• Guest, The rules for the P & N subforum have been updated to prohibit "ad hominem" or personal attacks against other posters. See the full details in the post "Politics and News Rules & Guidelines."

Thread to show racism is #bothsides during this campaign season.

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Maxima1

Diamond Member
Jan 15, 2013
3,342
657
126
Yes it isn't all that surprising that you are still confused. You are still focused on per pupil spending when I have just told you twice that by the time a child reaches school it is often way too late.
Regarding educational achievement, genetic influence explains around ~60% of the variance in Western countries. The underachievement of blacks still continues even for the most recent generation. So parents have a Western education and yet the gap still doesn't move much...

Haha. I knew you'd chomp right down on the hyperbolic position I put forward and dispute it with a willful desire to ignore the prevalence of police harassment against people of color.

Way to go, ding-donger.
lol Well, it's a common grievance, so what can I say? Even motherjones pointed out how exaggerated it is.

Did you read what you just posted? As you point out, we still have one of the broadest funding ranges for schools among the developed world, with school districts with high percentages of people of color receiving significantly less funding compared to predominantly white school districts. How is that providing a "huge influx of money" to fix the problem? We haven't even reached the point of equal funding.
Did you even read the Huffington article or the .gov site I pointed out? Within and between districts, the funding difference isn't that big.

Directly from your post. "Getting more low-income students into elite colleges like Harvard and Stanford is an important goal. But it can’t replace race-based affirmative action."
This is separate from school funding, so I'm not sure what you're point is. Yes, I quoted an article where the authors wanted to still keep it. So what? The point in showing that article was that affirmative action helps well-to-do black families, while making it harder for poor whites and Asians to get into Harvard and other highly selective schools. There is a lot of variation in parental style and money spent on kids within Asian or white families, never mind other things. Affirmative action is a crappy way of determining disadvantage.

That doesn't exist, and it can never happen. Your defense of numbers is some hyper-libertarian Randian nonsense that will never be and can never be applicable to any existing population of humanity. Generation upon generations upon generations of human lineage and culture of created the only status quo that currently exists now, and can only currently exist.
None of what I said is Randian. You can do race neutral policies like basic income, higher minimum wage, universal health care, but creating policies that intentionally privilege certain racial groups is bound to cause resentment or be seen as unfair. Shee-it, Ted Lieu felt that way.

...so, what then. What we currently have is a non-perfect attempt that has been popularly called "Affirmative Action" (only in the more recent decades), to try and encourage wholly and unquestionably disenfranchised communities to compete within sectors that have long been denied their presence and competitive resources due to systemic, unquestionable, and wholly observable racism and class warfare.
You realize that affirmative action helps blacks from well-to-do families by displacing poor whites and Asians? Asians would be the biggest benefactor if it was more SES based.

Incredibly silly. And the thread you pointed to isn't even really contesting the data itself, but whether we should keep the demographics together.

https://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2015/mar/02/dave-brat/brat-us-school-spending-375-percent-over-30-years-/

Brat: U.S. school spending up 375 percent over 30 years but test score remain flat

The inflation-adjusted figure Brat uses to describe what he sees as runaway federal spending on education over 30 years is overblown. You can only get near a 375 percent increase if you start in 1970 and end in 2010, when U.S. school funding was nearly doubled with stimulus money and stood at an all-time high of $73.3 billion.


[...]


That said, the increase in per-student spending is still significant and Brat has valid point on the test results. Average NAEP scores for 17-year-olds have barely budged during the last 30 years of testing.


So we rate the totality of Brat’s statement Mostly True.
 
Feb 4, 2009
31,170
11,610
136
Regarding educational achievement, genetic influence explains around ~60% of the variance in Western countries. The underachievement of blacks still continues even for the most recent generation. So parents have a Western education and yet the gap still doesn't move much...



lol Well, it's a common grievance, so what can I say? Even motherjones pointed out how exaggerated it is.



Did you even read the Huffington article or the .gov site I pointed out? Within and between districts, the funding difference isn't that big.



This is separate from school funding, so I'm not sure what you're point is. Yes, I quoted an article where the authors wanted to still keep it. So what? The point in showing that article was that affirmative action helps well-to-do black families, while making it harder for poor whites and Asians to get into Harvard and other highly selective schools. There is a lot of variation in parental style and money spent on kids within Asian or white families, never mind other things. Affirmative action is a crappy way of determining disadvantage.



None of what I said is Randian. You can do race neutral policies like basic income, higher minimum wage, universal health care, but creating policies that intentionally privilege certain racial groups is bound to cause resentment or be seen as unfair. Shee-it, Ted Lieu felt that way.



You realize that affirmative action helps blacks from well-to-do families by displacing poor whites and Asians? Asians would be the biggest benefactor if it was more SES based.



