2 ms·

I don't think I made the argument that being functionally disabled is meaningless, but straw men live in all discussions at some point. My argument is that abo

I don't think I made the argument that being functionally disabled is meaningless, but straw men live in all discussions at some point. My argument is that above average and even extraordinary intelligence have no correlation to money making. Smart people live in poverty all the time. To say that expectations of earned income should be adjusted for IQ is meaningless in that context because the adjustment would be zero. Making money doesn't derive from general intelligence, but from how it is applied and luck. There are many smart technical people on this message board who are clearly lucky that the world is in the middle of a massive expansion of technically complicated economic areas like apps and programming in general. It allows them to achieve wealth that otherwise is not a predetermined given. When I refer to IQ testing I refer to the concept of a universalized IQ test that can, without cultural bias, give an objective measure of intelligence.

roel_v 15y ago
"My argument is that above average and even extraordinary intelligence have no correlation to money making." Well you're objectively wrong. Go to your national data office and look at income vs education (using education as a proxy for intelligence is not perfect but works OK enough for this purpose). You will see strong correlations between the two. (not perfectly linear, and not perfectly correlated, but strong enough to be not random). Look at any data set of reasonably stable and free countries that have these two data points, and you will find the same. "Smart people live in poverty all the time." Anecdote != data.