101–110 of 308 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why? Journalists deserve to get paid for their work.
Don't you know that the "Fuck you, pay me" crede only applies to tech workers.
"opportunity hoarding" >That includes everything from legacy college admissions to unpaid internships that >let affluent parents rig the game a little more in their children's favor. Why does the author imply something sinister with economic division? I want my kid to succeed, so I fight for his chance to succeed. I have high end skills to offer, first in line to learn from me? My children. This isn't deliberate excl…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sure. Both are highly heritable: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3182557/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/8776880
I was thinking less about the 'intelligence is partly heritable' part, and more about 'affluent people are smart and conscientious' part.
"each point increase in IQ test scores raises income by between $234 and $616 per year"
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289607...
and conscientiousness may even trump IQ when it comes to SES
http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2009/06/does_personalit....
Dropping out of high school isn't "doing everything wrong" and finishing college is pretty far from "doing everything right" so this seems to be a little bit of editorial journalism. From the paper: "Children who go on to achieve a college degree, irrespective of their parents’ income, are more likely to make it to the top income quintile [...] Bottom-income children without a diploma have a 54% probability of remain…
Not quite. All it says that the people who are able to do well in school also are able to do well in the workplace.
If you want to try and derive causation here, the simplest and most reasonable explanation is that the qualities that allowed them to do well in school are also what allowed them to do well in the workplace. It does not seem shocking at all to think that those who have drive, desire, ability, etc. perform better in everything they do, be it education or the workplace.
The idea that schooling magically turns you into a new person able to finally succeed for the first time seems like a huge stretch.
It sucks, but what's the solution? Because let's face it, the primary purpose of "being rich" is to provide for one's family, at least from my point of view. If I work my ass off it's to make sure I can help my kids do better than I did. What's the point of being "wealthy" if it's not to help your kids have a better life than your own? I don't want to sound insensitive. All these studies about kids born in poverty an…
Fix the fucking educational system and stop wasting people's time.
[1] http://voxeu.org/article/intergenerational-mobility-denmark-... [2] http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2016/08/the-amer...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How is that? The main thrust of the article (including the chart) comes from an academic source which doesn't appear to be opinion-based at all.
It's not about the academic source's basis on opinion, but on correlation studies. This is your friendly reminder that correlation is not causation.
~ Randall Munroe
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is one of the most HN comments ever. Without getting into the nature-vs-nurture debate for the trillionth time, "Actually, mostly a matter of genes because this is by far the biggest influence parents have on their kids" is a totally preposterous statement. Genes are certainly AN influence, but I think my parents' encouraging my nerdiness, buying me a graphing calculator in high school and surrounding me with co…
It should be a very HN comment since I learned most of it here from 'gwern (not Ayn Rand): https://www.gwern.net/iq
When you have evidence that the supposedly smart and highly moral are guilty of oppressing an entire swath of people and you point at mostly economic markers without controlling for bad behavior by the "haves" you're just skewing your own results
That rich do better within our culture, which is rigged to give the rich an advantage, it doesn't say much to whether they are truly smarter
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fix the fucking educational system and stop wasting people's time.
I'm personally all for fixing the education system, but the idea that this would fix (or even help) income equality is a fantasy. Denmark is often held up as a model of low-inequality, high-income-mobility, high-education-investment countries. But a recent study indicated that these policies' have zero effect on Danish income mobility and education-attainment mobility relative to the US! Their high levels of equality…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I was thinking less about the 'intelligence is partly heritable' part, and more about 'affluent people are smart and conscientious' part.
OK. "each point increase in IQ test scores raises income by between $234 and $616 per year" http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289607... and conscientiousness may even trump IQ when it comes to SES http://econlog.econlib.org/archives/2009/06/does_personalit....
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It should be a very HN comment since I learned most of it here from 'gwern (not Ayn Rand): https://www.gwern.net/iq
Given the issues the social sciences have with reproducible results, that Gwern is linking more science blogs than papers, and that we know rich people have conspired to hold poor people back via laws and other self serving maneuvers I'm still going to lean into "bullshit" category When you have evidence that the supposedly smart and highly moral are guilty of oppressing an entire swath of people and you point at mos…