why do Blacks use welfare at 6 times the rate of Whites?

[Xchel]

High Gravity, in many Central American countries, like in Puerto Rico or Cuba there are a lot of mulattos. One of last years presidential candidates here was 100% black. His name is Bernard Martinez and one of his agriculture ministers is Cesar Ham a black man. People here do not care that the candidate is black or whatever...they don't even care if it is a man or a woman. Our vice president is female.

 

[High_Gravity]

High Gravity, in many Central American countries, like in Puerto Rico or Cuba there are a lot of mulattos. One of last years presidential candidates here was 100% black. His name is Bernard Martinez and one of his agriculture ministers is Cesar Ham a black man. People here do not care that the candidate is black or whatever...they don't even care if it is a man or a woman. Our vice president is female.

I was under the impression that Blacks face alot of racism in central American countries and Mexico especially, is this true?

 

[Xchel]

Maybe in Mexico, I can't speak for them, but not really that way here. We have a very diverse country in Honduras, probably one of the most diverse in Central America. There just isn't racism in the way there is in the US...yes, there is discrimination but it is usually age discrimination more than it is based on other things. In the work force there is a lot of problem with discrimination of people over 40. I have never heard of racism on the level that there is in the US. I watch whites, blacks, browns, reds here all interact and never hear some of the crap I did in the US..and there is no such thing as a white neighborhood or a black neighborhood. To understand what I am getting at you perhaps would have to live here or even perhaps a visit might get someone a jist of the intrisic situation and how it is different in general from the US.

 

[High_Gravity]

Maybe in Mexico, I can't speak for them, but not really that way here. We have a very diverse country in Honduras, probably one of the most diverse in Central America. There just isn't racism in the way there is in the US...yes, there is discrimination but it is usually age discrimination more than it is based on other things. In the work force there is a lot of problem with discrimination of people over 40. I have never heard of racism on the level that there is in the US. I watch whites, blacks, browns, reds here all interact and never hear some of the crap I did in the US..and there is no such thing as a white neighborhood or a black neighborhood. To understand what I am getting at you perhaps would have to live here or even perhaps a visit might get someone a jist of the intrisic situation and how it is different in general from the US.

I see, thanks for your insight.

 

[Tank]

Here in America, the Hispanics hate the blacks.

 

[toxicmedia]

oops, I forgot to mention the positive correlation between low intelligence and welfare and social programs usage.

Okay...let's get back to the basics...

This!.....is what a credible source looks like.

http://cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/sloth/lieberman-on-rushton.pdf

thanks for the pdf. did you read Harpending's comment at the end? very interesting.

The following statement in the paper really cuts to the heart of my viewpoint.

ace clarifies crucial areas that I did not emphasize
and rightly points out that to test for differences in intelligence
between groups (some say “races&#8221 they must
have lived “under conditions of social equality for several
generations.” We have not yet begun the first of these
generations.

Now that we have...albeit only from a legal perspective...begun the generations long process of correcting the social disadvantages blacks experience..

1. Has 40 years been enough?....apparently not based on the evidence you're providing

2. Should that have been enough, and do we have previous examples to draw from?

3. Have blacks actually gotten complete social equality since 1970?.....If not...could it take more than "several" generations to correct the social disadvatntages?

My guess is that people who are resentful or fearfull of blacks, will more likely think 40 years was enough.

People who empathize with blacks will more likely entertain the idea that it might not have been enough.

What are your thoughts?

 

[Xchel]

Tank, see that is where you are confused...hispanics can be black, white, asian or native american even...Hispanic does not simply mean brown it is an ethnicity not a race. There are black Hispanics from Mexico, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama, Dominican Republic, Puerto Rico, Cuba and most every country in Central and South America.

 

[High_Gravity]

Tank, see that is where you are confused...hispanics can be black, white, asian or native american even...Hispanic does not simply mean brown it is an ethnicity not a race. There are black Hispanics from Mexico, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama, Dominican Republic, Puerto Rico, Cuba and most every country in Central and South America.

Here in the US People tend to go by color generally, if they see a Black person from Cuba or Colombia they just assume he is Black, most Americans just think Hispanics are brown and Mexican.

 

[Xchel]

Tank, see that is where you are confused...hispanics can be black, white, asian or native american even...Hispanic does not simply mean brown it is an ethnicity not a race. There are black Hispanics from Mexico, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama, Dominican Republic, Puerto Rico, Cuba and most every country in Central and South America.

Here in the US People tend to go by color generally, if they see a Black person from Cuba or Colombia they just assume he is Black, most Americans just think Hispanics are brown and Mexican.

and that is where they are wrong. Brazil has the largest black population in the world. Most Dominicans and Panamanians are black...we have a huge black garifuna population here in Honduras as well.