Incredibly silly. And the thread you pointed to isn't even really contesting the data itself, but whether we should keep the demographics together.

https://www.politifact.com/virginia/statements/2015/mar/02/dave-brat/brat-us-school-spending-375-percent-over-30-years-/

Brat: U.S. school spending up 375 percent over 30 years but test score remain flat

The inflation-adjusted figure Brat uses to describe what he sees as runaway federal spending on education over 30 years is overblown. You can only get near a 375 percent increase if you start in 1970 and end in 2010, when U.S. school funding was nearly doubled with stimulus money and stood at an all-time high of $73.3 billion.


[...]


That said, the increase in per-student spending is still significant and Brat has valid point on the test results. Average NAEP scores for 17-year-olds have barely budged during the last 30 years of testing.


So we rate the totality of Brat’s statement Mostly True.
[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]


Ummm you provided that graph...
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
894
126
We are already taking money from others and giving it away...

Do you also ask how much to we give to others (massive amounts to business)? That's a bigger problem in to me and I would say the majority of Americans... Who indeed needs the help most at that point?

If we are going to give away money anyway shouldn't it be given to people instead of corporations... Or people at least stop bitching about one and not the other...
Yes, I do. I'm a firm believer that corporations get too many breaks and its absurd to think of companies as people.
 
  • Like
Reactions: umbrella39

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
894
126
The claim was immigrants commit more crimes than natives and second generation too. Graphs he supplied show something different.
That is different post though. His post was accurate in that progress has been extremely small even with more money going to schools with Black children. I think its accurate in that money might not be the biggest issue here.
 

dank69

Lifer
Oct 6, 2009
28,854
12,497
136
Regarding educational achievement, genetic influence explains around ~60% of the variance in Western countries. The underachievement of blacks still continues even for the most recent generation. So parents have a Western education and yet the gap still doesn't move much. ...
And I bet you think a "Western education" is the same no matter which public school you attend, right? Just going to forget about the differences between a public education from one town to the next? Going to dismiss all the communities fighting to prevent kids from inner cities getting bused in to take advantage of the better suburban schools?

And once again, for the third time now, the parents may have had access to this "Western education" but they didn't start it until after they turned 5...
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,942
126
Regarding educational achievement, genetic influence explains around ~60% of the variance in Western countries. The underachievement of blacks still continues even for the most recent generation. So parents have a Western education and yet the gap still doesn't move much...
holy nazis!

genetics is not the reason. You should just stop posting.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
894
126
what the hell does that have to do with the human brains capabilities?
Well, you think we are both different except for our brains, that is off limits to variation?

Here is a tip, variation is present in brains too.
 

JSt0rm

Lifer
Sep 5, 2000
27,399
3,942
126
Well, you think we are both different except for our brains, that is off limits to variation?

Here is a tip, variation is present in brains too.
variation doesn't mean white culture is the smartest.
 

ecogen

Golden Member
Dec 24, 2016
1,217
1,285
136
Yes, when we were talking about groups and how biology plays a role in IQ. Do you think somehow you brought up something relevant?
Even if we ignore the fact that IQ is only good at measuring IQ and not inherent intelligence, education and healthcare have been shown to play a much larger role in IQ scores than biology does.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
894
126
Even if we ignore the fact that IQ is only good at measuring IQ and not inherent intelligence, education and healthcare have been shown to play a much larger role in IQ scores than biology does.
Oh really. Show me that study.

As far as I know, the data shows somewhere around 40%-80% of IQ is most strongly linked to your parents.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5479093/

"Just like any other human trait, intelligence varies from person to person. Individuals differ in intelligence due to differences in both their environments and genetic heritage.[4] Most studies estimate that the heritability of intelligence quotient (IQ) is somewhere between 0.30 and 0.75.[5] This indicates that genetics plays a bigger role than environment in creating IQ differences among individuals. However, members of the same family also tend to differ substantially in intelligence (by an average of about 12 IQ points).[5]"

I will enjoy you explaining that away.

*edit.

You know, this fits well here too.

http://web.mit.edu/fustflum/documents/papers/AshkenaziIQ.jbiosocsci.pdf

"Ashkenazi Jews have the highest average IQ of any ethnic group for which there are reliable data. They score 0.75 to 1.0 standard deviations above the general European average, corresponding to an IQ 112-115. This has been seen in many studies (Backman, 1972; Levinson, 1959; Romanoff, 1976), although a recent review concludes that the advantage is slightly less, only half a standard deviation Lynn (2004). This fact has social significance because IQ (as measured by IQ tests) is the best predictor we have of success in academic subjects and most jobs"

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/6194035_Prefrontal_Cognitive_Ability_Intelligence_Big_Five_Personality_and_the_Prediction_of_Advanced_Academic_and_Workplace_Performance
 
Last edited:

ecogen

Golden Member
Dec 24, 2016
1,217
1,285
136
Oh really. Show me that study.

