why do idiots use the IQ of a population to determine it's level of prosperity when it's been shown over and over again, where two neightbor countries with the same IQ and genetic stock shows two diferent outcomes because one is socialist and the other is capitalist.
worse of all is that marxist keep making excuses.
Other urls found in this thread:
heritage.org
hdr.undp.org
twitter.com
>Colombia
>good
>he doesn't know the picture is comparing it to venezuela
your dumb venezuelans start crying when they enter one of my country supermarkets.
lmao faggot.
IQ is perhaps not sufficient but to have more development it is necessary within the human capital.
There isn't a single majority black country on this planet that isn't a shithole
Before you get to claim equality you need to have a single precedent case
Technological and societal/economic progress is largely driven by the top 5% of your society, with the rest doing more menial work and generally following suit.
Looking at a bell curve of IQ for your entire population distribution, even a difference of 10 points between two curve medians would register as a huge difference in the number of, say, people with an IQ of 120, who fall in the range of your inventors, entrepreneurs, scientists, doctors, and politicians.
Large difference in quality, tangible difference in development and prosperity. It is very easy math.
botswana have the same PPP as brazil, clearly a developing economy, not a shithole.
there's enough high IQ blacks to make a black nation sustainable.
top 20% of blacks have an IQ bigger than 100.
there should be easily a 5% of blacks that have enough IQ to control and move forward a black nation.
>developing economy
>not a shithole
Still a shithole. I want one clear example. Even Hispanics have places like Chile and Argentina that at least establish precedence.
S. Africa looked promising once, then the black majority took back control.
>Sustainable
That wasn't my qualifier. Sure, you can make a "sustainable" country. I mean advanced, like the United States, or Germany, with crazy amounts of economic and scientific production and a huge service sector. "Bigger than 100" wouldn't cut it.
Relative to each other, one country would have many, many more people above 120. That's my hypothesis and thus far nothing has been presented to disprove what I believe.
If we measure all humans against each other, relatively speaking, one group will always be ahead of another head to head. There is no ultimate conclusion for the entire human race.
That is, unless we mixed to near perfect genetic and cultural similarity, that isn't realistic at all so we will continue as we have for most of history.
IQ has been shown many times to be THE SINGLE MOST RELIABLE predictor of how successful someone will be in life in terms of staying out of jail, graduating high school and college, getting a good job, avoiding major problems etc. The average IQ of a country has a huge affect on productiveness, competitiveness with other countries, educational attainment, the ability of the citizens to wisely save and spend money etc.
However, IQ does not determine the sort of political or economic model by which the country/government is run.
IQ is HUGELY important, but at the same time its effects on the population of any particular country will only reflect how the populations IQ affects things under that particular political and economic system.
People living in a country run according to a bad economic/political system will likely do poorly regardless of whether the population has a high or low average IQ. But as long as there are two different populations living in two separate countries that aren't completely shit then the one with the significantly higher average IQ will certainly do better.
Africa having an average IQ of 70 is a serious problem. Hopefully the Chinese figure out soon how to successfully edit the DNA of the next generation and provide the tech to Africa in exchange for resources so Africa can get it's shit together.
Preventing economic collapse, civil war and widespread famine is a whole different ball game than transitioning to a country with a 1st world or near 1st world standard of living.
The second is a lot more difficult than the first. Also, keep in mind many of those Africans may end up utilizing their higher IQ to outwit others in order to profit from corruption/graft and other things that don't benefit the country. That's what happens when a country fails to set up an established system to effectively deal with corruption and mismanagement.
heritage.org
hdr.undp.org
why pol loves to talk so much about blacks and never do research on them.
botswana is cleary on latinoamerican tier territory, which is good, since latinoamerica is a tier upward.
>but is not germany levels
but is not a failure neither.
>population of 2 million on a continent with 1.216 billion
>it disproves the IQ argument
>clearly blacks are still dumb
should facts be ignored because of ideology?
iq is not the be all end all
how "domesticated" your underclass is a better indicator
compare walking through the slums of new Delhi with walking through the slums of Rio
>it disproves the IQ argument
No it doesn't you retard.
One or even several success stories amidst a sea of failures does not disprove the argument that low average IQ is a major contributor to poverty and economic mismanagement.
Low average IQ plays a major role but this does not preclude any country from succeeding, it just makes it more difficult but on a continent with a billion people it's unlikely that there would be no success stories because of how many people there are.
It's absurd to think that a tiny country of 2 million doing well among a continent of a billion people doing poorly proves that the 99.9% of Africans doing poorly are not doing so in part because of their low IQ.
That sort of thinking is like saying that the small amount of East Asians who can consume lots of dairy without stomach issues somehow proves that the 90% of East Asians who are lactose intolerant are somehow not lactose intolerant.
>clearly blacks are still dumb
Africans have a low average IQ which is an irrefutable fact and which is separate from the issue of poverty and economics. I don't have to prove that poverty and African IQ are linked in order to demonstrate Africans are unintelligent because the low average IQ has already been conclusively proven.
because the other nations were socialist dictatorships during decades, like venezuela retard.
learn about african history.
>because the other nations were socialist dictatorships during decades, like venezuela retard.
>learn about african history.