 

[Tank]

Tank, see that is where you are confused...hispanics can be black, white, asian or native american even...Hispanic does not simply mean brown it is an ethnicity not a race. There are black Hispanics from Mexico, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama, Dominican Republic, Puerto Rico, Cuba and most every country in Central and South America.

Here in America the brown people hate the black people.

 

[IanC]

Okay...let's get back to the basics...

This!.....is what a credible source looks like.

http://cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/sloth/lieberman-on-rushton.pdf

thanks for the pdf. did you read Harpending's comment at the end? very interesting.

The following statement in the paper really cuts to the heart of my viewpoint.

ace clarifies crucial areas that I did not emphasize
and rightly points out that to test for differences in intelligence
between groups (some say “races”) they must
have lived “under conditions of social equality for several
generations.” We have not yet begun the first of these
generations.

Now that we have...albeit only from a legal perspective...begun the generations long process of correcting the social disadvantages blacks experience..

1. Has 40 years been enough?....apparently not based on the evidence you're providing

2. Should that have been enough, and do we have previous examples to draw from?

3. Have blacks actually gotten complete social equality since 1970?.....If not...could it take more than "several" generations to correct the social disadvatntages?

My guess is that people who are resentful or fearfull of blacks, will more likely think 40 years was enough.

People who empathize with blacks will more likely entertain the idea that it might not have been enough.

What are your thoughts?

my thoughts?
first off I think as soon as the egg is fertilized there is a maximum level of intelligence that can be expressed. genetics
nurture then immediately starts its influence. conditions in the womb. birthing. disease. nutrition. accidents. parenting. environmental conditions. social interactions. etc. all of these can reduce the maximum potential but none can improve it.

obviously none of us reaches our full potential, there are just too many negative factors waiting to damage us.

the next thing to contemplate is whether nature or nurture is the most important. is it better to start with high potential and take more damage or vice versa? certainly it is better to start with high potential and take less damage than the reverse. we cant directly measure initial potential (yet).
can we measure the other aspects? well sort of.

the law of large numbers make it statistically possible find average conditions for some things.
...continued later, my phone is dying...

 

[High_Gravity]

Tank, see that is where you are confused...hispanics can be black, white, asian or native american even...Hispanic does not simply mean brown it is an ethnicity not a race. There are black Hispanics from Mexico, Honduras, Nicaragua, Panama, Dominican Republic, Puerto Rico, Cuba and most every country in Central and South America.

Here in the US People tend to go by color generally, if they see a Black person from Cuba or Colombia they just assume he is Black, most Americans just think Hispanics are brown and Mexican.

and that is where they are wrong. Brazil has the largest black population in the world. Most Dominicans and Panamanians are black...we have a huge black garifuna population here in Honduras as well.

Alot of people don't know that, when I tell people there are Black people in Mexico and Venezuela they don't believe me. Most Americans just think its all brown people in Central and South America that look like Hugo Chavez.

 

[High_Gravity]

thanks for the pdf. did you read Harpending's comment at the end? very interesting.

The following statement in the paper really cuts to the heart of my viewpoint.

ace clarifies crucial areas that I did not emphasize
and rightly points out that to test for differences in intelligence
between groups (some say “races”) they must
have lived “under conditions of social equality for several
generations.” We have not yet begun the first of these
generations.

Now that we have...albeit only from a legal perspective...begun the generations long process of correcting the social disadvantages blacks experience..

1. Has 40 years been enough?....apparently not based on the evidence you're providing

2. Should that have been enough, and do we have previous examples to draw from?

3. Have blacks actually gotten complete social equality since 1970?.....If not...could it take more than "several" generations to correct the social disadvatntages?

My guess is that people who are resentful or fearfull of blacks, will more likely think 40 years was enough.

People who empathize with blacks will more likely entertain the idea that it might not have been enough.

What are your thoughts?

my thoughts?
first off I think as soon as the egg is fertilized there is a maximum level of intelligence that can be expressed. genetics
nurture then immediately starts its influence. conditions in the womb. birthing. disease. nutrition. accidents. parenting. environmental conditions. social interactions. etc. all of these can reduce the maximum potential but none can improve it.

obviously none of us reaches our full potential, there are just too many negative factors waiting to damage us.

the next thing to contemplate is whether nature or nurture is the most important. is it better to start with high potential and take more damage or vice versa? certainly it is better to start with high potential and take less damage than the reverse. we cant directly measure initial potential (yet).
can we measure the other aspects? well sort of.

the law of large numbers make it statistically possible find average conditions for some things.
...continued later, my phone is dying...

You think Black people are just born less intelligent than whites correct? so what about someone who is half black half white? are they smarter than the average black because of their white genes?

 

[signelect]

why do Blacks use welfare at 6 times the rate of Whites?
Because whites make 20X as much money as blacks do?