As far as I know, the data shows somewhere around 40%-80% of IQ is most strongly linked to your parents.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5479093/

"Just like any other human trait, intelligence varies from person to person. Individuals differ in intelligence due to differences in both their environments and genetic heritage.[4] Most studies estimate that the heritability of intelligence quotient (IQ) is somewhere between 0.30 and 0.75.[5] This indicates that genetics plays a bigger role than environment in creating IQ differences among individuals. However, members of the same family also tend to differ substantially in intelligence (by an average of about 12 IQ points).[5]"

I will enjoy you explaining that away.
You were talking about the biology of groups, not specific individuals. Don't shift the goalposts.

Yes, when we were talking about groups and how biology plays a role in IQ.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flynn_effect

Read up.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
894
126
You were talking about the biology of groups, not specific individuals. Don't shift the goalposts.
Perhaps you are unaware, but you can only test individuals as groups are not testable. That said, do you want to see the IQ data by race? Its not hard to find.

Already know about it. The biggest reason was likely due to people finally getting enough to eat. Its also why we are seeing it go flat. I also added to my previous post, so feel free to look that over.


Mind telling me what you think the Flynn effect has to do with anything here?
 

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
62,305
14,516
136
One way or another, it all comes back around to the racist claim that blacks are inferior. "We've got these studies & stuff..." None of which matters at all in terms of the basic respect & rights that all Americans need to allow each other if we're to thrive. IQ has nothing to do with being a decent human being. Within limits, it has nothing to do with being a productive member of society, either.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JSt0rm

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
894
126
One way or another, it all comes back around to the racist claim that blacks are inferior. "We've got these studies & stuff..." None of which matters at all in terms of the basic respect & rights that all Americans need to allow each other if we're to thrive. IQ has nothing to do with being a decent human being. Within limits, it has nothing to do with being a productive member of society, either.
Is your argument that there is no difference, or that the difference does not matter?
 

ecogen

Golden Member
Dec 24, 2016
1,217
1,285
136
Perhaps you are unaware, but you can only test individuals as groups are not testable. That said, do you want to see the IQ data by race? Its not hard to find.
Is that data weighted for education levels, health, and all the myriads of other factors that may effect them?

Already know about it. The biggest reason was likely due to people finally getting enough to eat. Its also why we are seeing it go flat. I also added to my previous post, so feel free to look that over.
Nutrition is one of the reasons mentioned, you'll have to back up that it's the biggest.

Mind telling me what you think the Flynn effect has to do with anything here?
Because it explains discrepancies between the different average IQ scores of races?

https://books.google.gr/books?id=FtYeTcNwzQ4C&pg=PA301&dq#v=onepage&q&f=false

At the end of the day, even if what you were saying was true, IQ has been proven to be a flawed measure of intelligence. Take your racial superiority bullshit elsewhere.
 
  • Like
Reactions: JSt0rm

Jhhnn

No Lifer
Nov 11, 1999
62,305
14,516
136
Is your argument that there is no difference, or that the difference does not matter?
That it doesn't matter even if it exists. That finding ways to define black people as "lesser" is actually counterproductive to the goals of egalitarian democracy & a civil society.
 

realibrad

Lifer
Oct 18, 2013
12,337
894
126
Is that data weighted for education levels, health, and all the myriads of other factors that may effect them?
Its peer reviewed. I cant say for sure that the reviewers knew what they were doing and did not just put it out there because gosh things are hard though.



Nutrition is one of the reasons mentioned, you'll have to back up that it's the biggest.
It can be done, but, what is the point of bring that up anyway? The studies done have been for people in the western world. Why would the groups in those countries matter to the global average?



Because it explains discrepancies between the different average IQ scores of races?
No. What it does is realize that IQs globally have been rising on average. In many developed nations, it has actually gone flat, or declined. In developing nations its still rising as they are moving out of extreme poverty. This is why the prevailing belief is that food is the biggest driver of that growth. Where did you get the idea it shows the differences between races? Again, the studies that have looked at IQ by race when people are from the same country show the gap.

https://books.google.gr/books?id=FtYeTcNwzQ4C&pg=PA301&dq#v=onepage&q&f=false

At the end of the day, even if what you were saying was true, IQ has been proven to be a flawed measure of intelligence. Take your racial superiority bullshit elsewhere.
IQ is not a flawed measure of intelligence. That is a comment from someone that does not know what he is talking about. IQ is not only the best way we have, but its a good measure. Not flawless, but, what measure in science is?

Also, just because someone has a high IQ does not say anything about them being a good person. IQ is not the only thing society should look at. That said, the data is quite clear that there are differences that are replicable and have been replicated over and over. Let me also point out that biology while being the best predictor, is not the only link to IQ. And none of this means much when you are dealing with individuals as the variation is much larger than the average differences. Just because a person is from said group, does not mean much of anything because of the aforementioned variation. Anyone that tries to judge an individual by the group they are from in terms of IQ is an idiot. Does not mean the gap is not there though.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY