On page 292 of the book The g Factor, scholar Arthur Jensen writes:
There is a high degree of agreement among people when they are asked to rank occupation titles according to their impression of (1) the occupation’s socially perceived prestige, (2) the desirability (for whatever reason) of being employed in the occupation, and (3) the estimated level of “intelligence” needed to succeed in the occupation. When a number of people are asked to rank a large number of different occupations titles, from highest to lowest, on each of these standards, the mean rank for each occupation remains fairly constant. The over-all rank order-correlations in various studies fall between .95 and .98. The high consistency of rank order holds up across rankings by people from different occupations, social class backgrounds, industrialized countries, and generations.
From a Darwinian perspective, intelligence can be defined as the cognitive ability to adapt: to take whatever situation you’re in, and turn it around to your advantage. People who spend their lives working in a good job, a job that others admire and wish they had, have generally turned their situation to their advantage. By contrast, one who spends his life working in a job that others look down on and would never want to do, have generally failed to adapt, assuming one has the same goals as most people (and by definition most people do). Thus, one should expect a positive correlation between IQ and occupational status.
On page 293 Jensen writes:
The correlation of individuals’ IQs with occupational rank increases with age, ranging from 0.50 for young persons to about 0.70 for middle aged and older persons, whose career lines by then are well established.
The relation of IQ to occupational level is not at all caused by differences in individuals’ IQs being determined by the differences in amount of education or the particular intellectual demands associated with different occupations. This is proved by the fact that IQ, even when measured in childhood, is correlated about 0.70 with occupational level in later adulthood.
A 0.70 correlation is absolutely massive, especially by the standards of the social sciences. It’s roughly the correlation between IQ as measured in childhood and IQ as measured in adulthood. If what Jensen is saying is true, one could make a very strong case that IQ is destiny. The idea that a test given to a child could predict with that much accuracy, their place in society 40 years later is absolutely fascinating. It’s almost as if life is a valid IQ test, and occupation is your score.
As a kid, an Indian woman in a sari drove from far, far away, to get to my school, just to test me, on the most expensive, in-depth IQ test the school board had. A test so closely guarded and so carefully scored, no teacher was allowed to give it. At the time I thought of Indian women in saris as fortune tellers because I would see one reading palms on downtown streets, so I remembered thinking of the school board Indian woman who asked me to play with blocks, jig-saw puzzles, and cartoon pictures that resembled tarot cards, as a fortune-teller too. I was more right than I knew. Childhood IQ predicts your future with alarming accuracy.
On the other hand, the correlation between IQ (both in childhood and adulthood) and older adult occupation sounds too high to be true, especially if the correlation could be forced to fit a bivariate normal distribution and extended to the extremes.
For example, there are 76.4 million baby boomers. That means the baby-boomer with the best job is +5.53 Standard Deviations above the mean of a normalized occupation distribution. This implies an IQ that is 0.7(5.53) = 3.87 SD above the mean: IQ 158, a truly jaw-dropping figure.
So who has the best job in America? Apparently it’s not the president since White House occupants seem to average IQs around 130. Maybe this is a case where the linear models I love so much, simply don’t work, no matter how much I want them to.
It’s also a bit strange that childhood IQ would correlate as much with older adult occupation as adult IQ itself does. I hope this isn’t because socioeconomic background is influencing both childhood IQ and later adult occupation.
Ok, random question: Why inbreed causes low IQ? ( I know, may sound a stupid question… ), think with me; let’s assume a rich family with 2 brights brothers, marry equally to bright girls; one have a son and the other have a daughter. The cousins marry, what are the chances of their son born bright?
Because it increases the odds of getting recessive genes
occupations can be ranked so as to make the correlation “massive”, obviously.
what was the method of ranking?
peepee still thinks most people are like him.
they aren’t.
especially smart people.
they have many interests…and status and high earned income is most often NOT one of them.
besides jensen demonstrated his very low IQ on multiple occasions.
but i think it is true that smart people gravitate toward occupations with other smart people. and toward easy low stress occupations. that is, they are more sensitive to the work environment.
actuary probably has the highest mean IQ of any general occupational category, but i didn’t find the actuaries i worked with very impressive.
yes. even higher than m.d. and j.d..
of course physics or math professor would be higher, but that’s too specific.
jensen as usual doesn’t cite his sources, because he has none. he’s making it up.
salesman low status even if he’s selling options on CDS indices to institutional clients…and making millions every year.
