary roots, that literally no one knows what to do about our current social ills. Providing a social safety net seemed like a good idea, and moral, but there is a line after which the results are predictable. When people had to work in back-breaking jobs just to live, they did. Now, no one has to. What would YOU pick? But the same standard of living means that nowadays almost no one is willing to take the hard stands that would go back to those days. And if all people had to work like that, no one would need to import foreigners to clean the hotel rooms, pick up trash, etc. Remember, Americans *did* used to do those jobs, and a side benefit was that most of those groups magically understood the power of education and insisted that their children get it. My dad, who had a stable middle-class job at the gas and electric company, used to get angry if my brother or I said something about working there… even as a summer job!

    I suggest that people pick up the book “Spoiled Rotten: Affluence, Anxiety, and Social Decay in America” by Arthur Fleisher and Brian Goff. It won’t make you feel better about rolling back where we are today, however…

    Read More
  42. @Anonymous
    Well in the Netherlands - and actually in almost every single northern European nation ie nations which had mass immigration inflicted upon them by the political class there have been many, many careful, comprehensive fiscal impact studies done by unbiased, uninterested experts on the national profit/loss impact of third world immigration.
    The entirety of these studies unequivocally show that mass third world immigration is an enormous fiscal loss to the receiving nations. There has not been one single exception. If there was, the left would crow about it incessantly.
    A few years back, the left used to bark 'but we need immigrants to fill job vacancies/do the dirty jobs/pay taxes/pay for 'our' pensions' etc etc etc. Now in the Netherlands the 'smart' lefties now cry 'but you can't judge a human being by how much money he makes'.
    A new day. A new excuse.

    ” there have been many, many careful, comprehensive fiscal impact studies done”

    A list of these studies, or links, or a good google scholar search quote (“comprehensive fiscal impact” AND “third world immigration” AND EU ?) would be appreciated.

    Read More
  43. During early childhood, this population segment is characterized by a small set of risk factors: low SES, child maltreatment, low self-control, low IQ, and poor brain integrity. Reducing these factors may bring surprisingly good return on investment.

    It seems likely to me that the child maltreatment is due to the parents having the same genes as the child.

    Read More
  44. @PowerLaw
    So 20% is a pretty big hit to take but if your system is Pareto distributed then 64% of your problems are likely due to 4% of your population and 51.2% of problems are on .8% of the pop. At some point on this curve we are going to hit a level of per capita badness that justifies extraordinary measures, for example about one in a million US citizens are on death row. If these were the correctly identified worst of the worst and the Pareto assumption held they would be responsible for close to 15% of the social ills which looks like a pretty good cost/benefit to me.

    Now prescreening isn't likely to be that accurate and the actual big problems are more likely at the other end of the bell curve, Neville Chamberlain rather than Jack the Ripper, but to put it in Steve's favored terms cutting off the distribution at -1.4 SD would cut out over half of your problems. This would stop around .8% of white Europeans and 34% of African-American similar populations if the test is IQ. However if the test is some kind of composite politesse quotient (PQ) based on these studies the inter-racial breakdown could be different. Obviously if you have developed such a test deciding how far to raise the standard for incoming persons is a perfectly reasonable debate even if some group should decide to raise it to insurmountable levels (see Sentinelese people ) likewise as Steve points out Citizenism precludes a lot of this sort action for current citizens.

    Another interesting point is the diminishing returns on extra 20%s. So you are positing some kind of progressive doom as after the success of the first 20% we lop off a few more 20%s and then there isn't anything left. However it is geometric not linear so two iterations 64% of the population with 4% of the problems and then 51.2% of the population with .8% of the problems. In contrast to being limited to 5 you could actually do 10 of these 20% culls and still have almost 10% of the population and at this point you would have 99.99999% of the trouble out of the system. If you could do this well that might almost be that answer to Steve's observation of the 5 billion people that want to move here. Such a test applied to them would allow us to onboard 500,000,000 useful citizens at the cost of absorbing 500 deadheads. If PQ encompassed cultural compatibility, and at this extreme it would have to, then such a move would be a boon.

    Happily social science will never be precise enough for us to have to worry about the more extreme ends of these implications. For my part losing half your problems with a -1.4 SD tripwire or even a quarter of them with a -2.5 SD gate strikes me as good sense rather than a slippery slope.

    That is basically segregation, or as its called these days: gentrification.

    Read More
  45. Come one, Steve – you know you want to step into the kerfuffle over whether or not Idris Elba can play James Bond.

    Read More
  46. @syonredux
    Off-topic,

    TNC offers his take on the NYC cop killings:

    For activists and protesters radicalized by the killings of Michael Brown and Eric Garner, this weekend's killing may seem to pose a great obstacle. In fact, it merely points to the monumental task in front of them. The response to Garner's death, particularly, seemed to offer some hope. But the very fact that this opening originated in the most extreme case—the on-camera choking of a man for a minor offense—points to the shaky ground on which such hope took root. It was only a matter of time before some criminal shot a police officer in New York. If that's all it takes to turn Americans away from police reform, the efforts were likely doomed from the start.
     
    http://www.theatlantic.com/ta-nehisi-coates/

    You can't let a little thing like murdering cops get in the way, people!

    Are you suggesting that we should care less about police misconduct because some nut shot a couple of cops? I don’t see any way for that to make sense. We already give crazy people too much power over our policy debates.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Are you suggesting that we should care less about police misconduct because some nut shot a couple of cops?
     
    No, I'm suggesting that TNC is more interested in who-whom than he is in police misconduct

    I don’t see any way for that to make sense. We already give crazy people too much power over our policy debates.
     
    Well, unless the crazy people fit the narrative, dear fellow. Cf, for example, Michael Brown, whose frankly deranged conduct was not allowed to get in the way of the anti-policing agenda.
  47. There is a key insight here: In a modern first world society, even many people with jobs are in practice dependent on the state–Medicaid, public schools, AFDC, police, jails, etc. all run up the bill. The implication for immigration policy is that just because someone comes here to work doesn’t mean he isn’t a net drain on the treasury.

    Read More
  48. Steve said, “Taking care of your own citizenry’s problem children is one thing, taking care of other peoples’ is something else.”

    The emphasis should be on taking care that your own citizenry’s problem children are strongly encouraged NOT to reproduce.

    Read More
  49. Now in the Netherlands the ‘smart’ lefties now cry ‘but you can’t judge a human being by how much money he makes’.
    A new day. A new excuse.

    Let’s be honest. These folks are not leftists. Leftists would champion the interests of the average (and below average) Dutch worker, and these folks don’t. The are agents of capital. The costs of the low performing immigrants are socialized to the bottom 90% of people and the profits are privately accrued somewhere in the top 10%.

    Read More
  50. @NOTA
    Are you suggesting that we should care less about police misconduct because some nut shot a couple of cops? I don't see any way for that to make sense. We already give crazy people too much power over our policy debates.

    Are you suggesting that we should care less about police misconduct because some nut shot a couple of cops?

    No, I’m suggesting that TNC is more interested in who-whom than he is in police misconduct

    I don’t see any way for that to make sense. We already give crazy people too much power over our policy debates.

    Well, unless the crazy people fit the narrative, dear fellow. Cf, for example, Michael Brown, whose frankly deranged conduct was not allowed to get in the way of the anti-policing agenda.

    Read More
  51. […] Years ago I highlighted Modeled Behavior’s theorizing on “Citizen X”, the ideal taxpayer who consumed minimal benefits. Now James Thompson highlights some empirical work on the distribution of tax payers and consumers. Those familiar with the work of Malcoml Gladwell should not be surprised to know that 20% of the population cost a disproportionate share of public resources. Hat-tip to Steve Sailer. […]

    Read More
  52. This strikes me as potentially hugely useful in immigration policy.

    Talk to Jason Richwine about that.

    Read More
  53. @Lot
    Every one of those articles sounds really interesting.

    The titles suggest something I've said here before: IQ is correlated with basically every other desirable human train, including morality. That's not a popular thing to say, and I bet for a lot of people their mind races to recall the many exceptions to this rule.

    What bad traits are associated with IQ? All I can think of is myopia.

    “What bad traits are associated with IQ?”

    Extrapolating from border collies, I would guess epilepsy. Also, neuroses of one form or another – i.e., any kind of idiocy that comes with being an idiot savant.

    And worst of all, nerdiness.

    Read More
  54. @syonredux
    Interesting article about the link between being cold and fat loss:

    During the swimmer Michael Phelps’s 2008 Olympic gold-medal streak, Cronise heard the widely circulated claim that Phelps was eating 12,000 calories a day. Having been fastidiously trying to lose weight, he was incredulous. Phelps’s intake was more than five times what the average American eats daily, and many thousands of calories more than what most elite athletes in training need. Running a marathon burns only about 2,500 calories. Phelps would have to be aggressively swimming during every waking hour to keep from gaining weight. But then Cronise—who knows enough about heat transfer to have been employed keeping astronauts alive in the sub-zero depths of space—figured it out: Phelps must be burning extra calories simply by being immersed in cool water.
     

    The lead researcher in that study, Francesco Celi, published more research in June, finding that when people cool their bedrooms from 75 degrees to 66 degrees, they gain brown fat, the metabolically active fat that burns calories to generate heat. (Having brown fat is considered a good thing; white fat, by contrast, stores calories.) Another 2014 study found that, even after controlling for diet, lifestyle, and other factors, people who live in warmer parts of Spain are more likely to be obese than people who live in the cooler parts.
     
    http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/01/does-global-warming-make-me-look-fat/383509/

    “when people cool their bedrooms from 75 degrees …”: good God, do people really try to sleep at 75F? Why?

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    “when people cool their bedrooms from 75 degrees …”: good God, do people really try to sleep at 75F? Why?
     
    Well, to borrow a phrase from The Big Sleep, some people seem to have the cold tolerance of newborn spiders.

    Personally, I would find that level of heat quite uncomfortable. I live in the Boston (MA) area, and I set my Winter thermostat at 50F when I sleep and at 55F when I am awake. Cold doesn't bother me.
  55. WhatEvvs [AKA "Bemused"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    I think HBD people go a little overboard with associating IQ with all things good and wonderful. Many times I’ve seen the crowd associate high IQ with impulse control. While it’s probably true that most high IQ people have enough impulse control to stay out of jail, I’ve known many impulsive high IQ people.

    Isn’t this a rather low bar? As Chris Rock would say, “you’re not supposed to go to jail!”

    Speaking of Rock, Mr. and Mrs. Rock announced their split today, after 20 years. Sorry to hear that.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Former Darfur
    I think HBD people go a little overboard with associating IQ with all things good and wonderful. Many times I’ve seen the crowd associate high IQ with impulse control. While it’s probably true that most high IQ people have enough impulse control to stay out of jail, I’ve known many impulsive high IQ people.

    High IQ people often have relatively poor impulse control but they are intelligent enough to channel those impulses into behaviors not likely to get them put in jail or the nut house. Those areas are therefore usually not violent or destructive.
  56. WhatEvvs [AKA "Bemused"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @syonredux
    Interesting article about the link between being cold and fat loss:

    During the swimmer Michael Phelps’s 2008 Olympic gold-medal streak, Cronise heard the widely circulated claim that Phelps was eating 12,000 calories a day. Having been fastidiously trying to lose weight, he was incredulous. Phelps’s intake was more than five times what the average American eats daily, and many thousands of calories more than what most elite athletes in training need. Running a marathon burns only about 2,500 calories. Phelps would have to be aggressively swimming during every waking hour to keep from gaining weight. But then Cronise—who knows enough about heat transfer to have been employed keeping astronauts alive in the sub-zero depths of space—figured it out: Phelps must be burning extra calories simply by being immersed in cool water.
     