I don't know your personally but I know many more blacks that are much much much more financially stable than you and me.

 

[IanC]

The following statement in the paper really cuts to the heart of my viewpoint.



Now that we have...albeit only from a legal perspective...begun the generations long process of correcting the social disadvantages blacks experience..

1. Has 40 years been enough?....apparently not based on the evidence you're providing

2. Should that have been enough, and do we have previous examples to draw from?

3. Have blacks actually gotten complete social equality since 1970?.....If not...could it take more than "several" generations to correct the social disadvatntages?

My guess is that people who are resentful or fearfull of blacks, will more likely think 40 years was enough.

People who empathize with blacks will more likely entertain the idea that it might not have been enough.

What are your thoughts?

my thoughts?
first off I think as soon as the egg is fertilized there is a maximum level of intelligence that can be expressed. genetics
nurture then immediately starts its influence. conditions in the womb. birthing. disease. nutrition. accidents. parenting. environmental conditions. social interactions. etc. all of these can reduce the maximum potential but none can improve it.

obviously none of us reaches our full potential, there are just too many negative factors waiting to damage us.

the next thing to contemplate is whether nature or nurture is the most important. is it better to start with high potential and take more damage or vice versa? certainly it is better to start with high potential and take less damage than the reverse. we cant directly measure initial potential (yet).
can we measure the other aspects? well sort of.

the law of large numbers make it statistically possible find average conditions for some things.
...continued later, my phone is dying...

You think Black people are just born less intelligent than whites correct? so what about someone who is half black half white? are they smarter than the average black because of their white genes?

actually yes I do think on average whites are born with a higher potential for intellectual achievement. Occam's Razor would certainly come to that conclusion due to the massive amounts of evidence that show whites do in fact intellectually achieve more than the average black. but that is the genetic side of the equation.

what about the nurture side? healthcare, nutrition and unhealth environments have been improved for blacks in the last 50 years with very little to show for it, at least intelectually. what is left over? parenting and socialization. is that the area that should be investigated? black children coming into kindergarten are already substantially behind. how can that be blamed on the outside world? culture is a strong influence but I am at a loss as to how anyone besides blacks can change it. one interesting artifact of several studies was that racially mixed children seemed to score higher if they had a white mother. there are potential confounding factors there but it may say something about parenting styles.

 

[Flagwavrusa]

Okay...let's get back to the basics...

This!.....is what a credible source looks like.

http://cscs.umich.edu/~crshalizi/sloth/lieberman-on-rushton.pdf

thanks for the pdf. did you read Harpending's comment at the end? very interesting.

The following statement in the paper really cuts to the heart of my viewpoint.

ace clarifies crucial areas that I did not emphasize
and rightly points out that to test for differences in intelligence
between groups (some say “races”) they must
have lived “under conditions of social equality for several
generations.” We have not yet begun the first of these
generations.

Now that we have...albeit only from a legal perspective...begun the generations long process of correcting the social disadvantages blacks experience..

1. Has 40 years been enough?....apparently not based on the evidence you're providing

2. Should that have been enough, and do we have previous examples to draw from?

3. Have blacks actually gotten complete social equality since 1970?.....If not...could it take more than "several" generations to correct the social disadvatntages?

My guess is that people who are resentful or fearfull of blacks, will more likely think 40 years was enough.

People who empathize with blacks will more likely entertain the idea that it might not have been enough.

What are your thoughts?

I don't see how a legacy of social inequality would have anything much to do with the IQs of young black children today, as intelligence is largely an outcome of biological factors. As long as children receive adequate nutrition for the brain to develop normally, aren't raised in a traumatizing environment of severe abuse, and attend reasonably good schools, their IQ would not suffer even though their ancestors had been discriminated against. There is no empirical evidence I am aware of that persons whose ancestors were victims of social inequality - and most white people come from such a background as well - inherit a lower IQ as a result of how society treated their ancestors. The most persecuted people in European history are the Jews and they have the highest IQs.

 

[toxicmedia]

thanks for the pdf. did you read Harpending's comment at the end? very interesting.

The following statement in the paper really cuts to the heart of my viewpoint.

ace clarifies crucial areas that I did not emphasize
and rightly points out that to test for differences in intelligence
between groups (some say “races&#8221 they must
have lived “under conditions of social equality for several
generations.” We have not yet begun the first of these
generations.

Now that we have...albeit only from a legal perspective...begun the generations long process of correcting the social disadvantages blacks experience..

1. Has 40 years been enough?....apparently not based on the evidence you're providing

2. Should that have been enough, and do we have previous examples to draw from?

3. Have blacks actually gotten complete social equality since 1970?.....If not...could it take more than "several" generations to correct the social disadvatntages?

My guess is that people who are resentful or fearfull of blacks, will more likely think 40 years was enough.

People who empathize with blacks will more likely entertain the idea that it might not have been enough.

What are your thoughts?

I don't see how a legacy of social inequality would have anything much to do with the IQs of young black children today, as intelligence is largely an outcome of biological factors. As long as children receive adequate nutrition for the brain to develop normally, aren't raised in a traumatizing environment of severe abuse, and attend reasonably good schools, their IQ would not suffer even though their ancestors had been discriminated against. There is no empirical evidence I am aware of that persons whose ancestors were victims of social inequality - and most white people come from such a background as well - inherit a lower IQ as a result of how society treated their ancestors. The most persecuted people in European history are the Jews and they have the highest IQs.

Someone can have a genius IQ, and still perform poorly in school, and have trouble finding work. Intelligence has biological factors, but the manefestation of that IQ is hugely affected by environment, and especially poverty. Children exposed to poverty have always been exposed to higher than normal rates of malnutrition, discrimination, and less adequate education than their affluent counterparts.

You're putting too much into the IQ thing. It looks like we can find studies that say blacks and whites don't have depserate IQ's generally, and visa versa.

When the Irish and Italians migrated to the US they experienced all the pitfalls of poverty many blacks still do, but the difference is that Irish and Italians retained their family structure, which has far reaching implications for the long term autonomy of the social structure of the African American communities.

Where did you hear that Jewish people have higher IQ's?

 

[Xchel]

Here in the US People tend to go by color generally, if they see a Black person from Cuba or Colombia they just assume he is Black, most Americans just think Hispanics are brown and Mexican.

and that is where they are wrong. Brazil has the largest black population in the world. Most Dominicans and Panamanians are black...we have a huge black garifuna population here in Honduras as well.

Alot of people don't know that, when I tell people there are Black people in Mexico and Venezuela they don't believe me. Most Americans just think its all brown people in Central and South America that look like Hugo Chavez.

and they would be really really wrong..there is every variation of people here that there is in the USA. There are people that are blue eyed and blond haired*yes Honduran* and there are people black, there are asians and there are even turks here that are born in Honduras. The majority is mestizo, but that isn't what everyone here looks like it is as ridiculous as thinking that everyone in the US is white...and I know what you are saying I get the same dumbfoundedness when I tell people that there are blacks that are native to Honduras.

 

[Flagwavrusa]

The following statement in the paper really cuts to the heart of my viewpoint.



Now that we have...albeit only from a legal perspective...begun the generations long process of correcting the social disadvantages blacks experience..

1. Has 40 years been enough?....apparently not based on the evidence you're providing

2. Should that have been enough, and do we have previous examples to draw from?

3. Have blacks actually gotten complete social equality since 1970?.....If not...could it take more than "several" generations to correct the social disadvatntages?

My guess is that people who are resentful or fearfull of blacks, will more likely think 40 years was enough.

People who empathize with blacks will more likely entertain the idea that it might not have been enough.

What are your thoughts?

I don't see how a legacy of social inequality would have anything much to do with the IQs of young black children today, as intelligence is largely an outcome of biological factors. As long as children receive adequate nutrition for the brain to develop normally, aren't raised in a traumatizing environment of severe abuse, and attend reasonably good schools, their IQ would not suffer even though their ancestors had been discriminated against. There is no empirical evidence I am aware of that persons whose ancestors were victims of social inequality - and most white people come from such a background as well - inherit a lower IQ as a result of how society treated their ancestors. The most persecuted people in European history are the Jews and they have the highest IQs.

Someone can have a genius IQ, and still perform poorly in school, and have trouble finding work. Intelligence has biological factors, but the manefestation of that IQ is hugely affected by environment, and especially poverty. Children exposed to poverty have always been exposed to higher than normal rates of malnutrition, discrimination, and less adequate education than their affluent counterparts.

You're putting too much into the IQ thing. It looks like we can find studies that say blacks and whites don't have depserate IQ's generally, and visa versa.

When the Irish and Italians migrated to the US they experienced all the pitfalls of poverty many blacks still do, but the difference is that Irish and Italians retained their family structure, which has far reaching implications for the long term autonomy of the social structure of the African American communities.

Where did you hear that Jewish people have higher IQ's?

IQ is not very much affected by the environment in the United States today. That's because almost every child in this country - including the impoverished - grows up in an environment that is adequate to develope their IQ to its potential. Every individual has their own seperate story, and some individuals both black and white are inhibited in IQ development because of environmental things that happen to them, but the population statistics smooth out anomalies and accurately reflect the true IQ of the races. As IanC points out, the environmental circumstances have vastly improved for blacks over the past 50 years, but the IQ and standardized test score gap with whites remains. That would not be the case if environment was as important as you want to believe.

I would recommend the Bell Curve to you, it talks about the evidence on racial IQ and also discusses high Jewish IQ.

 

[Tank]