He did provide one source, and it sounds like a good one. On page 293 of The g Factor he wrote:
Another way to demonstrate the overall relative magnitude of g differences between occupations is by analysis of variance. I have performed this analysis on all 444 occupational titles used by the U.S. Employment Service. The General Aptitude Test Battery (GATB) Manual presents the mean and standard deviation of GATB G-scores for large samples of each of the 444 different occupations. An analysis of variance performed on these data shows that 47 percent of the total G-score variance is between occupations (i.e., differences between the mean G-scores of the various occupations) and 53 percent of the variance is within occupations (i.e., differences between the G-scores of individuals within each occupation). Since about 10 percent of the within-occupations variance is attributable to measurement error, the true within-occupations variance constitutes only 43 percent of the total G-score variance. From these figures one can compute [39] the true-score correlation (based on individuals, not group means) between occupations and G-scores. It is .72, which closely agrees with the average correlation of .70 found in other studies in which individual IQs were directly correlated with the mean rank of people’s subjective ranking of occupations.
that the correlation between IQ and educational attainment is much less than that between IQ and occupational status is…
a red flag that jensen is making shit up.
as one should have expected given his ugly shaped head.
Well I mentioned in the post that the correlation seemed to high to be true and perhaps it is
Here’s an excellent study done by Jensen himself that finds a much lower correlation between IQ and occupation level, however the participants are in their 30s and thus have not yet reached peak earning years:
http://arthurjensen.net/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Occupation-and-Income-Related-to-Psychometric-g-2001-by-Helmuth-S%C3%B8rensen-Nyborg-Arthur-Robert-Jensen.pdf
Still, Jensen said 0.5 for younger adults, and this study found 0.37.
I think Jensen is right in his estimate of how much SES affects IQ:
http://www.psychologicalscience.org/index.php/news/releases/poverty-dampens-genetic-influence-on-iq-in-the-us.html
And we’re more closer to finding where g is in the brain:
http://neurosciencenews.com/gene-clusters-intelligence-3299/
THe current spate of behavior genetic research is reflecting very well on Jensen’s earlt work
and perhaps not one of the “occupations” ranked by popular consent …supposedly… is the very highest status occupation there is …
namely…rentier…
waugh makes fun of the british consul in tangier who thinks sebastian needs “an occupation”.
of course most people will never meet such a person.
it’s funny how the nouveau riche are proud of their m.d. children.
the faggot from brideshead says it well…
down the little red lane they go.
it should also be obvious…but not to peepee…or to jensen…that whatever the correlation was, it can change over time…
and apparently has…
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2013-04-08/more-101-million-working-age-americans-do-not-have-job
that is, it appears that the baby boomers’ children have much lower occupational prestige than their parents…and will have for their whole working life…relative to their parents.
So who has the best job in America? Apparently it’s not the president since White House occupants seem to average IQs around 130. Maybe this is a case where the linear models I love so much, simply don’t work, no matter how much I want them to.
When I was 9 I found a physics book where I just looked at the pictures. I found a picture where they were trying to explain relativity with a light clock. They also said something about how space could be warped to go back in time. But to me I wondered how can you warp space, it is made of nothing and I also thought why does energy exist. What makes it exist in space, what is existence? I also understood the bohr model of the atom at that time and I told the lady at the desk in the kids area that if you could understand physics that you could create anything you wanted. In 7th grade I had the idea that photon emission might be able to create a perpetual motion machine. But then I dropped that idea because I learned that lasers did not work that way. I thought that phosphorus from glow in the dark toys would make a great medium for a laser.
The movie the Time Machine came out in 2002. The paradox; you cannot change the past because if you did you would never have built it in the first place. This goes against the many world interpretation. But now I understand how the machine works. He read Einsteins paper on general relativity. So he used that information to reverse and increase the wave function with the refraction index of light. This is exactly how introversion works. The morlock had psychic powers. Just as you can create music inside your head that you can hear or just as you can create different realities inside your head that you can see. The time machine folded spacetime inside the bubble around the machine. When you bend spacetime the wave function is reversible.