    The lead researcher in that study, Francesco Celi, published more research in June, finding that when people cool their bedrooms from 75 degrees to 66 degrees, they gain brown fat, the metabolically active fat that burns calories to generate heat. (Having brown fat is considered a good thing; white fat, by contrast, stores calories.) Another 2014 study found that, even after controlling for diet, lifestyle, and other factors, people who live in warmer parts of Spain are more likely to be obese than people who live in the cooler parts.
     
    http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2015/01/does-global-warming-make-me-look-fat/383509/

    Phelps could also be overestimating his caloric intake. Numerous studies have shown that self-reporting caloric intake is useless. The only studies that matter are metabolic ward studies.

    That said I don’t doubt that Phelps eats loads of food.

    Read More
  57. What about individualism? Shouldn’t that also be a criteria in determining immigration policy. There’s your meritocracy right there. I’d rather have a bunch of mediocre individualists come in who could maintain a fair republic than a bunch of smart groups who will turn the republic into a caste hierarchy.

    Read More
  58. O/T-
    I noticed an article about the re-development of Anacostia in Washington DC in today’s NY Times. The whitening of that city continues.

    Read More
  59. @PowerLaw
    So 20% is a pretty big hit to take but if your system is Pareto distributed then 64% of your problems are likely due to 4% of your population and 51.2% of problems are on .8% of the pop. At some point on this curve we are going to hit a level of per capita badness that justifies extraordinary measures, for example about one in a million US citizens are on death row. If these were the correctly identified worst of the worst and the Pareto assumption held they would be responsible for close to 15% of the social ills which looks like a pretty good cost/benefit to me.

    Now prescreening isn't likely to be that accurate and the actual big problems are more likely at the other end of the bell curve, Neville Chamberlain rather than Jack the Ripper, but to put it in Steve's favored terms cutting off the distribution at -1.4 SD would cut out over half of your problems. This would stop around .8% of white Europeans and 34% of African-American similar populations if the test is IQ. However if the test is some kind of composite politesse quotient (PQ) based on these studies the inter-racial breakdown could be different. Obviously if you have developed such a test deciding how far to raise the standard for incoming persons is a perfectly reasonable debate even if some group should decide to raise it to insurmountable levels (see Sentinelese people ) likewise as Steve points out Citizenism precludes a lot of this sort action for current citizens.

    Another interesting point is the diminishing returns on extra 20%s. So you are positing some kind of progressive doom as after the success of the first 20% we lop off a few more 20%s and then there isn't anything left. However it is geometric not linear so two iterations 64% of the population with 4% of the problems and then 51.2% of the population with .8% of the problems. In contrast to being limited to 5 you could actually do 10 of these 20% culls and still have almost 10% of the population and at this point you would have 99.99999% of the trouble out of the system. If you could do this well that might almost be that answer to Steve's observation of the 5 billion people that want to move here. Such a test applied to them would allow us to onboard 500,000,000 useful citizens at the cost of absorbing 500 deadheads. If PQ encompassed cultural compatibility, and at this extreme it would have to, then such a move would be a boon.

    Happily social science will never be precise enough for us to have to worry about the more extreme ends of these implications. For my part losing half your problems with a -1.4 SD tripwire or even a quarter of them with a -2.5 SD gate strikes me as good sense rather than a slippery slope.

    You’re going a little too heavy-quant for something that isn’t that obviously quantitative. Death row inmates aren’t responsible for 15% of society’s ills–they’re usually psychos who kill a few people in gruesome ways that shock a jury.

    Read More
    • Replies: @PowerLaw
    Quant heaviness is my specialty and for social issues it's also the only option. While personal interactions need to be personal the scale that modern institutions operate on from politics to finance and industry is simply too large for subjective methods to do anything. If you had the ability to judge with some accuracy the ability and character of a stranger in one second it would take over two centuries of 24-7 to cover the worlds population. Neither you nor they will live that long and assessing people at a glance is a fantasy. Waiting for Superman may be futile but if you are doing that while Superman is demonstrably insufficient to the task at hand then that is futility squared and cubed.

    As for death row I was mostly looking for an example of group sufficiently bad to justify strong sanctions from society. If indeed there are a population of 3088 (Wikipedia) responsible for one in seven of the nation's problems I would look to holders of The Megaphone TM as well as leading members of government and business.

    , @The most deplorable one

    Death row inmates aren’t responsible for 15% of society’s ills–they’re usually psychos who kill a few people in gruesome ways that shock a jury.

     

    By the time they get to death row they have caused lots of trouble.
  60. @Major Problem
    Yes, the post-Vietnam military really went to hell. Wouldn’t be shocked if the same thing has happened to today’s military, as well.

    The late Vietnam War-era military saw a draft army plagued by race riots in the barracks, rampant drug abuse and alcoholism, fragging of NCOs and junior officers. Fully one-third of the 47,000 combat deaths in that war were the result of friendly fire. There were an additional 11,000 deaths due to accidents.
    The post-Vietnam military faced abject demoralization within the ranks as well as civilian disdain. This led to the Abrams reforms and a decades-long effort to produce a highly professional armed force that is a career choice.
    Today, 75 percent of those who apply to enlist cannot qualify and are rejected--this is after almost 15 years of continuous warfare. At present, the waiting list to join the Marines is nine-months long. It has been as long as a year. There is no shortage of motivated, qualified recruits despite the high standards. The result is that we die less and kill more than ever in history.
    There is no tolerance for screw-ups or foul balls in today's armed forces. Any kind of alcohol-related incident will end your chances for promotion. The "O" Club culture of bygone days is dead.
    Of course, the armed forces reflect the society they are part of, including all of its problems, but to assert that they have "gone to hell" is a base canard.

    It hasn’t gone to hell in the same sense, but my friends who are still in have lots of stories involving things like

    - infantry units pulled in from field exercises in order to attend three day workshops on “sexual harassment awareness” and other diversity uberalles exercises.

    - budgets slashed for things like rifle marksmanship but plenty of money to hire Nice White Women to teach men how not to rape

    - male on male sexual assault gets swept under a rug in short order with all involved parties scattered hither and yon throughout the Army, but if a female admin clerk gets drunk and cries rape there’s hell to pay.

    I don’t know how the other services are but the Army is basically a bunch of officers drinking the kool aid in order to make their OERs look good (think lots of bullet points about “instituting a 21 point plan in order to cut sexual assault incidents 85%”) and not a whole lot about combat. Right now the future warfighting capabilities of the Army are in the hands of the NCOs who stayed in through multiple deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan and are seeing things ramp up again.

    Yes the SOCOM units aren’t affected by this, but the personnel there are exceptional enough that you’re not just going to grab the type of person who can do commando or unconventional warfare operations off the street. These types of people are not easily replaceable and this is one of the few places the military learned a lesson after the mass exodus of special operations troops to PMCs back in the early to mid 2000′s. The line infantry might suffer the social petri dish nonsense but not the guys who got Bin Laden.

    Sad to say its likely going to take the destruction of a sizeable maneuver element in order to get the military focused on doing things like winning wars vs. keeping Sen. Gillibrand and the contractor mafia happy (witness the attempts of the AF brass to kill the A-10, probably the most successful airframe we have, to fund the F-35 Sinkhole). I’m sure the Obama/neolib-con view of warfare is playing into this mindset as well. Who the hell needs things like the 82nd ABN or 1st Armored Division when all you need to “win” is the unwieldy three legged stool of commandos, drones, and air strikes?

    Unfortunately these people don’t realize that shit won’t win you a ground war, but whatever its not their sons going into the poor bloody infantry so why would they care?

    Read More
    • Replies: @SFG
    Agreed. I always thought we'd have the sense to exempt our military from this crap, but I guess not.

    Then again, it's not really a life-or-death thing for our nation like it is for many others--we have oceans and nukes protecting us. There really is no nation that could successfully launch a (military) invasion of the USA right now. So I guess we can get away with all this diversity scheisse.

    Still makes me want to puke.
  61. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    What bad traits are associated with IQ?

    The desire to exterminate those seen as inferior. (A desire which greatly predated the Nazis)

    Read More
    • Replies: @Tim
    Everyone's inner chimp wants to exterminate the other. Definitely no correlation with IQ.
    , @syonredux

    What bad traits are associated with IQ?

    The desire to exterminate those seen as inferior. (A desire which greatly predated the Nazis)
     
    Really? It seems to me that an awful lot of high IQ people in contemporary society are quite sentimental about low IQ people.
    , @ben tillman

    What bad traits are associated with IQ?

    The desire to exterminate those seen as inferior. (A desire which greatly predated the Nazis)

     

    It looks like someone is projecting again.
  62. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    The biggest study of all is underway affecting all three-hundred plus million Americans to see who is cognitively fit for survival in today’s increasingly competitive economy. The majority aren’t.

    The experiment which is under way does not attempt to discover who is "cognitively fit for survival in today’s increasingly competitive economy". It's an openly racist attack on people of a certain background. Nobody is concerned with whether you are cognitively fit for survival in today’s increasingly competitive economy, only with whether you are being paid more than somebody in India or China.

    Read More
  63. Are you suggesting that we should care less about police misconduct because some nut shot a couple of cops? I don’t see any way for that to make sense. We already give crazy people too much power over our policy debates.

    I’m stating that I don’t care about the policy goals of people who think Brown & Gardner are a BIG DEAL, but don’t care at all about the two cops assassinated in NYC. Which I think describes about 99% of the people who think Brown & Gardner are a BIG DEAL.

    “I actively oppose” might be a better choice of words than “I don’t care.”

    Read More
  64. @Anonymous
    What bad traits are associated with IQ?

    The desire to exterminate those seen as inferior. (A desire which greatly predated the Nazis)

    Everyone’s inner chimp wants to exterminate the other. Definitely no correlation with IQ.

    Read More
  65. @Anonymous
    What bad traits are associated with IQ?

    The desire to exterminate those seen as inferior. (A desire which greatly predated the Nazis)

    What bad traits are associated with IQ?

    The desire to exterminate those seen as inferior. (A desire which greatly predated the Nazis)

    Really? It seems to me that an awful lot of high IQ people in contemporary society are quite sentimental about low IQ people.

    Read More
  66. @dearieme
    "when people cool their bedrooms from 75 degrees ...": good God, do people really try to sleep at 75F? Why?

    “when people cool their bedrooms from 75 degrees …”: good God, do people really try to sleep at 75F? Why?

    Well, to borrow a phrase from The Big Sleep, some people seem to have the cold tolerance of newborn spiders.

    Personally, I would find that level of heat quite uncomfortable. I live in the Boston (MA) area, and I set my Winter thermostat at 50F when I sleep and at 55F when I am awake. Cold doesn’t bother me.

    Read More
  67. @Trouble
    There is plenty of new data form the UK and they have closed a massive amount of the gaps there, in most(all?) age cohorts and on different tests. Some data now show no gaps at all especially in 11 year olds from the millennium cohort. There is one sample I saw that had literally erased the gap between African blacks and White Brit 11 year olds in Verbal Sims IQ test... and mixed race.

    They have closed the main Maths and English GCSE gaps to trivial amounts between blacks and whites.

    There is plenty of new data form the UK and they have closed a massive amount of the gaps there, in most(all?) age cohorts and on different tests. Some data now show no gaps at all especially in 11 year olds from the millennium cohort. There is one sample I saw that had literally erased the gap between African blacks and White Brit 11 year olds in Verbal Sims IQ test… and mixed race.

    They have closed the main Maths and English GCSE gaps to trivial amounts between blacks and whites.

    Care to link/quote the data? After all, if the British have really found a way to raise the Black mean IQ to 100, that would be useful knowledge to spread around.At the very least, perhaps we could subsidize the immigration of America’s Blacks to the UK, seeing as how they have licked the problem of low Black IQ…..

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jeyi
    The brief quote doesn't say at all that the black mean IQ has been raised to the white norm of 100. The racial IQ gap would be equally well closed if the present Brit white IQ has been lowered to 85... which in fact seems more likely.
    , @Truth



    Care to link/quote the data? After all, if the British have really found a way to raise the Black mean IQ to 100, that would be useful knowledge to spread around
     
    Do you think that white men would want to create a race of men that is more virile, more athletic, more outgoing, funnier, and with more athletic talent...and "just as smart?"
  68. @Jack Hanson
    It hasn't gone to hell in the same sense, but my friends who are still in have lots of stories involving things like

    - infantry units pulled in from field exercises in order to attend three day workshops on "sexual harassment awareness" and other diversity uberalles exercises.

    - budgets slashed for things like rifle marksmanship but plenty of money to hire Nice White Women to teach men how not to rape

    - male on male sexual assault gets swept under a rug in short order with all involved parties scattered hither and yon throughout the Army, but if a female admin clerk gets drunk and cries rape there's hell to pay.

    I don't know how the other services are but the Army is basically a bunch of officers drinking the kool aid in order to make their OERs look good (think lots of bullet points about "instituting a 21 point plan in order to cut sexual assault incidents 85%") and not a whole lot about combat. Right now the future warfighting capabilities of the Army are in the hands of the NCOs who stayed in through multiple deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan and are seeing things ramp up again.

    Yes the SOCOM units aren't affected by this, but the personnel there are exceptional enough that you're not just going to grab the type of person who can do commando or unconventional warfare operations off the street. These types of people are not easily replaceable and this is one of the few places the military learned a lesson after the mass exodus of special operations troops to PMCs back in the early to mid 2000's. The line infantry might suffer the social petri dish nonsense but not the guys who got Bin Laden.

    Sad to say its likely going to take the destruction of a sizeable maneuver element in order to get the military focused on doing things like winning wars vs. keeping Sen. Gillibrand and the contractor mafia happy (witness the attempts of the AF brass to kill the A-10, probably the most successful airframe we have, to fund the F-35 Sinkhole). I'm sure the Obama/neolib-con view of warfare is playing into this mindset as well. Who the hell needs things like the 82nd ABN or 1st Armored Division when all you need to "win" is the unwieldy three legged stool of commandos, drones, and air strikes?

    Unfortunately these people don't realize that shit won't win you a ground war, but whatever its not their sons going into the poor bloody infantry so why would they care?

    Agreed. I always thought we’d have the sense to exempt our military from this crap, but I guess not.

    Then again, it’s not really a life-or-death thing for our nation like it is for many others–we have oceans and nukes protecting us. There really is no nation that could successfully launch a (military) invasion of the USA right now. So I guess we can get away with all this diversity scheisse.

    Still makes me want to puke.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Truth

    Agreed. I always thought we’d have the sense to exempt our military from this crap, but I guess not.
     
    Our military in Afghanistan is guarding opium fields for Afghan drug lords, from other Afghan drug lords right now. I work for the Army, I know this as fact.
  69. @Trouble
    There is plenty of new data form the UK and they have closed a massive amount of the gaps there, in most(all?) age cohorts and on different tests. Some data now show no gaps at all especially in 11 year olds from the millennium cohort. There is one sample I saw that had literally erased the gap between African blacks and White Brit 11 year olds in Verbal Sims IQ test... and mixed race.

    They have closed the main Maths and English GCSE gaps to trivial amounts between blacks and whites.

    Here’s an old discussion from Steve on the topic:

    http://isteve.blogspot.com/2012/02/is-white-black-cognitive-gap-smaller-in.html

    Chuck at Occidentalist assembles a bunch of test reports, here and here. It’s not as well-studied of a subject as it is in the U.S., so it’s hard to make sense of all the data, but most point toward the white-black gap in the U.K. being well under a standard deviation.

    I haven’t seen a good meta-analyses by a British researcher who knows the ins and outs of all these acronyms like GCSE. (For example, a few years ago a British researcher slipped up on writing about regional differences in performance on the SAT in the U.S. because he didn’t know that only the most ambitious students in the Midwest take the SAT instead of the ACT — so what pitfalls await American kibbitzers among British test scores?) But most of the data seems to suggest a smaller cognitive and/or achievement gap in the U.K. than in the U.S.

    It has been apparent for some time now (see this post at Racial Reality) that in Britain, the lads are not all right. In the U.S., we’ve become familiar with gender gaps on school achievement tests favoring black and Hispanic girls over their brothers, but we see less of this among whites and Asians. This is among the better evidence that culture — fear of being put down by your co-ethnics for Acting White, etc. — is depressing NAM performance.

    On a lot of tests, in Britain, there’s even a bigger gender gap favoring the distaff side, but it seems to go across all ethnicities, even Chinese. We see weird things like girls whose parents are from Africa outscoring white boys and maybe even East Asian boys on some tests.

    As I pointed out in a couple of articles in 2005, class is the big divide in Britain rather than race. “Class” is a 1500-year-long project to civilize the Conan the Barbarian warlords who inundated the Roman Empire to act like “gentlemen.” By the late 20th Century, all that politeness, all that studying, all that self-discipline, was striking young males of the lower classes as pretty gay. Thus, chavism.

    In contrast, there isn’t all that much of an oppositional culture among blacks in Britain, since assimilating into the white working class isn’t terribly hard: You like ‘aving a pint while watching footie on the telly, too? The proportion of mixed race children appears much larger than in the U.S. As historian David Starkey pointed out during the English looting last summer, that blacks were in the lead, but whites were right behind in the looting — something you don’t see in the U.S much at all.

    Moreover, blacks in Britain are of immigrant origin: West Indian and African, with the Africans doing better on tests, typically. Some not insignificant fraction of Africans in Britain were brain-drained from Anglophone ex-colonies to work in National Health as nurses and doctors. In the U.S., West Indians and African immigrants tend to outperform native blacks. The Bell Curve found that in the NLSY79 longitudinal study, blacks who were immigrants or the children of immigrants outscored native African-Americans by an average of 5 IQ points.

    But, those are just a few speculations. It’s an interesting question that, as far as I know, hasn’t been studied terribly systematically.

    Update: lots of good stuff in the comments from people who know more about what they are talking about when it comes to Britain than I know.

    Read More
  70. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    It seems to me that an awful lot of high IQ people in contemporary society are quite sentimental about low IQ people.

    What you mean is that an awful lot of high IQ people in contemporary society are very eager to pit those with lower IQ’s than their own against each other, lest they get the notion of ganging up on their high IQ overlords.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    What you mean is that an awful lot of high IQ people in contemporary society are very eager to pit those with lower IQ’s than their own against each other, lest they get the notion of ganging up on their high IQ overlords.
     
    Low IQ people are led by people with higher IQs, dear fellow. That's how societies work.
  71. What bad traits are associated with IQ?

    The desire to exterminate those seen as inferior. (A desire which greatly predated the Nazis)

    While the Jews’ treatment of the Palestinians isn’t helping high IQ’s reputation, things like the Rwandan Genocide (black on black, far higher death rate than the Jewish Holocaust), and black Africans eating albinos as we speak, make me wonder which end of the bell curve is really more prone to exterminating others without cause. Then there’s the tendency on the part of the right side of the bell curve to simply keep better records.

    Read More
    • Replies: @syonredux

    Then there’s the tendency on the part of the right side of the bell curve to simply keep better records.
     
    In his Atrocities, Matthew White notes how South Asia/Greater India comes out looking fairly pacific in comparison to China, the Middle East, Europe, etc. To be sure, there are things like the Bengali Genocide I(1.5 million) and Partition Massacres (5,00,000+), but Greater India just doesn't seem to really belong in the same league as the big boys.

    He speculates that at least part of the reason for this is that historiography was quite weak in India before the Muslim Conquest.Compared to China, Greece, Israel, etc, India in antiquity is surprisingly un-chronicled, with no South Asian equivalents to The Book of Kings or Thucydides' History of the Peloponnesian War .When your system of philosophy views time as merely an unending series of cycles, the idea of chronicling mere events must seem quite pointless.
  72. How many blacks they even got in the UK? If I can get the sample size for blacks narrowed down to Barack Obama, I can show that blacks are substantially smarter than whites.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Former Darfur
    How many blacks they even got in the UK? If I can get the sample size for blacks narrowed down to Barack Obama, I can show that blacks are substantially smarter than whites.

    I suspect B-Ho is about 100-105 IQ overall, so no you couldn't.
    , @Truth
    The UK is roughly %3 black; which extrapolates to about 1.9m. I'd say that's a fair sample size.
  73. @syon

    There is this chart: “Percentage of pupils achieving 5 or more A*-C grades at GCSE or equivalent including English and Maths GCSEs by ethnic group, 2006-7 and 2010-11″

    http://www.ethnicity.ac.uk/research/data-sources/downloadable-statistics/education/gcse/

    Black Africans improved their GCSE attainment at a greater rate during the period than the White British and had equal attainment by 2010. Black Caribbeans still score lower though. The Irish have the third highest attainment after Chinese and Indians.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Lot

    Black Africans improved their GCSE attainment at a greater rate during the period than the White British and had equal attainment by 2010.

     

    It is a pretty easy rule that when you see a black group getting the same score as a white group in a test, the test isn't a representative population sample.

    Indeed, what you say is true, but this is a test taken at the end of high school. A much smaller percentage of blacks take the test as white british, and the dropouts are of course the ones who are going to score the worst. You may be comparing the top 80% of one group v. the top 50% of the other.

    Here's the race/test score info for England for younger children, age 7 to 11, with same racial sequence with the Chinese on top that you see in the USA and everywhere else:

    http://www.ethnicity.ac.uk/research/data-sources/downloadable-statistics/education/keystage2/
  74. @Anonymous
    It seems to me that an awful lot of high IQ people in contemporary society are quite sentimental about low IQ people.

    What you mean is that an awful lot of high IQ people in contemporary society are very eager to pit those with lower IQ's than their own against each other, lest they get the notion of ganging up on their high IQ overlords.

    What you mean is that an awful lot of high IQ people in contemporary society are very eager to pit those with lower IQ’s than their own against each other, lest they get the notion of ganging up on their high IQ overlords.

    Low IQ people are led by people with higher IQs, dear fellow. That’s how societies work.

    Read More
  75. @TGGP
    Human biodiversity is not synonymous with race. Race is a particular manifestation of biodiversity. A whole lot of biodiversity resides within racially homogenous groups. If all the races of the world melded into one with only clinal variation, you could still have the same total amount of biodiversity, it just wouldn't be across groups.

    Human biodiversity is not synonymous with race. Race is a particular manifestation of biodiversity. A whole lot of biodiversity resides within racially homogenous groups. If all the races of the world melded into one with only clinal variation, you could still have the same total amount of biodiversity, it just wouldn’t be across groups.

    That would be true at first but pretty soon the stupid tenth and the really smart tenth would both be gone. The stupidest would no longer compete at all and be starved out and the smart tenth would probably be killed off as a tall poppy mentality quickly set in. Neither would have a cohesive set of co-ethnics to protect them.

    Then too, the natural tendency would be to separate out, so one would have to figure in some sort of external force getting them to mix in the first place and keeping them mixed.

    Read More
  76. @Svigor
    How many blacks they even got in the UK? If I can get the sample size for blacks narrowed down to Barack Obama, I can show that blacks are substantially smarter than whites.

    How many blacks they even got in the UK? If I can get the sample size for blacks narrowed down to Barack Obama, I can show that blacks are substantially smarter than whites.

    I suspect B-Ho is about 100-105 IQ overall, so no you couldn’t.

    Read More
  77. @WhatEvvs
    I think HBD people go a little overboard with associating IQ with all things good and wonderful. Many times I've seen the crowd associate high IQ with impulse control. While it's probably true that most high IQ people have enough impulse control to stay out of jail, I've known many impulsive high IQ people.

    Isn't this a rather low bar? As Chris Rock would say, "you're not supposed to go to jail!"

    Speaking of Rock, Mr. and Mrs. Rock announced their split today, after 20 years. Sorry to hear that.

    I think HBD people go a little overboard with associating IQ with all things good and wonderful. Many times I’ve seen the crowd associate high IQ with impulse control. While it’s probably true that most high IQ people have enough impulse control to stay out of jail, I’ve known many impulsive high IQ people.

    High IQ people often have relatively poor impulse control but they are intelligent enough to channel those impulses into behaviors not likely to get them put in jail or the nut house. Those areas are therefore usually not violent or destructive.

    Read More
    • Replies: @WhatEvvs
    I didn't say high IQ people often have poor impulse control. I said then can. In other words, it's a personality trait completely independent of intellect. Which is the exact opposite of what the HBD proponents are always saying.

    I've known quite a few very high IQ drug addicts and not just smoking the old weed. I'm talking the hard stuff. If they hadn't had nice families they'd have rotted in jail. That seems to be another HBD heresy: environment matters. Parents matter.
    , @HA
    "High IQ people often have relatively poor impulse control..."

    All kinds of people, both low and high IQ, "often have relatively poor impulse control", so that the above statement is meaningless.

    If you are trying to say that IQ is negatively correlated with impulse control, then please find a link or some other supporting evidence. Because that would be surprising indeed. I can see how some of the neuroses that can lead to poor impulse control (Tourette's, autism...) might be more prevalent among those with higher IQ (though that, too, could use a link), but impulse control in general? Doubtful.

  78. @Svigor

    What bad traits are associated with IQ?

    The desire to exterminate those seen as inferior. (A desire which greatly predated the Nazis)
     
    While the Jews' treatment of the Palestinians isn't helping high IQ's reputation, things like the Rwandan Genocide (black on black, far higher death rate than the Jewish Holocaust), and black Africans eating albinos as we speak, make me wonder which end of the bell curve is really more prone to exterminating others without cause. Then there's the tendency on the part of the right side of the bell curve to simply keep better records.

    Then there’s the tendency on the part of the right side of the bell curve to simply keep better records.

    In his Atrocities, Matthew White notes how South Asia/Greater India comes out looking fairly pacific in comparison to China, the Middle East, Europe, etc. To be sure, there are things like the Bengali Genocide I(1.5 million) and Partition Massacres (5,00,000+), but Greater India just doesn’t seem to really belong in the same league as the big boys.

    He speculates that at least part of the reason for this is that historiography was quite weak in India before the Muslim Conquest.Compared to China, Greece, Israel, etc, India in antiquity is surprisingly un-chronicled, with no South Asian equivalents to The Book of Kings or Thucydides’ History of the Peloponnesian War .When your system of philosophy views time as merely an unending series of cycles, the idea of chronicling mere events must seem quite pointless.

    Read More
  79. @Steve Sailer
    Arthur Jensen said musical rhythm is unusual in not being correlated with IQ, which is why drummer jokes are a thing and why obviously smart rock stars like Jagger, Bowie, and Townshend tell them.

    Arthur Jensen said musical rhythm is unusual in not being correlated with IQ, which is why drummer jokes are a thing and why obviously smart rock stars like Jagger, Bowie, and Townshend tell them.

    Drummers are not so much unique in having a better sense of rhythm than the rest of the band as in having to be in better physical shape.

    http://www.clemburkedrummingproject.com/Research.html

    Having worked with a lot of rock musicians as an equipment vendor and repairman (I did not specialize in drums, but you wind up doing everything) I never thought there was a substantial difference in intelligence between drummers and guitarists, keys or bass players.

    Read More
  80. @SFG
    You're going a little too heavy-quant for something that isn't that obviously quantitative. Death row inmates aren't responsible for 15% of society's ills--they're usually psychos who kill a few people in gruesome ways that shock a jury.

    Quant heaviness is my specialty and for social issues it’s also the only option. While personal interactions need to be personal the scale that modern institutions operate on from politics to finance and industry is simply too large for subjective methods to do anything. If you had the ability to judge with some accuracy the ability and character of a stranger in one second it would take over two centuries of 24-7 to cover the worlds population. Neither you nor they will live that long and assessing people at a glance is a fantasy. Waiting for Superman may be futile but if you are doing that while Superman is demonstrably insufficient to the task at hand then that is futility squared and cubed.

    As for death row I was mostly looking for an example of group sufficiently bad to justify strong sanctions from society. If indeed there are a population of 3088 (Wikipedia) responsible for one in seven of the nation’s problems I would look to holders of The Megaphone TM as well as leading members of government and business.

    Read More
  81. @Perspective
    @syon

    There is this chart: "Percentage of pupils achieving 5 or more A*-C grades at GCSE or equivalent including English and Maths GCSEs by ethnic group, 2006-7 and 2010-11"

    http://www.ethnicity.ac.uk/research/data-sources/downloadable-statistics/education/gcse/

    Black Africans improved their GCSE attainment at a greater rate during the period than the White British and had equal attainment by 2010. Black Caribbeans still score lower though. The Irish have the third highest attainment after Chinese and Indians.

    Black Africans improved their GCSE attainment at a greater rate during the period than the White British and had equal attainment by 2010.

    It is a pretty easy rule that when you see a black group getting the same score as a white group in a test, the test isn’t a representative population sample.

    Indeed, what you say is true, but this is a test taken at the end of high school. A much smaller percentage of blacks take the test as white british, and the dropouts are of course the ones who are going to score the worst. You may be comparing the top 80% of one group v. the top 50% of the other.

    Here’s the race/test score info for England for younger children, age 7 to 11, with same racial sequence with the Chinese on top that you see in the USA and everywhere else:

    http://www.ethnicity.ac.uk/research/data-sources/downloadable-statistics/education/keystage2/

    Read More
    • Replies: @Simon in London
    "It is a pretty easy rule that when you see a black group getting the same score as a white group in a test, the test isn’t a representative population sample.

    Indeed, what you say is true, but this is a test taken at the end of high school. A much smaller percentage of blacks take the test as white british, and the dropouts are of course the ones who are going to score the worst. You may be comparing the top 80% of one group v. the top 50% of the other."

    GCSEs are taken at 16 and no one can legally drop out of school before taking them, so they should be pretty representative.
    Main points w0uld be: black African immigrants tend to be middle class (only the Somali 'refugees' are really bad) with a good work ethic, the white working class is massively demoralised due to the collapse of the family, and UK state education is much more anti-male even than the US. Black African girls certainly greatly outperform working class white boys.
  82. The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doorman of the apocalypse"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @SFG
    You're going a little too heavy-quant for something that isn't that obviously quantitative. Death row inmates aren't responsible for 15% of society's ills--they're usually psychos who kill a few people in gruesome ways that shock a jury.

    Death row inmates aren’t responsible for 15% of society’s ills–they’re usually psychos who kill a few people in gruesome ways that shock a jury.

    By the time they get to death row they have caused lots of trouble.

    Read More
  83. WhatEvvs [AKA "Bemused"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Former Darfur
    I think HBD people go a little overboard with associating IQ with all things good and wonderful. Many times I’ve seen the crowd associate high IQ with impulse control. While it’s probably true that most high IQ people have enough impulse control to stay out of jail, I’ve known many impulsive high IQ people.

    High IQ people often have relatively poor impulse control but they are intelligent enough to channel those impulses into behaviors not likely to get them put in jail or the nut house. Those areas are therefore usually not violent or destructive.

    I didn’t say high IQ people often have poor impulse control. I said then can. In other words, it’s a personality trait completely independent of intellect. Which is the exact opposite of what the HBD proponents are always saying.

    I’ve known quite a few very high IQ drug addicts and not just smoking the old weed. I’m talking the hard stuff. If they hadn’t had nice families they’d have rotted in jail. That seems to be another HBD heresy: environment matters. Parents matter.

    Read More
    • Replies: @unpc downunder
    You're confusing impulse control with neuroticism - the later is just as common among high IQ people, and many people with high levels of neuroticism take drugs or alcohol for stress relief.

    However, neurotics with drug and alcohol problems (like hippie stoners and alcoholic housewifes) are less of a social problem than impulsive hedonists with low to moderate levels of neuroticism.

    Neuroticism among people with high IQs is also more easily treated than it is among low IQ hedonists (who can't be trusted to take stimulant medications for ADHD, let alone do a course of Cognitive Behaviour Therapy).
  84. @Wilkey
    "The period following Vietnam was a dark one for the military, and its standing in the public was quite low. Even if the test were correctly applied, they probably wouldn’t have been able to get enough top line recruits."

    Back in high school in the early 90s I knew an older guy who attended one of the military academies in the '70s. I asked him how he got in. "I was the only guy from my congressional district who applied," was his reply.

    Yes, the post-Vietnam military really went to hell. Wouldn't be shocked if the same thing has happened to today's military, as well.

    That makes no sense. During Vietnam we had “the Draft”. That means every idiot had to serve in the military. I just watched a three part documentary on Brits serving in Afghanistan. The British soldiers came across as very intelligent. Even 18 year olds seemed mature and bright. There is a great essay by a French soldier floating around the net recently, that describes American troops in a glowing light.

    http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/a-french-soldiers-view-of-us-soldiers-in-afghanistan

    Whenever I listen to American troops speak about their experiences of war, I am truly impressed by their intelligence. If we are talking about the quality of education being much lower than it was in the 1960′s and before, then I have to agree. My mother, raised in Oakland during the 1950′s, could have been a Jeopardy champ. I would match her high school education, with most ivy league college educations of today and she would come out the winner.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Major Problem
    There is a great essay by a French soldier floating around the net recently, that describes American troops in a glowing light.
    http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/a-french-soldiers-view-of-us-soldiers-in-afghanistan

    Thank you very much for the link, Michelle. The article is dead accurate.
    For some reason, many people want to denigrate our armed forces and those who volunteer to serve. The fact is that we have the most deadly and capable military force ever.
    If it may have been misused by our civilian leadership, that is another matter; one that we, as citizens and voters, have an obligation to correct.

  85. @syonredux

    There is plenty of new data form the UK and they have closed a massive amount of the gaps there, in most(all?) age cohorts and on different tests. Some data now show no gaps at all especially in 11 year olds from the millennium cohort. There is one sample I saw that had literally erased the gap between African blacks and White Brit 11 year olds in Verbal Sims IQ test… and mixed race.

    They have closed the main Maths and English GCSE gaps to trivial amounts between blacks and whites.
     
    Care to link/quote the data? After all, if the British have really found a way to raise the Black mean IQ to 100, that would be useful knowledge to spread around.At the very least, perhaps we could subsidize the immigration of America's Blacks to the UK, seeing as how they have licked the problem of low Black IQ.....

    The brief quote doesn’t say at all that the black mean IQ has been raised to the white norm of 100. The racial IQ gap would be equally well closed if the present Brit white IQ has been lowered to 85… which in fact seems more likely.

    Read More
  86. anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    “The late Vietnam War-era military saw a draft army plagued by race riots in the barracks, rampant drug abuse and alcoholism, fragging of NCOs and junior officers. Fully one-third of the 47,000 combat deaths in that war were the result of friendly fire. There were an additional 11,000 deaths due to accidents.”

    Wasn’t the draft army the result of trying to fight the Vietnam war without mobilizing? Mobilizing would be seen as much to… uhm… warlike, so the thought was to fight the war (er, police action) using the annual draft pipeline.

    Read More
  87. @Lot

    Black Africans improved their GCSE attainment at a greater rate during the period than the White British and had equal attainment by 2010.

     

    It is a pretty easy rule that when you see a black group getting the same score as a white group in a test, the test isn't a representative population sample.

    Indeed, what you say is true, but this is a test taken at the end of high school. A much smaller percentage of blacks take the test as white british, and the dropouts are of course the ones who are going to score the worst. You may be comparing the top 80% of one group v. the top 50% of the other.

    Here's the race/test score info for England for younger children, age 7 to 11, with same racial sequence with the Chinese on top that you see in the USA and everywhere else:

    http://www.ethnicity.ac.uk/research/data-sources/downloadable-statistics/education/keystage2/

    “It is a pretty easy rule that when you see a black group getting the same score as a white group in a test, the test isn’t a representative population sample.

    Indeed, what you say is true, but this is a test taken at the end of high school. A much smaller percentage of blacks take the test as white british, and the dropouts are of course the ones who are going to score the worst. You may be comparing the top 80% of one group v. the top 50% of the other.”

    GCSEs are taken at 16 and no one can legally drop out of school before taking them, so they should be pretty representative.
    Main points w0uld be: black African immigrants tend to be middle class (only the Somali ‘refugees’ are really bad) with a good work ethic, the white working class is massively demoralised due to the collapse of the family, and UK state education is much more anti-male even than the US. Black African girls certainly greatly outperform working class white boys.

    Read More
  88. @AnotherDad
    @TomB

    Isn’t one of the problems with proceeding with these findings the question of where to stop?
    ...
    And thus, too one might observe, is there really any moral/ethical difference between getting rid of that first 20% and getting rid of the second? Or between the first and the third? Or the fifth?
     
    Tom, these questions you pose aren't actually the slightest bit earth shattering.

    First off society is always\already making these sorts of judgments. Example: what behavior lands you in jail? What behavior merits capital punishment?

    Further, this issue of "the next 20%" is precisely what nature does. Sometimes folks don't seem aware of it--not saying you're not--but not to evolve, but just for any species to*to stay in place* requires continual selection. For say rabbits to still be capable of eluding foxes (or eagles and coyotes in my neighborhood) the "least fit" (with admittedly a lot of luck) 20% must be culled in every generation. If i get a bunch of rabbits and start raising them, feeding them (welfare), giving them "universal health care" and allowing them to breed like ... well ... rabbits, in several generations i'm going to have a population that would be absolutely hopeless trying to survive in the wild. Forget building supermen, selection is required just to keep any species fit.

    As to arguments about morals a couple points:
    --> When in comes to criminal costs, you have the criminal behavior which society has every right (usurping the victim's right) to punish. In our old tribal societies, being a chronic jerk--if it didn't get you killed--would likely get you banished. No "group" up to and including society has some sort of obligation to carry people who don't want to abide by the norms and rules of that group.

    --> For non-criminal costs--essentially welfare--there's an issue of quid pro quo. The current model is there is no quo. You screw up and aren't taking care of yourself ... fine, the taxpayers will pick up the tab. This is ridiculous. As a taxpayer, my reaction when someone comes with there hand out to be supported on the public dime is ... fine, but you don't get to have any kids. I see no moral issue with that. If you don't like the deal--don't take it. Take care of yourself.

    I think that pretty much wraps up the moral case. You don't have to run around inventing new moral logic to handle this, we already have it--criminal behavior and quid pro quo. No one is entitled to be a criminal jackass. No one is actually entitled to the state--meaning the taxpayers--giving him stuff.

    ~~~

    Whether anyone iSteve readers or anyone else approves of dealing with this or not ... it's going to happen.

    The "anything goes" modern Western welfare state is an unsustainable blip in history. It's already clearly headed toward destruction because the West--under the influence of pernicious ideology--is unable to even police *external* access to its welfare ( much less work on eugenics) and its nations are simply being destroyed.

    But even if that wasn't going on, the "anything goes"--survival of the unfittest--welfare state is doomed because some people, some nation, will eventually develop *eugenic* polices. And those nations that have eugenic fertility and start making themselves smarter, healthier, stronger will wildly out-compete those that do not.

    Note, i don't claim to know whether that will occur by old fashioned eugenic policies, or whether the onrush of genetic technology will dominate. But i do know that whichever nations start caring about the quality of their human capital and working to improve it will triumph over those that do not.

    Our current program of survival and subsidized reproduction of the unfittest is an evolutionary dead end--as is obvious to anyone who gives it any thought. You have to basically not believe in biology to think it makes sense.

    “It’s already clearly headed toward destruction because the West–under the influence of pernicious ideology–is unable to even police *external* access to its welfare ( much less work on eugenics) and its nations are simply being destroyed.”

    You could almost think it’s a deliberate strategy – to encourage dysgenics and welfare abuse as a long-term way of rendering welfare unsustainable and discredited.
    In the UK benefits are being either frozen or restricted to a 1% increase, despite living costs rising by far more.

    “The greatest prize for the very rich would be the total dismantling of the welfare state and the removal of its consequent tax burden …

    It’s a lot easier to justify a welfare state when the recipients are “people like us” and therefore easier to identify with and to think “there but for the grace of God”. Social solidarity among working people, whether it be support for a welfare state or a trades union, will always be stronger in the absence of cultural, religious or racial divisions…

    So were I an evil capitalist billionaire looking to reduce the power of trades unions and destroy the welfare state, I’d start by funding Left groups supporting mass immigration.

    I’d encourage such groups, and left-wing lawyers too, to support the most outrageous abuses of the welfare system, knowing that it would discredit welfare in the eyes of ordinary working people – and I’d chuckle to see Telegraph and Mail readers – and BBC commenters, too – getting angry when benefits rise, as they should do, with inflation.

    “The plan is working … heh heh heh …”

    http://ukcommentators.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/the-end-of-journey-will-soon-be-in-sight.html

    The other salient feature of the UK political landscape is the total triumph of the left social agenda marching in step with the total defeat of the left economic agenda.

    “The ruling ideas of each age have ever been the ideas of its ruling class”

    The post-68 Left social agenda has almost completely triumphed in the UK – witness Cameron joining Hope Not Hate (“anti-fascist” campaigning group ≡ open borders campaigning group ) and campaigning for gay marriage.

    At the same time the Left economic agenda has been so utterly defeated that terms and conditions for the average worker are being driven down remorselessly – even as total remuneration for the top few percent accelerates into the distance.

    Haven’t any of these educated lefties wondered why this might be? So much success in one sphere, so little in another?

    Why, it’s almost as if there’s an inverse relationship between the two!”

    http://ukcommentators.blogspot.co.uk/2013/03/the-uk-left-are-lapdogs-of-capitalist.html

    Read More
  89. @SPMoore8
    I appreciate the New England Patriots are a good team, but they did after all draft Aaron Hernandez, who has been indicted in three murders

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Hernandez

    The list of possible negatives associated with low intelligence, including everything from tobacco use to obesity, is slightly absurd. I know a number of 1% in intelligence people who have those problems, and others.

    The #1 thing I associate with high intelligence is mental illness, running the gamut from various neuroses like OCD all the way up to schizophrenia.

    I was also in the Marines for 4 years in the early to mid 70's and I can attest to the mal-adaptive nature of the services in those days, but I have nothing to compare it to. My father, who was in the Marines in WW2 and Korea (and also interestingly spent some time in New Zealand) did not think that the intellectual niveau of the infantry in which I served was dissimilar to his own generation's. Since I know 3 veterans from my son's generation I can also attest that things haven't changed much, although I am willing to believe that there is less racial discord, drug abuse, and criminality. However, all 3 chose not to continue their service, the repeal of DADT had something to do with that in 2 cases at least. (For whatever that's worth.)

    However, to the main point, it is probably correct, the US should be looking for brighter people who will be less of a social drain than less bright people who are likely to become dependent. But that doesn't explain why less bright people are continually getting into this country: they are only doing so because someone is willing to give them jobs. That's where you have to shut it off. Because after these people have been here 20 years, you aren't going to get them to leave, amnesty or not. The American people are not going to abide a "cleansing" of illegals. It just isn't going to happen.

    I wouldn’t be so sure. 25% of British would repatriate immigrants. 10 years ago I wouldn’t have thought you’d get 1%. 25% of British must be what, 30-40% of the white population?

    http://www.amren.com/news/2014/11/british-future-report-says-25-of-british-adults-want-all-immigrants-repatriated/

    Read More
  90. This account is full of what might be labeled WASP or Calvinist bias. It presumes that those that draw on social services are morally and socially defective while those who live productive lives measured by (we presume) wealth and the convergence toward upper class social norms are exemplary citizens. How does one then explain Wall Street and the Neoconservatives in Washington think tanks (among others)?

    Come at this issue from the perspective of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) rather than welfare rolls and petty crime and one would find that the elite who run society have a disproportionate number of people suffering from anti-social, a.k.a. sociopathic, behaviors. We know why they are not on the welfare rolls. We also know why they do not have run-ins with cops on patrol. Their sociopathic behaviors are protected by their political power. Indeed, these protections have been institutionalized as government policy.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Art Deco
    Come at this issue from the perspective of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5)

    Why? That merely reflects the biases of the mental health trade at any one time. I do not care what they value.
  91. @SPMoore8
    I appreciate the New England Patriots are a good team, but they did after all draft Aaron Hernandez, who has been indicted in three murders

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Hernandez

    The list of possible negatives associated with low intelligence, including everything from tobacco use to obesity, is slightly absurd. I know a number of 1% in intelligence people who have those problems, and others.

    The #1 thing I associate with high intelligence is mental illness, running the gamut from various neuroses like OCD all the way up to schizophrenia.

    I was also in the Marines for 4 years in the early to mid 70's and I can attest to the mal-adaptive nature of the services in those days, but I have nothing to compare it to. My father, who was in the Marines in WW2 and Korea (and also interestingly spent some time in New Zealand) did not think that the intellectual niveau of the infantry in which I served was dissimilar to his own generation's. Since I know 3 veterans from my son's generation I can also attest that things haven't changed much, although I am willing to believe that there is less racial discord, drug abuse, and criminality. However, all 3 chose not to continue their service, the repeal of DADT had something to do with that in 2 cases at least. (For whatever that's worth.)

    However, to the main point, it is probably correct, the US should be looking for brighter people who will be less of a social drain than less bright people who are likely to become dependent. But that doesn't explain why less bright people are continually getting into this country: they are only doing so because someone is willing to give them jobs. That's where you have to shut it off. Because after these people have been here 20 years, you aren't going to get them to leave, amnesty or not. The American people are not going to abide a "cleansing" of illegals. It just isn't going to happen.

    The #1 thing I associate with high intelligence is mental illness, running the gamut from various neuroses like OCD all the way up to schizophrenia.

    I think it’s in the family as much as anything… the mentally ill could be a brother or sister as the highly intelligent. Swing for the fences and you either hit a home run or strike out.