That does not in any way disprove or even slightly challenge the link between IQ and poverty.
Many African countries were not under socialist dictatorships and in any case there are dozens of European, Latin American and Asian countries who suffered under socialist and non-socialist dictators, many of whom were much worse than anyone ruling in African but most of those countries are doing 10 times better today than the average African country.
I would love to hear examples of pro capitalist black nations then.
and yes, one counterexample disproves your theory, retard.
isn't this how science works?
>I would love to hear examples of pro capitalist black nations then.
1) I don't need to provide examples of "pro-capitalist" African nations in order to prove that IQ and African poverty are linked because the examples of countries all around the world who went through similar and worse governments pokes a big hole in the middle of your hypothesis about socialism being responsible because almost all the countries outside Africa recovered and are doing well today while much of Africa (even ones who didn't have socialist govs) is still doing very poorly.
2) Most of black Africa only became independent countries around the 1960's and many of the ones that had socialist governments only had them for brief periods of a decade or two. African countries that had to deal with socialism don't even compare to European and Asian countries who in some cases had socialist/communist governments for 50 or 60 years and even longer in some cases.
>and yes, one counterexample disproves your theory, retard.
>isn't this how science works?
Honestly I don't believe anyone is this stupid and I think you're just trolling out of spite but in case you are serious I'll respond. This is the logic underlying the discussion.
1) It is an irrefutable fact, based on over a century of massive amounts of scientific research that has been found time and time again to be true including by almost all recent studies that:
a) Black Africans living in Africa have a low average IQ, most studies estimate the average IQ of Black Africans to be 70
b) IQ has a massive affect on how successful someone is in life and their ability to follow the law, do well in school, get a good job, solve problems, act responsibly, plan ahead, understand complex issues, innovate etc etc
continued (1/2)
(2/2)
2) There is no reason to assume why black Africans are magically exempt from the effects that IQ has on the stuff mentioned above in b)
3) In the absence of any evidence showing low-IQ blacks are somehow just as good as medium/high-IQ people at that stuff (this evidence does not exist) then it must be taken as fact that a low-IQ harms black Africans just as much as it harms low-lQ people from any race.
4) In the face of all the massive research showing how much IQ impacts an individual it is obvious that a 70-IQ African country compared to the 100-IQ white country will be doing much worse when it comes to the economy, crime, industry, scientific output etc. because those stats for the whole country just reflect the sum of how all the individuals do (which is heavily affected by IQ) and so the affects of IQ on every individual will be reflected in the general stats for the whole country.
5) Of course the economic or political system has a huge affect on poverty and other stuff but that does not make anything in the above posts untrue, it just adds another variable. The existence of socialism or capitalism as a variable in this situation does not in any way have any bearing on how average IQ affects a population.
6) While we can't say with certainty that in every case low average IQ caused economic problems in Africa there is a rock-solid basis to think that in many or in most cases it did play a major role because of how we know IQ affects individuals and thus how the average IQ affects the population of a country.
Nice cherrypicked photo for Botswana
Here's how it looks like in average
That "East Germany" pic is from Camden, New Jersey
>typed Botswana in google picture
>first picture of human habitations is pic related
2) *no reason to assume that
>many of whom were much worse than anyone ruling in African
Not really. The dedicators in Africa were really fucked up. the stories of them and the shit they did are the stuff of memetic horror. They do have obscurity ad irrelevance to make them invisible.
I can go to the bad end of my town (Kroken) and see the same shit and I live in fucking Norway.
Then stop importing nignogs
South Africa was pretty shit during the Apartheid years when only whites had conditions worth resembling developed.
You dont understand. The ape men of Kroken are white.
Development leads to increases in IQ gain. Watt's so hard to get about that we've seen this allover the world.
>Apartheid
Only whites are developed
>post Apartheid
Nothing is developed
It was a downgrade.
Just so you know the only legit black country is Haiti, the other black countries are really niggers using already white built infrastructure to keep themselves from tearing down back into a stone age wilderness state. Also if you think African countries are safer than South American states you truely have no idea at all.
No the stuff that was apartheid developed was still there. More Coloreds and Blacks and Indians entered the middle and upper class.
The abolition of Apartheid did not suddenly reverse everything.
>same shit
No african slums are hell on earth compared to any ghetto made by white people, just walk into any black area in America and see how nonhuman black people are for yourself.
@2163534
Here's your dots
Nice try leftard
I visited Malmo once, and the subhumans in Scandinavia arent Europeans
It did, the previously safe white areas are now rape and murder zones thanks to desegregation. The entire area around Ponte City in Joburg for example, worse than Detroit.
What is the murder rate like in there? Here in St. Louis it's 50 per 100k annually which is worse than some warzones.
And yet South African developed in a lot of ways.
South African cities have to deal with the huge issue that the government (during and before Apartheid) had on city development and planning which caused the big growth in slums and townhouses.
It's like how slums form in other parts of the world.
>Not really.
Did socialist/communist regimes in Africa kill tens of millions of people in a single country like Russia and China?
Fucking retard
It's true that socialist economies have all resulted in failed states, but saying that North Korean juche is a communist ideology is just plain wrong.
I've never heard of IQ = Country Prosperity argument.
Are you maybe projecting?