6 ms·

I think it's because intelligence doesn't help when it comes to earning money. The luck and social component is so strong that there is very little incentive fo

I think it's because intelligence doesn't help when it comes to earning money. The luck and social component is so strong that there is very little incentive for people to be intelligent. I also do think that wealth inequality correlates with lower average IQ. Rich people want to keep the majority of people dumb; breed them like cattle, hook them up to machines and milk them.

icedchai 7y ago
Though it's not a guarantee, it certainly does help. I'd argue that intelligence is part of that "luck." You lucked out and won the genetic lottery.
- jondubois 7y ago
  I don't buy the genetic argument. Intelligence is worthless. In this society, a complete idiot with capital can achieve much more than a genius can achieve without capital.
  - xyzzyz 7y ago
    Which is why top companies are founded by children of lottery winners and media celebrities, while poor immigrants never achieve anything significant.
    - atq2119 7y ago
      Founding a top company is the most visible way of gaining a lot of wealth, but it is by far not representative. Much more common are ways of starting with a lot of wealth and turning it into even more wealth.
      - Viliam1234 7y ago
        This is exactly the kind of information that will NOT be welcome at Hacker News.
        zone411 7y ago
        Even according to a source that wants to agree with you, 57% of Forbes 400 started with less than $1 million: http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/ufe/legacy_url/410/BornOnThirdBase_2012.pdf?1448056427 http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/ufe/legacy_url/410/Born....
  - icedchai 7y ago
    An idiot with capital will, relatively quickly, lose all of his capital through wasteful spending. You see this all the time with lottery jackpot winners, those who receive a large inheritance, etc.
    - jondubois 7y ago
      Not so. The reality is that his family banker will invest the money in an index fund like S&P500 for him and then he will see it compound a predictable 10% or so every year, becoming increasingly wealthy without ever having to lift a finger or exercise a single neuron.
      - icedchai 7y ago
        More likely the banker will invest it in low performing actively managed mutual funds and slowly drain 1-2% in additional "management fees" out of him...
      - ksenzee 7y ago
        If you're getting a predictable 10% from your investments, you're investing in a different SPY than I am.
    - watwut 7y ago
      No. You can be extremely frugal while stupid as hell.
    - savethefuture 7y ago
      Then he will become an idiot, without capital, whats your point?
      - icedchai 7y ago
        The point is one might luck into getting rich. Staying rich requires some intelligence, or you're going to make poor decisions. This is even true of dynastic wealth. One example: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/huntington-hartford-riches-to-rags-grocery-heir-834613.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/huntington-har...
  - james_s_tayler 7y ago
    That's exactly why sports stars and rappers with many millions of dollars often go broke and college kids eating ramen start billion dollar companies.
- Youcandothis 7y ago
  A lottery suggests a sort of reincarnation where people are randomly being born in different bodies.
  - icedchai 7y ago
    Not really. It's just a commonly used phrase.
skookumchuck 7y ago
> I think it's because intelligence doesn't help when it comes to earning money. What evidence is there of that? > The luck and social component is so strong that there is very little incentive for people to be intelligent. People tend to make their own luck. For example, if you sit home and watch TV 6 hours a day, you are highly unlikely to get lucky. If you're out swinging the bat, you're far more likely to get a hit.
- jodrellblank 7y ago
  Lucky if you're a person with the drive and motivation to go out swinging the bat.
  - skookumchuck 7y ago
    Drive and motivation is a choice, not luck.
    - jodrellblank 7y ago
      I see no reason that brain makeup would be any more a choice than eye color or height. But even if it is, that just pushes the question back another stage. People make choices for reasons, based on their experience and predictions. Lucky to be someone who had the appropriate experiences and made appropriate predictions to choose drive and motivation. There should be no reason to doubt this unless you believe in some kind of external soul or intervening deity - a child who is hit every time they speak or move without being told to, will make different choices about "drive and motivation" as a child who is encouraged and praised when they do things of their own accord. It can't be otherwise, to suggest that people do things /without/ their environment affecting them at all is so absurd as to be instantly dismissible. The idea that infants might know what "drive and motivation" even are, without being taught, that everyone must learn that they are effective and valuable, independent of all experiences, doesn't stand up to any scrutiny whatsoever. Put simply, if what you say was true, /everyone would choose that/.
      - 7y ago
deleted 7y ago
[deleted]
vibrato 7y ago
IQ is the best test we have to predict economic success. https://www.gwern.net/docs/iq/2007-strenze.pdf https://www.gwern.net/docs/iq/2007-strenze.pdf

icedchai 7y ago

Though it's not a guarantee, it certainly does help. I'd argue that intelligence is part of that "luck." You lucked out and won the genetic lottery.

jondubois 7y ago
I don't buy the genetic argument. Intelligence is worthless. In this society, a complete idiot with capital can achieve much more than a genius can achieve without capital.
- xyzzyz 7y ago
  Which is why top companies are founded by children of lottery winners and media celebrities, while poor immigrants never achieve anything significant.
  - atq2119 7y ago
    Founding a top company is the most visible way of gaining a lot of wealth, but it is by far not representative. Much more common are ways of starting with a lot of wealth and turning it into even more wealth.
    - Viliam1234 7y ago
      This is exactly the kind of information that will NOT be welcome at Hacker News.
      - zone411 7y ago
        Even according to a source that wants to agree with you, 57% of Forbes 400 started with less than $1 million: http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/ufe/legacy_url/410/BornOnThirdBase_2012.pdf?1448056427 http://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/ufe/legacy_url/410/Born....
- icedchai 7y ago
  An idiot with capital will, relatively quickly, lose all of his capital through wasteful spending. You see this all the time with lottery jackpot winners, those who receive a large inheritance, etc.
  - jondubois 7y ago
    Not so. The reality is that his family banker will invest the money in an index fund like S&P500 for him and then he will see it compound a predictable 10% or so every year, becoming increasingly wealthy without ever having to lift a finger or exercise a single neuron.
    - icedchai 7y ago
      More likely the banker will invest it in low performing actively managed mutual funds and slowly drain 1-2% in additional "management fees" out of him...
    - ksenzee 7y ago
      If you're getting a predictable 10% from your investments, you're investing in a different SPY than I am.
  - watwut 7y ago
    No. You can be extremely frugal while stupid as hell.
  - savethefuture 7y ago
    Then he will become an idiot, without capital, whats your point?
    - icedchai 7y ago
      The point is one might luck into getting rich. Staying rich requires some intelligence, or you're going to make poor decisions. This is even true of dynastic wealth. One example: https://www.independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/huntington-hartford-riches-to-rags-grocery-heir-834613.html https://www.independent.co.uk/news/obituaries/huntington-har...
- james_s_tayler 7y ago
  That's exactly why sports stars and rappers with many millions of dollars often go broke and college kids eating ramen start billion dollar companies.
Youcandothis 7y ago
A lottery suggests a sort of reincarnation where people are randomly being born in different bodies.
- icedchai 7y ago
  Not really. It's just a commonly used phrase.

skookumchuck 7y ago

> I think it's because intelligence doesn't help when it comes to earning money. What evidence is there of that? > The luck and social component is so strong that there is very little incentive for people to be intelligent. People tend to make their own luck. For example, if you sit home and watch TV 6 hours a day, you are highly unlikely to get lucky. If you're out swinging the bat, you're far more likely to get a hit.

jodrellblank 7y ago
Lucky if you're a person with the drive and motivation to go out swinging the bat.
- skookumchuck 7y ago
  Drive and motivation is a choice, not luck.
  - jodrellblank 7y ago
    I see no reason that brain makeup would be any more a choice than eye color or height. But even if it is, that just pushes the question back another stage. People make choices for reasons, based on their experience and predictions. Lucky to be someone who had the appropriate experiences and made appropriate predictions to choose drive and motivation. There should be no reason to doubt this unless you believe in some kind of external soul or intervening deity - a child who is hit every time they speak or move without being told to, will make different choices about "drive and motivation" as a child who is encouraged and praised when they do things of their own accord. It can't be otherwise, to suggest that people do things /without/ their environment affecting them at all is so absurd as to be instantly dismissible. The idea that infants might know what "drive and motivation" even are, without being taught, that everyone must learn that they are effective and valuable, independent of all experiences, doesn't stand up to any scrutiny whatsoever. Put simply, if what you say was true, /everyone would choose that/.
    - 7y ago

deleted 7y ago

[deleted]

vibrato 7y ago

IQ is the best test we have to predict economic success. https://www.gwern.net/docs/iq/2007-strenze.pdf https://www.gwern.net/docs/iq/2007-strenze.pdf