In the book Dinotopia the man and his son found secret ruins of the old civilization (Atlantis). They found a crystal that had a negative refraction index. This crystal was used to power robot dinosaurs. That made me start thinking about the structure of diamond. But I did not realize carbon only forms six covenant bonds not eight. Diamond is tetrahedral not cubic. And it does not have a negative refraction index. I thought that if you embedded phosphorus within the diamond you could use it as a power source. A negative refraction index theoretically is what he used to bend spacetime.
Personally I do not want an occupation.
That would not give me a purpose in life.
By the time I could get a degree from a university virtual reality and artificial intelligence will make it useless. Telepresence will redefine the work environment. It is called the metaverse. The secret to creating A.I. is to give it the cognitive trait of introversion. Then it can truly understand human behavior and it will be your best friend or at least my best friend.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Strauss%E2%80%93Howe_generational_theory
Hero generations are born after an Awakening, during an Unraveling, a time of individual pragmatism, self-reliance, and laissez faire. Heroes grow up as increasingly protected post-Awakening children, come of age as team-oriented young optimists during a Crisis, emerge as energetic, overly-confident midlifers, and age into politically powerful elders attacked by another Awakening.
An average life is 80 years, and consists of four periods of ~20 years
Childhood → Young adult → Midlife → Elderhood
A generation is an aggregate of people born every ~20 years
Baby Boomers → Gen X → Millennials → Post-Millennials (“Homeland Generation”)
Each generation experiences “four turnings” every ~80y
High → Awakening → Unraveling → Crisis
four bond not six*
peepee once again makes the typical mistake of the sociopath and/or amoral sheeple.
she confuses the ability to adapt with actually choosing to adapt.
all progress is made by unreasonable men.
In my opinion, you can’t choose to adapt. I think all conscious human behavior is motivated by a desire to adapt. I think the only thing we choose are the goals we adapt to (and even these choices are determined by our pleasure pain incentive structure). And since most people value high status occupations (by definition, otherwise those occupations wouldn’t be high status), most people are motivated to achieve one. Hence, the correlation between occupation & cognitive adaptability (IQ)
Whatever IQ is, it correlates very well with many of those things that we as a society value — academic success, verbal prowess, and numerical talent…. It does not, however, correlate at all well with one’s value as a person. People at either end of the IQ spectrum can be immoral, amoral, vicious, and destructive. Likewise, they can be creative, contributing, conscientious, and kind.
I do not disagree at all with attempts to improve IQ. Doing so very probably would be good for society at large and for individuals. I think, though, that our recent experience with financial magnates and politicians who undoubtedly had high IQs is convincing evidence that it would be even more important to instill a better sense of social responsibility and concern for others into everyone.
Given me an honest and well-intentioned politician or business person with an average IQ any time over the most intellectually gifted Scrooge.
you’re just playing a meaningless word game peepee-tard.
if you were a male and really serious about “adapting” you’d donate to as many sperm banks as you could and travel the world having unprotected sex with the native ladies.
it’s totally vague what “adapt” even means, if it doesn’t mean adapt in the darwinian sense…the natural sense.
according to peepee those with the highest IQs all have two dozen children…
the opposite is the case…
in the only non-vague sense of “the ability to adapt” that there is…
high IQ is MAL-ADAPTIVE.
but socrates said:
Be of good hope in the face of death. Believe in this one truth for certain, that no evil can befall a good man either in life or death, and that his fate is not a matter of indifference to the gods.
The point is those with money and status would be the most adaptive (in the genetic sense) if survival of the fittest were still operating because they’d be the only ones who could afford to eat. Once you add a safety net, you (in a sense) turn natural selection off, and selection arguably becomes “dysgenic”. So when I say the rich and powerful are more adaptable, I mean two things:
1) They are better at adapting their behavior to advance their goals
2) Those goals used to be favored by evolution, and thus were adaptive in the genetic sense, back when intelligence was being strongly selected.
the safety net had nothing to do with the poor outbreeding the rich in 19th britain, because there wasn’t one. and this made fools of the social darwinists even then.
more accurate might be during and after industrialization.
poor people in poor countries without a safety net have more kids than comparatively rich people in the developed world. it’s only recently that latin america has had a tfr below replacement. and some african countries have a tfr of 5. their populations would increase even without foreign aid.
A study done in 2005 in the western German state of Nordrhein-Westfalen by the HDZ revealed that childlessness was especially widespread among scientists. It showed that 78% of the female scientists and 71% of the male scientists working in that state were childless.[34]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_Germany
Obviously when scientists say intelligence is the ability to adapt, they don’t mean have children. They mean the ability to change your behavior to meet your goal. Everyone knows stupid people have the most kids. Of course intelligence would be maladaptive in the genetic sense if it were not also accompanied by at least a mild desire for sex, but the adaptiveness of the goals and the adaptiveness of the behavior needed to meet those goals need to be distinguished to make sense of this definition of intelligence. A lot of smart people have maladaptive goals but they’re brilliant at adapting to them.
We are overlaped by two contexts in our societies
– anti-natural or essentially human (abstract-ized)
-”natural” or ”mammal heritage”
Smarter people on average are maladaptative because despite producing almost of inventions and evolutions in all departments, they are not those who really reap the fruits of their works, but who control them, just a tiny % of human beings. Look for nobel winners, they are not the richest.
Cognitive adaptability does matter.
I can see how others get results with little mental effort.
But personality also plays a factor. Just look at bernie madoff.
Everyone knows stupid people have the most kids.
I almost agree. K-selection is retaliative to the time period. The rich can have more kids because of income and relatively low divorce rates. I know a person who has 12 kids with different men but my mom had only 3 with the same person. The Great Depression increased selection pressures greatly. She had 5 kids with the same man. Two during the Depression and 3 after the war. My maternal grandmother gave each kid she has one hundred thousand dollars. And each grandchild including me got ten thousand. I now own my own house beginning at age 27.
In Europe things are different. Europe had an well established Aristocracy but America did not. The only thing you could do to adapt was to basically be a slave to the established order. China and Japan never had immigration problems. There was nowhere to migrate to. The smart people in those countries survived because they hide their intentions from the rulers. This is happening again in the state sanctioned citizen ranking video game system to be in full effect by 2020. Europe is socialist because the have more K selected children. In america half adapt with r selection. This is why it (socialism) works better in Europe than America but less so in Southern Europe.
In America the constitution means your ideas are protected from government. This is why trust is earned by who has the best ideas and that means you share them with more people instead of keeping them secret. This creates self selection because you become friends with people like you. America is a place where inventors go to get results. The homogeneity then is really high. Good ideas get you respect. And also assassinated (JFK). The leader is elected who will not lie to the public or at least it used to be.
Kennedy was almost not elected because he was catholic.
Date Christianity Protestantism Catholicism
1962 93.0% 70.0% 23.0%
2012 77.3% 51.9% 23.3%
The current pope is a Jesuit.
The Jesuit order was created in response to Protestantism.
Protest was a crime in the 1500’s in Europe.
George Washington – Wikipedia
His mother was Mary Ball and his father was Augustine Washington. They owned a plantation with slaves in Virginia. George studied at local schools in Fredericksburg, and was also homeschooled for part of his life. George’s father died when he was 11. George’s mother was not fit to look after him. There is a well known story about honesty, that Washington cut down his father’s cherry tree. Although it is a very good example of what Washington was like, the story is not true.
They called the 16th president Honest Abe.
There are Separation of powers.
But this implemented differently than it did back then.
Ed Bernays and Prohibition damaged this country greatly.
As a failing superpower America needs to adapt to globalism.
Consumerism will lead to our destruction if we do not change.
The robots are coming. The robots are coming. (Paul Revere)
We need a guaranteed basic income and a free robot for each citizen.
The “confession booth” probably influenced Jefferson when he wrote the fifth amendment as to not incriminating yourself.
I really like Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan.
Bush and Nixon not so much. (moloch)
Clinton and Obama are too friendly.
But they are my favorite celebrities.
@ak
GW had no kids, and i thought you said you were 18.
@pp
IQ is just IQ, it correlates with other things, but it’s still sui generis.
how could one possibly measure “the ability to achieve one’s goals”?
not by whether or not he had achieved them, because…
one’s goals could be very difficult or impossible for anyone…
or very easy.
as don mclean said:
i had very low expectations for myself. very low. if i could own a house and be able to pay the propety taxes…game over…
how could one possibly measure “the ability to achieve one’s goals”?
not by whether or not he had achieved them, because…
one’s goals could be very difficult or impossible for anyone…
or very easy.
I agree 100%. That’s what I tell myself whenever I see a super high IQ person who is a failure in life (in every possible way): It’s not that they can’t adapt, it’s that their goals are too hard to adapt to, Because their capacity for goal-directed adaptive behavior has already been proven by their test scores so the only explanation for their failure is their goals are too hard, given the opportunity they have.
My philosophy on IQ tests is they make the goal the same for everyone, along with the opportunity to reach it, and then observe one’s adaptability under very controlled conditions (i.e. the goal is to adapt a bunch of blocks to make a given design within 2 minutes)
It seems I need new goals to adapt to.
A person commented on one of my videos on youtube.
So now I will go with what he said and assume I am ESFJ.
Since ESFJ is the reverse of INTP you may assume I am INTP,
But this just means whether or not I am INTP or ESFJ they both shadow each other.
The shadow of INTP is ESFJ.
The shadow of ESFJ is INTP.
Each person has a side to them that limits what they achieve do to strengths and weaknesses. My shadow would mean I am weak on the social side.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lego_Movie
I was in advanced school programs but emotionally I guess that I was too sensitive to relate to anyone. I had no friends who were both emotionally sensitive and interested in science. I really felt alone. And because I was alone I did not know what it was I wanted to do in life. My highest aspirations were to to understand things I thought were cool ideas. Cool ideas don’t matter to most people. Quality is lost in retrospect of quantity of production.
I have had precognitive dreams before where I see something happening in the future and then a few months latter they happen and I remember both the dream and the moment that it happened. I think I know how this happens. In computers in order for them to work you need error correction software. And because of wave particle duality in the double slit experiment. What is happening is that each particle in probing the future for the best outcome of your future reality. All futures are tested and sometimes we are aware of this probing in the dream world. It just so happens that the wave collapse in the future has been relayed to the present moment. Your consciousness has chosen that future. This is because of the error corrections within the rules of entanglement. You send signals into the future and error correct them by the one choice of all the branches. The copenhagen interpretation is wrong because if all worlds existed you could not choose your future state and error correction would not work. So precognitive dreams are validation of the wave collapse. The double slit experiment is solved by understanding error correction of future probabilities coalescing into the outcome of the present moment. We avoid pain and seek pleasure. This is the secret principle.
http://www.eoht.info/page/Secret+principle
The future genius will: (a) find the secret principle of the universe; (b) embody Henry Adams’ (IQ=190) famous 1910 “call for the aid of another Newton” (IQ=215), someone who comes forth to give the “complete solution”, as Adams, who worked on the problem through Gibbs (IQ=200), Clausius (IQ=205), Darwin (IQ=175), etc., put it, to the elective affinities problem: explaining morality, sociology, economics, and history according to chemistry, physics, and mechanics, via pure mathematics, symbols, figures, and one “common formula”—in a sense, the “new Goethe” (IQ=230); (c) be the final version of Nietzsche’s 1883 prophesized “final Uberman”; and (d) solve, among other things, the: gravity/electromagnetic force problem, double slit problem, accelerating universe problem, and the spin-coupling problem (see: modern queries)—all integrated with new findings in particle physics, the final version of quantum mechanics, among other new experimental findings that may arise, all subsumed under the auspices of first law (fundamental law) and second law (supreme law) of thermodynamics—the only science, of universal content, “least likely”, in the words of (Einstein (IQ=220), to ever be overthrow.
A.I. will definitely need distintion probing to achieve its goals just as the brain uses QED to probe the future.
i’ve actually taken the test, and i am an istp. but only the p was in a very high percentile.
I made a mistake in phrasing my paragraph.
My grandmother had 5 kids during and after the Great depression not my mom.
I am 28.
Bush senior was the CIA director before becoming president and was president after Ronald Reagan. Bush Jr was president from 2001 to 2009.
I dislike them both.
The story of the cherry tree was about how when Georges father Augustine Washington asked what happened to the tree George said said. I cannot tell lie, I was having so much fun chomping the other trees that I chomped down the tree you told me not to. His father rewarded him for his honesty.
Fake story but I still like Walt Disney.
Paul Bunion was another American Legend.
Disney was a story teller, he called his employees imagineers.
Japan gave America cherry trees to as a gift before WW1.
and i agree, ak, as does jew-lion.
basic income is inevtiable.
switzerland, brazil, the netherlands, have voted on it or have it in some form already.
only about 20% of the formally employed or 10% of the population does all the work already. there are never going to be enough jobs ever again. the “lump of labor fallacy” is itself fallacious.
You will be shocked to know that factory workers in the Netherlands live a better life than a prole in NYC who slaves away for a 100K+ salary like Jew-Lion.
Prolemerica will never implement a basic income. It can not even and will not believe that quality life work balance is important. Meriproles are sadomasochists who believe corporatism in the name of free market capitalism.
In fairness to LOTB, he quit his job so you should be giving him marks for refusing to be a corporate slave. Also, I don’t think he ever really slaved away because he had so much free time to blog. Even before he quit his job he managed to find time to post a lot, so his job must have been quite easy, at least for him. I used to wonder how he did it as I’m sleep deprived from posting what little that I do while also working.
His postings were usually terse when he was working, so he must have been busy with work.
Though I wonder how much longer LOTB can afford to live in NYC without a job.
He could find a cheaper place to live like I did, and live there for another decade without problems. But it’s very difficult now in NYC. Rent is also high outside of Manhattan.
Social class is important to him, so moving to a more proleish area would be difficult. He grew up in Staten Island and the thought of returning to somewhere like that probably sounds like a nightmare.
Maybe he should follow your lead and come to Canada, where class divisions are less acute.
I made a comment on his blog that I feel no remorse for those who complain about America’s stark class division and their lack of status, where they continue to remain in a state of misery. I have come to the conclusion that America is a disgusting place, physically and culturally.
Prolish areas in NYC are also getting expensive, so Lion might have no choice if his money runs out significantly. Many proles huddle together under one roof, in order to survive. I think he has no immediate relatives, and I don’t think he would want to return to his parents, at middle age, and act like a 20 year old if he runs out of money. Besides, he should be done with NYC at his age as a bachelor. It’s time to go somewhere else and find a place more conducive to self actualization. I suggest Canada, where it’s more accommodating.
Has Canada lived up to your expectations or are you disappointed?
So far I’m not disappointed. Montreal does not have the schizophrenic vibe of NYC, which many people love, although the city can get edgy in certain areas, but nothing of the same magnitude. It’s a city which I can tolerate long term, because it’s interesting with culture. It’s not like living in one of the smaller places like St. Johns in Newfoundland, which I have been to.
I think LOTB is rich enough that he can live a long time without working. He said in the summer of 2014 that he could buy a $100 K condo in Phoenix and retire.
Although his self-report annual salary has never exceeded $175 K, according to chartreuse, he probably saved a lot and perhaps invested wisely.
Phoenix is very cheap compared to Manhattan. The cost of living is very low. But he might get bored easily and want to move back.
I’m looking into Montreal Real Estate. The main issue with Montreal is the long cold winters.
A 1 mil dollar apartment in Manhattan costs about 300K in Montreal. There are so many cheap and high quality places to live and choose from.
he’s already said he has between 500 and 600k in investments.
single and no kids that’s plenty in flyover country unless you spend it all on cocaine and hookers.
but if it’s in a retirement account he can’t use leverage or short, so his options for income generation are limited.
he can probably count on about 30k in income per year without selling anything.
and if inflation is never going to be a problem again he could make maybe 50k, even in a retirement account, without much risk.
plenty of fixed income CEFs yield north of 10% and even though their prices go down over the long term, the decline is slow and the dividend is cut infrequently.
it’s the “carry trade”, borrow short lend long and lend on junk.