    Interesting re: OCD, it’s something fairly common in pilots. Not really that surprising considering how many aircraft crashes are due to pilot error and how much is at stake if they screw up. Pilots are certainly of above average intelligence, and a compulsion to check things goes hand in hand with getting higher scores in anything, really. The more you are compelled to check, the longer it will take but the more correct your answer is, generally speaking. If it is a complex problem.

    http://www.human-memory.net/disorders_ocd.html

    Emphasis mine:
    Although there is no scientific evidence to suggest that people with OCD have any problems with verbal memory (remembering information that has been stored verbally or in the form of words), it has been consistently found that people with OCD show deficits in non-verbal, visual or spacial memory. Also, people with OCD (particularly those whose symptoms involve compulsive checking) tend to have less confidence in their memory than those without OCD, even if this level of confidence is not actually related to their actual performance on memory tasks, and the worse the OCD symptoms are, the worse this confidence in memory seems to be. This may explain to some extent the repetitive nature of many OCD symptoms.

    Read More
  92. The GCSE system is designed to maximise equality of outcome – hence reliance on homework, modules, and making achievement in mathematics and, for example, retail studies of equal merit.

    Differences in difficult tests are persistent. By the time students reach higher education, all minority groups have lower attainment than the white British group.

    Black Britons make up 1.1% of all 15 to 29-year-olds in England and Wales and 1.5% of all domestic students attending UK universities in 2012-13 but only 0.5% of students attending the most competitive universities.

    Regardless of the type of university attended, black students are less likely to receive a first or upper second class degree than white students who enter with the same A-level grades.

    Medicine is very competitive in the UK; a study of two cohorts of UK students from one medical school showed that minority ethnic students performed more poorly than their white colleagues in final year practical and written examinations (Woolf et al., 2011).

    After final exam, doctors have to complete a practice exam. UK ethnic minority doctors are four times more likely than white candidates to fail this exam, the General Medical Council has found. They also more likely to be incompetent and disbarred.

    Read More
  93. Ethnic minorities perform worse in difficult tests:

    A third of all UK medical students and junior doctors are from minority ethnic groups.

    A meta-analysis of 22 studies 24,000 UK trained doctors found that ethnic minorities under-performed on all categories measured: under-graduate, post-graduate, practical, academic, pass/fail and scored tests.

    The difference was consistent, persistent and moderate to large.

    Ethnic differences are unlikely to be primarily caused by examiner bias or candidate communication skills because similar effects are found in machine and examiner marked assessments.

    BMJ 2011;342:d901

    Read More
  94. And lastly:
    Attendance at university is proportionate to % of population between 15-29.

    White: uni 81% age 15-29 81%
    Indian uni 3.2% age 15-29 3.4%
    Pakistani uni 2.8% age 15-29 2.4%
    Black African uni 2.2% age 15-29 4.4%
    Black caribbean uni 1.1% age 15-29 1.5%

    Note Black Africans (many elites with degrees) now are double the population of Caribbeans (descendants of slaves).
    Also Indians are mainly elite, left-shifted immigrants with degrees whereas Pakistani’s were working class immigrants.
    Black Africans and Indians are over-represented at university.

    Performance: First class degree – the highest undergraduate award
    White 13%
    Indian 8%
    Pakistani 5%
    Black African 4%
    Caribbean 3%

    Exactly what you would expect in terms of overall IQ of population of origin and extent to which immigrants are selected for IQ.

    Read More
  95. @Former Darfur
    I think HBD people go a little overboard with associating IQ with all things good and wonderful. Many times I’ve seen the crowd associate high IQ with impulse control. While it’s probably true that most high IQ people have enough impulse control to stay out of jail, I’ve known many impulsive high IQ people.

    High IQ people often have relatively poor impulse control but they are intelligent enough to channel those impulses into behaviors not likely to get them put in jail or the nut house. Those areas are therefore usually not violent or destructive.

    “High IQ people often have relatively poor impulse control…”

    All kinds of people, both low and high IQ, “often have relatively poor impulse control”, so that the above statement is meaningless.

    If you are trying to say that IQ is negatively correlated with impulse control, then please find a link or some other supporting evidence. Because that would be surprising indeed. I can see how some of the neuroses that can lead to poor impulse control (Tourette’s, autism…) might be more prevalent among those with higher IQ (though that, too, could use a link), but impulse control in general? Doubtful.

    Read More
    • Replies: @HA
    Darfur Miller:“High IQ people often have relatively poor impulse control…”

    With regard to impulse control and IQ, the Stanford Marshmallow experiment indicates that the ability to choose delayed gratification (a kind of impulse control) is actually positively correlated with SAT scores (and, one would therefore suppose, with IQ in general).

  96. @SPMoore8
    I appreciate the New England Patriots are a good team, but they did after all draft Aaron Hernandez, who has been indicted in three murders

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Hernandez

    The list of possible negatives associated with low intelligence, including everything from tobacco use to obesity, is slightly absurd. I know a number of 1% in intelligence people who have those problems, and others.

    The #1 thing I associate with high intelligence is mental illness, running the gamut from various neuroses like OCD all the way up to schizophrenia.

    I was also in the Marines for 4 years in the early to mid 70's and I can attest to the mal-adaptive nature of the services in those days, but I have nothing to compare it to. My father, who was in the Marines in WW2 and Korea (and also interestingly spent some time in New Zealand) did not think that the intellectual niveau of the infantry in which I served was dissimilar to his own generation's. Since I know 3 veterans from my son's generation I can also attest that things haven't changed much, although I am willing to believe that there is less racial discord, drug abuse, and criminality. However, all 3 chose not to continue their service, the repeal of DADT had something to do with that in 2 cases at least. (For whatever that's worth.)

    However, to the main point, it is probably correct, the US should be looking for brighter people who will be less of a social drain than less bright people who are likely to become dependent. But that doesn't explain why less bright people are continually getting into this country: they are only doing so because someone is willing to give them jobs. That's where you have to shut it off. Because after these people have been here 20 years, you aren't going to get them to leave, amnesty or not. The American people are not going to abide a "cleansing" of illegals. It just isn't going to happen.

    There’s a reason why the Mackey Award winner (best college tight end) fell all the way to the 4th round. Nobody had any illusions about Hernandez.

    The Patriots have always been willing to take a chance on marginal characters, leaning on a locker room with proven leaders and winners to keep the dicey guys in line. The did it TWICE in the 2010 Draft, taking the emotional manchild Gronkowski and proto-thug Hernandez.

    I blame Spinal Tap for the drummer thing.

    Read More
  97. @HA
    "High IQ people often have relatively poor impulse control..."

    All kinds of people, both low and high IQ, "often have relatively poor impulse control", so that the above statement is meaningless.

    If you are trying to say that IQ is negatively correlated with impulse control, then please find a link or some other supporting evidence. Because that would be surprising indeed. I can see how some of the neuroses that can lead to poor impulse control (Tourette's, autism...) might be more prevalent among those with higher IQ (though that, too, could use a link), but impulse control in general? Doubtful.

    Darfur Miller:“High IQ people often have relatively poor impulse control…”

    With regard to impulse control and IQ, the Stanford Marshmallow experiment indicates that the ability to choose delayed gratification (a kind of impulse control) is actually positively correlated with SAT scores (and, one would therefore suppose, with IQ in general).

    Read More
    • Replies: @WhatEvvs
    Darfur Miller totally misunderstood my point, which is that impulse control and IQ are unrelated. With all due respect to the study you cited, I believe that these studies are all confounded by WEIRDness. Check Steve's archives for a def. of WEIRD.

    "Whenever I listen to American troops speak about their experiences of war, I am truly impressed by their intelligence."

    Sophia Chua-Rubenfeld is joining the army and her parents are (of course) gushing about how proud they are of her "defending our country."

    Sum ting tells me that in their heart of hearts, they hated it when she told them, but being good Tiger/Jewish parents, thou shalt kvell. Being a firm believer in method acting, I think that doing affects being. It's kind of like PFLAG, pretending you really love it when your son comes out as gay. Eventually you convince yourself that this is really great.

    I wonder if this is a trend, or is Sophia sui generis. There have always been intellectuals in the military, however. I just don't know.

  98. No Western nation can import tens of millions of illiterate, impoverished 3rd world peasants with IQ’s in the 70 and 80′s and whose culture is antithetical to learning and literacy and expect to remain intact.

    About 13% of Mexico’s workforce is employed in agriculture. About 6% of the adult population is illiterate, and these skew old; about 2% of the youth population is illiterate. One of your number here is fond of speaking of “Mixtec peasants”, but there are only about 340,000 Mixtec speakers in Mexico.

    Read More
  99. WhatEvvs [AKA "Bemused"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @HA
    Darfur Miller:“High IQ people often have relatively poor impulse control…”

    With regard to impulse control and IQ, the Stanford Marshmallow experiment indicates that the ability to choose delayed gratification (a kind of impulse control) is actually positively correlated with SAT scores (and, one would therefore suppose, with IQ in general).

    Darfur Miller totally misunderstood my point, which is that impulse control and IQ are unrelated. With all due respect to the study you cited, I believe that these studies are all confounded by WEIRDness. Check Steve’s archives for a def. of WEIRD.

    “Whenever I listen to American troops speak about their experiences of war, I am truly impressed by their intelligence.”

    Sophia Chua-Rubenfeld is joining the army and her parents are (of course) gushing about how proud they are of her “defending our country.”

    Sum ting tells me that in their heart of hearts, they hated it when she told them, but being good Tiger/Jewish parents, thou shalt kvell. Being a firm believer in method acting, I think that doing affects being. It’s kind of like PFLAG, pretending you really love it when your son comes out as gay. Eventually you convince yourself that this is really great.

    I wonder if this is a trend, or is Sophia sui generis. There have always been intellectuals in the military, however. I just don’t know.

    Read More
  100. @Anonymous
    What bad traits are associated with IQ?

    The desire to exterminate those seen as inferior. (A desire which greatly predated the Nazis)

    What bad traits are associated with IQ?

    The desire to exterminate those seen as inferior. (A desire which greatly predated the Nazis)

    It looks like someone is projecting again.

    Read More
  101. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment

    It looks like someone is projecting again.

    It looks like somebody is displaying his ignorance of history again.

    Read More
  102. @TheJester
    This account is full of what might be labeled WASP or Calvinist bias. It presumes that those that draw on social services are morally and socially defective while those who live productive lives measured by (we presume) wealth and the convergence toward upper class social norms are exemplary citizens. How does one then explain Wall Street and the Neoconservatives in Washington think tanks (among others)?

    Come at this issue from the perspective of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5) rather than welfare rolls and petty crime and one would find that the elite who run society have a disproportionate number of people suffering from anti-social, a.k.a. sociopathic, behaviors. We know why they are not on the welfare rolls. We also know why they do not have run-ins with cops on patrol. Their sociopathic behaviors are protected by their political power. Indeed, these protections have been institutionalized as government policy.

    Come at this issue from the perspective of the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM-5)

    Why? That merely reflects the biases of the mental health trade at any one time. I do not care what they value.

    Read More
  103. @Michelle
    That makes no sense. During Vietnam we had "the Draft". That means every idiot had to serve in the military. I just watched a three part documentary on Brits serving in Afghanistan. The British soldiers came across as very intelligent. Even 18 year olds seemed mature and bright. There is a great essay by a French soldier floating around the net recently, that describes American troops in a glowing light.
    http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/a-french-soldiers-view-of-us-soldiers-in-afghanistan

    Whenever I listen to American troops speak about their experiences of war, I am truly impressed by their intelligence. If we are talking about the quality of education being much lower than it was in the 1960's and before, then I have to agree. My mother, raised in Oakland during the 1950's, could have been a Jeopardy champ. I would match her high school education, with most ivy league college educations of today and she would come out the winner.

    There is a great essay by a French soldier floating around the net recently, that describes American troops in a glowing light.

    http://smallwarsjournal.com/blog/a-french-soldiers-view-of-us-soldiers-in-afghanistan

    Thank you very much for the link, Michelle. The article is dead accurate.
    For some reason, many people want to denigrate our armed forces and those who volunteer to serve. The fact is that we have the most deadly and capable military force ever.
    If it may have been misused by our civilian leadership, that is another matter; one that we, as citizens and voters, have an obligation to correct.

    Read More
  104. @22pp22
    Dunedin has Otago University which makes some of the city very international, but by and large Dunedin is white. It won't tell us much about HBD. It would have made more sense to use Hamilton which is about the same size as Dunedin but with a much large Maori and PI population.

    Dunedin can be compared with a city like Sheffield in Northern England – white, working class, de-industrialised and dependent on its local university for economic survival.

    Read More
  105. @WhatEvvs
    I didn't say high IQ people often have poor impulse control. I said then can. In other words, it's a personality trait completely independent of intellect. Which is the exact opposite of what the HBD proponents are always saying.

    I've known quite a few very high IQ drug addicts and not just smoking the old weed. I'm talking the hard stuff. If they hadn't had nice families they'd have rotted in jail. That seems to be another HBD heresy: environment matters. Parents matter.

    You’re confusing impulse control with neuroticism – the later is just as common among high IQ people, and many people with high levels of neuroticism take drugs or alcohol for stress relief.

    However, neurotics with drug and alcohol problems (like hippie stoners and alcoholic housewifes) are less of a social problem than impulsive hedonists with low to moderate levels of neuroticism.

    Neuroticism among people with high IQs is also more easily treated than it is among low IQ hedonists (who can’t be trusted to take stimulant medications for ADHD, let alone do a course of Cognitive Behaviour Therapy).

    Read More
    • Replies: @WhatEvvs

    You’re confusing impulse control with neuroticism – the later is just as common among high IQ people, and many people with high levels of neuroticism take drugs or alcohol for stress relief.

     

    Good point. It's true, the high IQ screwups in my experience don't freak out and kill people, but they do require a lot of high quality drugs to cope. And they can be very crafty & manipulative about their drug use, which is the opposite of impulsive.

    If they develop impulse control problems it's because their brains are fried after years of drug abuse.

    Thanks.


    Neuroticism among people with high IQs is also more easily treated than it is among low IQ hedonists (who can’t be trusted to take stimulant medications for ADHD, let alone do a course of Cognitive Behaviour Therapy
     
    Erm...have to disagree here. The history of treating addicts is one of mostly dismal failure. I think that Lance Dodes is great. I discovered him on Slate (of all places). He's worth a google. He locates addiction in a matrix of feeling helpless, and lots of high IQ people, who have absurdly high standards, need medication for their feelings of inadequacy. In reality they are not inadequate at all but they are WEIRD.

    What is WEIRD? Here ya go:

    http://tinyurl.com/p9abe9e

    Dunno why Steve isn't at the top of that list. I learned about it from him. Does Google discriminate?

    , @WhatEvvs
    Another thing - it may be true that what I was really talking about was neuroticism, rather than poor impulse control, but the larger point is that the HBD crowd (which I consider myself a fringe part of) is overconfident of the ability of smart people to force their way through personal struggles by pure IQ alone. I think this is a dangerous myth.

    The high IQ drug addicts I've know have had terrible compulsions and could not free themselves of their addictions. Geez, the list of great writers that had drug & alcohol problems is very long.
  106. “You’re confusing impulse control with neuroticism…”

    I think I second that (frankly, I’m not sure what Bemused was trying to say, and searching for WEIRDness and Steve Sailer was no help). The point remains that there are different kinds of impulse control, and one would have to be obtuse indeed to deny that generalized thuggery, lashing out, and an inability to choose delayed gratification are more and more prevalent the farther left one goes down the Bell curve. (Ferguson, anyone?)

    As for nervous tics and Tourette’s and so forth, that may well be a different correlation, but I also see your point in that a certain amount of stick-to-it-iveness and impulse control are required to successfully maintain a medication and therapy regimen.

    Read More
  107. @Steve Sailer
    Arthur Jensen said musical rhythm is unusual in not being correlated with IQ, which is why drummer jokes are a thing and why obviously smart rock stars like Jagger, Bowie, and Townshend tell them.

    The only high IQ drummer I’m aware of is Neil Peart of Rush. Mind you, he’s also the only left-brained libertarian rock star I’m aware of, so he’s an outlier on numerous levels.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    The only high IQ drummer I’m aware of is...

    There's plenty of them. Jacob Slichter is a gifted writer, and a Harvard grad. The members of Bad Religion are a pretty nerdy bunch, the drummer included. You can't be stupid and do everything that Don Henley has done, the coke inhalation notwithstanding. Same goes for Andy Summers and Roger Taylor, dot, dot, dot...

    That being said, the drummers are probably not as smart as the bass players, by and large.
    , @BB753
    How about Phil Collins? Great drummer ( just listen to the Genesis album Foxtrot where he plays complex beats) and also had a great career. Doubtless above average IQ.
    Stuart Copeland from The Police is also pretty smart.
  108. @Svigor
    How many blacks they even got in the UK? If I can get the sample size for blacks narrowed down to Barack Obama, I can show that blacks are substantially smarter than whites.

    The UK is roughly %3 black; which extrapolates to about 1.9m. I’d say that’s a fair sample size.

    Read More
  109. @syonredux

    There is plenty of new data form the UK and they have closed a massive amount of the gaps there, in most(all?) age cohorts and on different tests. Some data now show no gaps at all especially in 11 year olds from the millennium cohort. There is one sample I saw that had literally erased the gap between African blacks and White Brit 11 year olds in Verbal Sims IQ test… and mixed race.

    They have closed the main Maths and English GCSE gaps to trivial amounts between blacks and whites.
     
    Care to link/quote the data? After all, if the British have really found a way to raise the Black mean IQ to 100, that would be useful knowledge to spread around.At the very least, perhaps we could subsidize the immigration of America's Blacks to the UK, seeing as how they have licked the problem of low Black IQ.....

    Care to link/quote the data? After all, if the British have really found a way to raise the Black mean IQ to 100, that would be useful knowledge to spread around

    Do you think that white men would want to create a race of men that is more virile, more athletic, more outgoing, funnier, and with more athletic talent…and “just as smart?”

    Read More
  110. @SFG
    Agreed. I always thought we'd have the sense to exempt our military from this crap, but I guess not.

    Then again, it's not really a life-or-death thing for our nation like it is for many others--we have oceans and nukes protecting us. There really is no nation that could successfully launch a (military) invasion of the USA right now. So I guess we can get away with all this diversity scheisse.

    Still makes me want to puke.

    Agreed. I always thought we’d have the sense to exempt our military from this crap, but I guess not.

    Our military in Afghanistan is guarding opium fields for Afghan drug lords, from other Afghan drug lords right now. I work for the Army, I know this as fact.

    Read More
    • Replies: @The most deplorable one
    And of course, we can believe you because your name is Truth.
  111. The most deplorable one [AKA "Fourth doorman of the apocalypse"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Truth

    Agreed. I always thought we’d have the sense to exempt our military from this crap, but I guess not.
     
    Our military in Afghanistan is guarding opium fields for Afghan drug lords, from other Afghan drug lords right now. I work for the Army, I know this as fact.

    And of course, we can believe you because your name is Truth.

    Read More
  112. “Whenever I listen to American troops speak about their experiences of war, I am truly impressed by their intelligence.”

    I would not say that your average soldier is particularly intelligent, nor particularly unintelligent, vis-a-vis the civilian world. This varies by branch but not that much. What military men have in common is that those who don’t wash out after a few years of service are generally unusually COMPLIANT people. I’ve met soldiers with two to three Advanced degrees, but soldiers that I would describe as “intellectuals” are as rare as hen’s teeth.

    There is a difference between being smart and being “intellectual.” I would say that most high level officers and enlisted soldiers would have probably been unable to achieve the same “heights” in the civil sector, because the ability to think independently is not there.

    Read More
  113. anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @unpc downunder
    The only high IQ drummer I'm aware of is Neil Peart of Rush. Mind you, he's also the only left-brained libertarian rock star I'm aware of, so he's an outlier on numerous levels.

    The only high IQ drummer I’m aware of is…

    There’s plenty of them. Jacob Slichter is a gifted writer, and a Harvard grad. The members of Bad Religion are a pretty nerdy bunch, the drummer included. You can’t be stupid and do everything that Don Henley has done, the coke inhalation notwithstanding. Same goes for Andy Summers and Roger Taylor, dot, dot, dot…

    That being said, the drummers are probably not as smart as the bass players, by and large.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Hapalong Cassidy
    I assume you meant Stewart Copeland rather than Andy Summers. Summers is the guitarist.

    Copeland's background is very interesting. His Dad was one of the first CIA agents.

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miles_Copeland,_Jr.
  114. […] STEVE SAILER: The Dunedin Study: Nature v. Nurture Across 40 Years. […]

    Read More
  115. @anonymous
    The only high IQ drummer I’m aware of is...

    There's plenty of them. Jacob Slichter is a gifted writer, and a Harvard grad. The members of Bad Religion are a pretty nerdy bunch, the drummer included. You can't be stupid and do everything that Don Henley has done, the coke inhalation notwithstanding. Same goes for Andy Summers and Roger Taylor, dot, dot, dot...

    That being said, the drummers are probably not as smart as the bass players, by and large.

    I assume you meant Stewart Copeland rather than Andy Summers. Summers is the guitarist.

    Copeland’s background is very interesting. His Dad was one of the first CIA agents.

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miles_Copeland,_Jr.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Steve Sailer
    Copeland's father wrote some very interesting articles for National Review in the mid-1970s on how the CIA works.
  116. @Hapalong Cassidy
    I assume you meant Stewart Copeland rather than Andy Summers. Summers is the guitarist.

    Copeland's background is very interesting. His Dad was one of the first CIA agents.

    http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miles_Copeland,_Jr.

    Copeland’s father wrote some very interesting articles for National Review in the mid-1970s on how the CIA works.

    Read More
  117. @Brutusale
    The science is settled: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1895839/Drummers-are-natural-intellectuals.html

    Ha ha. Illustrated with a photo of Keith Moon.

    Read More
  118. @unpc downunder
    The only high IQ drummer I'm aware of is Neil Peart of Rush. Mind you, he's also the only left-brained libertarian rock star I'm aware of, so he's an outlier on numerous levels.

    How about Phil Collins? Great drummer ( just listen to the Genesis album Foxtrot where he plays complex beats) and also had a great career. Doubtless above average IQ.
    Stuart Copeland from The Police is also pretty smart.

    Read More
    • Replies: @unpc downunder
    Phil Collins may have been smart but he's pretty much gone down in history as the Benedict Arnold of progressive rock. However, you got me with Stuart Copeland. He's definitely a smart guy.

    His previous band Curved Air produced some good tracks and was fronted by the magnificent Sonja Kristina, who sure was a lot easier on the eye than Sting.
  119. WhatEvvs [AKA "Bemused"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @unpc downunder
    You're confusing impulse control with neuroticism - the later is just as common among high IQ people, and many people with high levels of neuroticism take drugs or alcohol for stress relief.

    However, neurotics with drug and alcohol problems (like hippie stoners and alcoholic housewifes) are less of a social problem than impulsive hedonists with low to moderate levels of neuroticism.

    Neuroticism among people with high IQs is also more easily treated than it is among low IQ hedonists (who can't be trusted to take stimulant medications for ADHD, let alone do a course of Cognitive Behaviour Therapy).

    You’re confusing impulse control with neuroticism – the later is just as common among high IQ people, and many people with high levels of neuroticism take drugs or alcohol for stress relief.

    Good point. It’s true, the high IQ screwups in my experience don’t freak out and kill people, but they do require a lot of high quality drugs to cope. And they can be very crafty & manipulative about their drug use, which is the opposite of impulsive.

    If they develop impulse control problems it’s because their brains are fried after years of drug abuse.

    Thanks.

    Neuroticism among people with high IQs is also more easily treated than it is among low IQ hedonists (who can’t be trusted to take stimulant medications for ADHD, let alone do a course of Cognitive Behaviour Therapy

    Erm…have to disagree here. The history of treating addicts is one of mostly dismal failure. I think that Lance Dodes is great. I discovered him on Slate (of all places). He’s worth a google. He locates addiction in a matrix of feeling helpless, and lots of high IQ people, who have absurdly high standards, need medication for their feelings of inadequacy. In reality they are not inadequate at all but they are WEIRD.

    What is WEIRD? Here ya go:

    http://tinyurl.com/p9abe9e

    Dunno why Steve isn’t at the top of that list. I learned about it from him. Does Google discriminate?

    Read More
    • Replies: @HA
    The WEIRDness link doesn't work for me -- maybe Google and tinyurl are both in on the conspiracy.
  120. WhatEvvs [AKA "Bemused"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @unpc downunder
    You're confusing impulse control with neuroticism - the later is just as common among high IQ people, and many people with high levels of neuroticism take drugs or alcohol for stress relief.

    However, neurotics with drug and alcohol problems (like hippie stoners and alcoholic housewifes) are less of a social problem than impulsive hedonists with low to moderate levels of neuroticism.

    Neuroticism among people with high IQs is also more easily treated than it is among low IQ hedonists (who can't be trusted to take stimulant medications for ADHD, let alone do a course of Cognitive Behaviour Therapy).

    Another thing – it may be true that what I was really talking about was neuroticism, rather than poor impulse control, but the larger point is that the HBD crowd (which I consider myself a fringe part of) is overconfident of the ability of smart people to force their way through personal struggles by pure IQ alone. I think this is a dangerous myth.

    The high IQ drug addicts I’ve know have had terrible compulsions and could not free themselves of their addictions. Geez, the list of great writers that had drug & alcohol problems is very long.

    Read More
  121. At any rate, Stewart Copeland seems like a pretty smart guy, both because of his parentage and from how he comes across in interviews. And from a musical perspective, I believe he wrote a not insubstantial amount of the Police’s first album. After that, however, Sting insisted on writing almost all of the band’s material. I always suspected that it was Copeland who kept most of Sting’s loopier musical ideas out of the Police’s catalogue. Which is why Sting’s Police material is so much better than his solo stuff.

    Read More
    • Replies: @anonymous
    "...from a musical perspective, I believe he wrote a not insubstantial amount of the Police’s first album... I always suspected that it was Copeland who kept most of Sting’s loopier musical ideas out of the Police’s catalogue. Which is why Sting’s Police material is so much better than his solo stuff."

    No, the writing efforts of Copeland and Summers were always pretty insubstantial, in terms of success, which is why Sting was able to insist on dominating the writing of future albums, despite all the tension that caused. And in interviews, Copeland mentioned that Sting would eventually present the other two with nearly finished demos, whereupon the fights that he and Sting would have became about the drummer's efforts to put his own stamp on the material.

    That being said, it was Copeland who wisely convinced Sting to charge up "Roxanne" from its bossa nova origin into its final form.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roxanne_%28song%29
  122. “…the list of great writers that had drug & alcohol problems is very long.”

    True, but so is the list of mediocre writers with the very same problem, and also the list of addicts with no writing talent whatsoever. Those lists may be considerably longer, proportionally speaking, but the flameouts don’t get the same kind of attention.

    I agree that high IQ is no panacea for life’s problems, and any improvements it confers are observable only when averaged over a number of people, and not in ever single individual. But to be fair to the psychometrically obsessed in this site, who do indeed have far too little appreciation for culture and character and religion, even a considerable number of them would be quick to dismiss claims that life in an Ashkenazi or Chinese enclave is better just because of the relatively higher IQ.

    Read More
    • Replies: @WhatEvvs

    True, but so is the list of mediocre writers with the very same problem, and also the list of addicts with no writing talent whatsoever. Those lists may be considerably longer, proportionally speaking, but the flameouts don’t get the same kind of attention.

     

    Yeah, right, fine and your point is?....irrelevant to my point. Just saying that emotional problems aren't solvable by intellect alone, and that being very bright is totally unrelated to life satisfaction. And yes, the HBD crowd does indeed conflate and confuse the two.

    I get the feeling that you want to argue the point further, and at this point, I'm checking out.

    http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2013/05/weird_psychology_social_science_researchers_rely_too_much_on_western_college.html

    Steve wrote about this some time back.
  123. anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @Hapalong Cassidy
    At any rate, Stewart Copeland seems like a pretty smart guy, both because of his parentage and from how he comes across in interviews. And from a musical perspective, I believe he wrote a not insubstantial amount of the Police's first album. After that, however, Sting insisted on writing almost all of the band's material. I always suspected that it was Copeland who kept most of Sting's loopier musical ideas out of the Police's catalogue. Which is why Sting's Police material is so much better than his solo stuff.

    “…from a musical perspective, I believe he wrote a not insubstantial amount of the Police’s first album… I always suspected that it was Copeland who kept most of Sting’s loopier musical ideas out of the Police’s catalogue. Which is why Sting’s Police material is so much better than his solo stuff.”

    No, the writing efforts of Copeland and Summers were always pretty insubstantial, in terms of success, which is why Sting was able to insist on dominating the writing of future albums, despite all the tension that caused. And in interviews, Copeland mentioned that Sting would eventually present the other two with nearly finished demos, whereupon the fights that he and Sting would have became about the drummer’s efforts to put his own stamp on the material.

    That being said, it was Copeland who wisely convinced Sting to charge up “Roxanne” from its bossa nova origin into its final form.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roxanne_%28song%29

    Read More
  124. @WhatEvvs

    You’re confusing impulse control with neuroticism – the later is just as common among high IQ people, and many people with high levels of neuroticism take drugs or alcohol for stress relief.

     

    Good point. It's true, the high IQ screwups in my experience don't freak out and kill people, but they do require a lot of high quality drugs to cope. And they can be very crafty & manipulative about their drug use, which is the opposite of impulsive.

    If they develop impulse control problems it's because their brains are fried after years of drug abuse.

    Thanks.


    Neuroticism among people with high IQs is also more easily treated than it is among low IQ hedonists (who can’t be trusted to take stimulant medications for ADHD, let alone do a course of Cognitive Behaviour Therapy
     
    Erm...have to disagree here. The history of treating addicts is one of mostly dismal failure. I think that Lance Dodes is great. I discovered him on Slate (of all places). He's worth a google. He locates addiction in a matrix of feeling helpless, and lots of high IQ people, who have absurdly high standards, need medication for their feelings of inadequacy. In reality they are not inadequate at all but they are WEIRD.

    What is WEIRD? Here ya go:

    http://tinyurl.com/p9abe9e

    Dunno why Steve isn't at the top of that list. I learned about it from him. Does Google discriminate?

    The WEIRDness link doesn’t work for me — maybe Google and tinyurl are both in on the conspiracy.

    Read More
  125. WhatEvvs [AKA "Bemused"] says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @HA
    "...the list of great writers that had drug & alcohol problems is very long."

    True, but so is the list of mediocre writers with the very same problem, and also the list of addicts with no writing talent whatsoever. Those lists may be considerably longer, proportionally speaking, but the flameouts don't get the same kind of attention.

    I agree that high IQ is no panacea for life's problems, and any improvements it confers are observable only when averaged over a number of people, and not in ever single individual. But to be fair to the psychometrically obsessed in this site, who do indeed have far too little appreciation for culture and character and religion, even a considerable number of them would be quick to dismiss claims that life in an Ashkenazi or Chinese enclave is better just because of the relatively higher IQ.

    True, but so is the list of mediocre writers with the very same problem, and also the list of addicts with no writing talent whatsoever. Those lists may be considerably longer, proportionally speaking, but the flameouts don’t get the same kind of attention.

    Yeah, right, fine and your point is?….irrelevant to my point. Just saying that emotional problems aren’t solvable by intellect alone, and that being very bright is totally unrelated to life satisfaction. And yes, the HBD crowd does indeed conflate and confuse the two.

    I get the feeling that you want to argue the point further, and at this point, I’m checking out.

    http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2013/05/weird_psychology_social_science_researchers_rely_too_much_on_western_college.html

    Steve wrote about this some time back.

    Read More
  126. “Yeah, right, fine and your point is?….”

    That the arguments you are making, in particular this one:

    Darfur Miller totally misunderstood my point, which is that impulse control and IQ are unrelated.

    need something more substantive to back them up other than pointing out that great writers are frequently prone to addiction, which, as I noted in my previous post, is evidence of pretty much nothing. You also dismiss the study I pointed to that clearly does show a correlation between impulse control and IQ because you think it is being confused with WEIRDness, or something like that, though all you have in support of that is a dead link. If anyone else here finds your arguments persuasive, maybe they can chime in instead.

    Read More
  127. Anonymous says:     Show CommentNext New Comment
    @SPMoore8
    I appreciate the New England Patriots are a good team, but they did after all draft Aaron Hernandez, who has been indicted in three murders

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aaron_Hernandez

    The list of possible negatives associated with low intelligence, including everything from tobacco use to obesity, is slightly absurd. I know a number of 1% in intelligence people who have those problems, and others.

    The #1 thing I associate with high intelligence is mental illness, running the gamut from various neuroses like OCD all the way up to schizophrenia.

    I was also in the Marines for 4 years in the early to mid 70's and I can attest to the mal-adaptive nature of the services in those days, but I have nothing to compare it to. My father, who was in the Marines in WW2 and Korea (and also interestingly spent some time in New Zealand) did not think that the intellectual niveau of the infantry in which I served was dissimilar to his own generation's. Since I know 3 veterans from my son's generation I can also attest that things haven't changed much, although I am willing to believe that there is less racial discord, drug abuse, and criminality. However, all 3 chose not to continue their service, the repeal of DADT had something to do with that in 2 cases at least. (For whatever that's worth.)

    However, to the main point, it is probably correct, the US should be looking for brighter people who will be less of a social drain than less bright people who are likely to become dependent. But that doesn't explain why less bright people are continually getting into this country: they are only doing so because someone is willing to give them jobs. That's where you have to shut it off. Because after these people have been here 20 years, you aren't going to get them to leave, amnesty or not. The American people are not going to abide a "cleansing" of illegals. It just isn't going to happen.

    It is going to happen.

    Read More
  128. @BB753
    How about Phil Collins? Great drummer ( just listen to the Genesis album Foxtrot where he plays complex beats) and also had a great career. Doubtless above average IQ.
    Stuart Copeland from The Police is also pretty smart.

    Phil Collins may have been smart but he’s pretty much gone down in history as the Benedict Arnold of progressive rock. However, you got me with Stuart Copeland. He’s definitely a smart guy.

    His previous band Curved Air produced some good tracks and was fronted by the magnificent Sonja Kristina, who sure was a lot easier on the eye than Sting.

    Read More

Comments are closed.

PastClassics
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
Which superpower is more threatened by its “extractive elites”?
What Was John McCain's True Wartime Record in Vietnam?
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.