Does he own or rent his place in Hell’s Kitchen?
he can probably count on about 30k in income per year without selling anything
That’s not enough to live in Manhattan. I wonder how long he’ll stay if he doesn’t find work.
He has no significant activities, just eating and blogging. So 30K is doable in NYC without paying rent.
Also, Montreal has the lowest gini coefficient of all the “cool cities” in North America. As JV has mentioned, the Anglo-Prole-Sphere sucks, because wanting to live a normal life means you have to pay a lot of money. Lion will blog about people moving to dangerous neighborhoods in NYC, because they can’t live next to normal people, unless they have a lot of money. It’s very SAD!!!
no indeed, he can’t unless he moves to harlem or lives with some kind of rent control.
a shoebox costs $2000 per month even on the lower east side.
i doubt he owns as if he did he’d have a lot more than 600k in total wealth. his apartment would sell for more than 1 million i assume.
Harlem command similar rental rates to his Irish Westie of Hell’s Kitchie. I believe he doesn’t own.
A 1 mil dollar apartment in Manhattan costs about 300K in Montreal. There are so many cheap and high quality places to live and choose from.
How much are you worth?
My net worth in savings is about 300K, I guess ~ 75% of Lion. I bought a few stocks and have a mutual fund, but I don’t really invest in financial products, because I don’t care much for the markets (investing is a boring activity to me) Lion’s is a big saver, because he doesn’t buy much, consume extravagantly or travel a lot. I didn’t save much, when I was in my 20s. I was stupid enough to purchase a luxury car for a person in Manhattan, and I then ditch it. I have some collectibles (expensive books) which are nice, but they lose value when you resell.
By the way, Pumpkin, for about almost a decade, I structured my business as a S-Corp (if you know something about business formation). Even if my company earned 6 figures, I did not have the privilege to take all the money out and use it. I structured myself as an officer of the company taking on a wage salary and I made myself earning about 50K per year, because I was living in an affordable housing unit in a nice neighborhood in Manhattan. I only pay about 800 in monthly rent where as the average person would paid 3,500 and up. In the long run, it was a good idea, where I’m almost I forced to save money.
With the Canadian dollar sinking like a rock, your U.S. money should go even further in Canada
Yes, and to sustain the advantage, I was suggested by a Canadian to get an American job that pays higher wages and live the Canadian life.
You may want to check out Larry Kudlow, one of those Northeastern Jew proles who scream loud in his radio show that delusional Murka is the best place to live a good life, and NYC is the center of the world.
http://kudlow.com/
I’m a computer programmer. My estimation of the average US persons’ assessment of the job:
(1) the occupation’s socially perceived prestige
Middling. Better than blue collar jobs, but at the bottom of the heap of white collar jobs.
(2) the desirability (for whatever reason) of being employed in the occupation
Not that desirable other than the good pay. Too much nerdery and tinkering.
(3) The estimated level of “intelligence” needed to succeed in the occupation.
Above average, but not as high as say, a doctor or a lawyer.
I remember taking computer programming in high school. That was one class where there seemed to be a very high correlation between IQ and grades. There was a girl who normally got very high grades through hard work, not ability, and she struggled and struggled to adapt the code to her advantage but could not do so.
The teacher was a woman and extremely proud of the fact that she graduated from Waterloo which is one of the brainiest schools in Canada because of its emphasis on computer programming. Some companies only hire Waterloo grads.
Judging from various coworkers I’ve worked with, there is definitely a wide range of skill in the people that get hired. To be any good, you need to understand large swathes of computing. Far larger than what is taught in college, and no one’s holding your hand showing you the path.
check out steve shoe’s. my comment is hilarious.
He’ll delete that, as you know
Aw hell naw…
The best job is a tenured professor. It takes above average IQ to become a professor, and strong reading and writing comprehension to become a tenured one, because one needs to read and write a lot. The job requires a strong passion for a particular subject (so it is self actualizing). It has a lower stress environment comparing to other careers, and pays well for what it entails, with prestige.
It is an extremely good job. The fact that people as prestigious as Condi Rice and Canada’s first woman PM become professors when they retire shows how many benefits it has.
But I wouldn’t say it’s anywhere close to the best job in all of America because there are jobs that pay orders of magnitude more, and as much as people try to deny it, money really does matter A LOT
Again, Pumpkin, America is prole. People are willing to slave away at a high paying yet high stress job w/long hours, so they can make a lot of money, which otherwise doesn’t matter as much, because material consumption has been redefined by technological evolution. After a certain salary level, your money affords you excesses, which becomes boring very quickly to higher IQ individuals.
People are willing to slave away at a high paying yet high stress job w/long hours, so they can make a lot of money
I would argue that the people who make the most money are not slaving away because they are passionate about what they do, which is why they are able to make so much money in the first place. But I agree that slaving away at a job you hate, just to make extra money is stupid because you sacrifice your time which is infinitely more valuable than your money.
which otherwise doesn’t matter as much, because material consumption has been redefined by technological evolution. After a certain salary level, your money affords you excesses, which becomes boring very quickly to higher IQ individuals.
I don’t agree at the very high end. If you have millions or billions of dollars you can do breakthrough scientific research that is beyond the reach of any scientist. Extremely exciting for high IQ people. You can also swing presidential elections and buy congressmen, especially with the Supreme Court recently loosening restrictions on money in politics (i.e. Citizens United case)
You may have to slave away for money, but the money itself buys freedom. If you make enough of it, you don’t have to work at all.
Yes, billion of dollars to do research by a passionate scientist type is what excites him, but for him to make money so he can just like be like most Americans (over consume and wasting money doesn’t). Yes, you can say at the very high end, by it’s quite hard to achieve. To me, Wall St Jobs which are considered prestigious to Lion is not prestigious by my book. A prestigious career is a high status poistion that really excites you more than money as the end result. Influence, fame, and a sense of control.
In theory Wall St jobs should be prestigious because of the high pay and high college credentials. The combination of median income and mean education level is usually an excellent predictor of how prestigious a job is.
But given that Wall St jobs involve long hours full of boring work, and given the current political climate where Wall St types are considered thieves, you could make a case that it’s not that prestigious.
as garry wills said,
all i ever wanted to own was books.
why would one set out to make billions for science rather set out to be a scientist?
one area where les etats unis merdeux is not prole is that it still spends a larger % of its gdp on r & d than almost everyone.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_research_and_development_spending
but peepee wants a gulfstream, a mclaren, and a mansion, or mansions.
proles are gonna prole.
so that once peepee has these things she can say,
“i win. you’re a loser. look at all the lesbo whores i can buy.”
proletarianization is a genuine phenomenon.
and in ‘mer’ca-stan it’s taken over. it’s kudzu. it’s gangrene.
the whole american limb must be amputated if the world wants to survive.
but in an ideal world…
i’d volunteer for the role of blokhin in the liquidation of the professoriate.
Did PP abandon his Canada for America? Canada would be more prestigious than its southern neighbor, strictly because of its immigration policies, where it mostly wants high skilled/highly educated individuals. America will grab anyone off the street, so to speak!
I’m a bibliophile and ordering titles from Canadian booksellers over the internet, they come across as more professional and accommodating.
peepee wants billions because she thinks it will allow her to buy the best plastic surgeons so she can have a realistic fake penis.
never gonna happen.
peepee will never have a Y chromosome or round eyes.
Pumpkin – This person agrees with you that NYC is prole, or America is a prole country, if you look at the bigger picture.
Here is the link:
http://thoughtcatalog.com/chelsea-fagan/2015/09/10-reasons-new-york-city-is-painfully-overrated/
i have little experience, but
1. manhattan was dirty and the people crude, but the upper west side was ok.
2. brooklyn and queens and nj were gross.
3. the bronx is a third world country.
4. nassau and suffolk counties are pretty nice.
Upper Westie is home to rich, yet prole Jews. It’s the wealthier Israel.
Jewpsy kings.
JV, I have to say that you make one of the most important comments about Prolemerica. Its Status Quo elites love low skilled immigrants, because they are gullible and willing to enrich them for a dime. Income inequality doesn’t happen in a vacuum.
please do a study of IQ vs. 100 physics regents score. I hear they are very, very rare
Also read this chretruese http://graphics.wsj.com/image-grid/what-to-expect-in-2016/1666/steven-pinker-on-new-advances-in-behavioral-genetics