Why do 'Black' people perform more poorly on tests?

[Kadagar_AV]

This is something I have been pondering lately.

Black people seem to do pretty bad in any society, including their own. They also generally fail on IQ tests compared to others.

What is it that I have been missing?

No really, modern science would probably Occams Razor the dilemma, no?

If not, black people are failing, so it should be unto THEM to prove their worth in an argument, again, no? Or did we somehow skip the general rule of the one making a claim having to support it?

Honestly speaking, blacks just don't seem to do all that great, so what are the reasons / excuses for it?

[Husar]

Were the IQ tests made by black people or by white people?
Or is there any standard universal IQ test that is objectively valid?
And what does an IQ test measure anyway?
If I never learned to read, would that make my IQ 0 simply becuse I couldn't read the task descriptions on an IQ test?

It's hard to comment on your questions without knowing the circumstances of the tests you mention.

[Montmorency]

Or did we somehow skip the general rule of the one making a claim having to support it?

No self-awareness?


2011:

https://i494.photobucket.com/albums/rr309/desertSypglass/2013-10-1819_08_49-wwwalignnyorg_wp-content_uploads_2011_09_Poverty-In-NYC-September-2011pdf.png

And in the US 15% of black households have an income over $75,000.

Rather than having "failed everywhere", the "blacks" seem instead to have made significant strides despite the significant systemic disadvantages faced by their communities or societies. In Africa, despite a poor starting position, observers generally agree that the majority of sub-Saharan states are continually improving in stability, political openness, economic development, and so on.

Incredible that after a mere two generations of widespread black self-sovereignty in the world, the fact that they have not become wildly prosperous leads you to dismiss them: 'Ah well, the blacks have failed, I guess they just suck.'

[Beskar]

Biggest influence are education are socio-economical factors.

A rich person with access to private tutors and support in their education on average is going to end up attaining better results than some-one who hasn't.
Then on average, the 'Black' population is poorer than the 'White' population.
When looking across countries, there is also a cultural bias to consider from the method of testing. Not everyone is raised with the same values.

In an interesting situation, Asians score far higher than a 'White' individual. This is mostly attributed to a far stronger work and study ethic. But by using the tone and implications from your post, does that mean you are stupid/inferior than Asians and you should prove your worth to them and that 'White' people are failing ?

Obviously, there comes the other point where there are some very intelligent 'Black' people and there are some very stupid 'White' people which shows that it isn't simply a skin colour issue. It is all down to circumstances.

Why can you not simply accept people as being people without having to put big labels to segregate them?

[Kadagar_AV]

Were the IQ tests made by black people or by white people?
Or is there any standard universal IQ test that is objectively valid?
And what does an IQ test measure anyway?
If I never learned to read, would that make my IQ 0 simply becuse I couldn't read the task descriptions on an IQ test?

It's hard to comment on your questions without knowing the circumstances of the tests you mention.

The circumstances = black people seem to do rather bad. As a German, do you honestly think that it is the black population that makes your nation the motor of EU at large? Or are they a burden on your society?


No self-awareness?


2011:

https://i494.photobucket.com/albums/rr309/desertSypglass/2013-10-1819_08_49-wwwalignnyorg_wp-content_uploads_2011_09_Poverty-In-NYC-September-2011pdf.png

And in the US 15% of black households have an income over $75,000.

Rather than having "failed everywhere", the "blacks" seem instead to have made significant strides despite the significant systemic disadvantages faced by their communities or societies. In Africa, despite a poor starting position, observers generally agree that the majority of sub-Saharan states are continually improving in stability, political openness, economic development, and so on.

Incredible that after a mere two generations of widespread black self-sovereignty in the world, the fact that they have not become wildly prosperous leads you to dismiss them: 'Ah well, the blacks have failed, I guess they just suck.'

Cool chart of Queens, now please make your perspective rather more wide.

As a sidenote: Did your REALLY just make some sort of claim that because of stuff in Queens it's a general fact?

Where are the black laureates, go masters, chess masters...Where are the black mathematicians?

Look at the history books, where are the black Alexander the great, Genghis Khan, Ceasars?

Yes black people have failed, that it is because they suck have to stand for you. I am making no such claim, my claim is that blacks seem to do ill in their own nations coupled with doing ill when they have minority status in other nations, compared to other immigrant groups with minority status.

[Kadagar_AV]

Biggest influence are education are socio-economical factors.

A rich person with access to private tutors and support in their education on average is going to end up attaining better results than some-one who hasn't.
Then on average, the 'Black' population is poorer than the 'White' population.
When looking across countries, there is also a cultural bias to consider from the method of testing. Not everyone is raised with the same values.

In an interesting situation, Asians score far higher than a 'White' individual. This is mostly attributed to a far stronger work and study ethic. But by using the tone and implications from your post, does that mean you are stupid/inferior than Asians and you should prove your worth to them and that 'White' people are failing ?

Obviously, there comes the other point where there are some very intelligent 'Black' people and there are some very stupid 'White' people which shows that it isn't simply a skin colour issue. It is all down to circumstances.

Why can you not simply accept people as being people without having to put big labels to segregate them?

To put it short: **** yeah, I would claim Asians are more developed in the cognitive field compared to their white counterparts.

I have a problem with blacks because many nations, mine included, WANT them to be as good - and bend over in every which way to make facts vanish.

[Husar]

The circumstances = black people seem to do rather bad. As a German, do you honestly think that it is the black population that makes your nation the motor of EU at large? Or are they a burden on your society?

There aren't all that many here but I'd say most are much better than I am at the things we do.

[Slyspy]

This is bad even for the Backroom.

[Montmorency]

their own nations

Modern "black" states are almost all agglomerations of dozens of tribes with historical animosity between each other - some "nation"...


coupled with doing ill when they have minority status in other nations, compared to other immigrant groups with minority status.

So, the historical disadvantages mean nothing?

Anyway, black-African immigrants to the US are often well-educated and skilled.


As a sidenote: Did your REALLY just make some sort of claim that because of stuff in Queens it's a general fact?

I made two notes, one about Queens, and another about the United States. Read them over again.


Where are the black laureates, go masters, chess masters...Where are the black mathematicians?

Plenty of black mathematicians. There have been black grandmasters and Laureates, what's your point?


Look at the history books, where are the black Alexander the great, Genghis Khan, Ceasars?

What, you want a list of black military leaders? There were many of them, so? Anyway, there are many geographical and demographic reasons for no continent-spanning native empires to emerge in Africa. That doesn't really say much of anything about the people themselves...

[a completely inoffensive name]

If someone or some group does not adhere to my definition of prosperity and success, they must be literally retarded.

Thanks Kadagar for once again proving that European education is not what it is hyped up to be.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

The most commonly accepted theory is that "race" is a social construct and not a biological difference, and that average genetic variation of the "races" is less than the variation average between any two individuals of the same "race." This would suggest that any difference in "intelligence" must be culturally derived (my view).

The minority opinion on the issues holds that persistently lower scores for "blacks" than for "whites" in intelligence testing exist despite specific efforts to set aside or counteract cultural differences.

We probably do not know enough about genetics OR culture to make a final evaluation on the issue.

[Montmorency]

We probably do not know enough about genetics OR culture to make a final evaluation on the issue.

While that's an important point, one might at least be expected to extend the intellectual courtesy of not begging the question on "black failure".

[PanzerJaeger]

If someone or some group does not adhere to my definition of prosperity and success, they must be literally retarded.

Exactly what definition of prosperity and success is the black community adhering to?

[a completely inoffensive name]

Exactly what definition of prosperity and success is the black community adhering to?

When you try to take black culture which has historically been economically and socially disadvantaged and try to apply the standards that white culture has created for itself, you are no doubt going to look down on blacks while they try to achieve equilibrium.

The fact that since the 1960s (a small amount of time historically) we see such facts as the ones Monty pointed out, shows that they are indeed just as smart and hard working and successful as us.

It's like telling the owners of a small retail company that even though they expanded from 1 to 12 locations in 10 years, they are borderline retarded since the executives at WalMart built 100x more locations in the same period. Does that really say anything about the mental facilities of the small business owner?

[PanzerJaeger]

I do not understand the comparison. Your small business is steadily improving, albeit at a slower rate than WalMart. The black community is not steadily improving (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/08/28/these-seven-charts-show-the-black-white-economic-gap-hasnt-budged-in-50-years/), and is actually declining in many statistical measurements of "success". The linked data is economic; I won't even go into the social stats (crime, abortion rate, obesity, HIV/AIDS, single parent households, domestic violence, LGBT abuse, etc.), which are even worse.

Kadagar's OP was typically crude, but I think there are legitimate questions behind it. Incredulously declaring that there's nothing to see here (move along) is willful ignorance. Of course, with an OP like that, there's probably no hope in trying to glean some meaningful discussion out of the thread.

[a completely inoffensive name]

This information you have presented is new to me. I will need to bow out and re-think the details of my argument if it is still plausible.

I will note that looking at this data in a vacuum is dangerous as there is still programs that drastically impact the black community disproportionately, such as the War on Drugs. The data in context may even support my argument such that blacks are still able to keep the gap stable despite these targeted programs against them.

[Montmorency]

Interesting notes:

*Blacks who have experienced poverty in childhood are likelier than whites to stay in or fall into poverty.
*Blacks are much more likely than whites to spend a considerable part (i.e. > 25%)of their childhoods in poverty
*The majority of white children never experience poverty, and the majority of black children do
*Blacks are more downwardly-mobile than whites in the second and third income quintiles, and less downwardly-mobile than whites in the fourth and fifth income quintiles
*Blacks are more upwardly-mobile from the first and second income quintiles than whites
*19.3% of black households are in the middle-quintile for income, while 20.2% of white households are
*24.6% of black households are in the top-two quintiles for income, while 42% of white households are


My impression is that the mediocre statistics can be interpreted as the stagnation of the majority of poor or lower-middle-class blacks masking the solidification and modest growth of the black middle and upper classes.

[Montmorency]

For reference:

11095

[Ironside]

Look at the history books, where are the black Alexander the great, Genghis Khan, Ceasars?


Musa I of Mali is a candidate of the richest person in history and the reason why the city of Timbuktu has a vague western awareness for a long time. Kush conquered Eqypt. You got Aksum, Songhai, Mutapa etc, etc.

Africa got significant natural barriers in the north (Sahara), in the middle (the tropics) and simply too much distance in the west-east direction. The Kanem-Bornu Empire, whose base was in Chad seems to have faced very little empire resistance due to the last one.

Without extreme naval superiority, it's pretty much impssible to maintain something accross Sahara.

It's worth to remember Shaka the Zulu was an exception. He found the spear better than the musket (that was a common weapon in Africa by this time, imported). When the west started to show up with rifles, improved cannons and (later on) machine guns, that's when the real conquest of Africa began.

[Fragony]

This is something I have been pondering lately.

Black people seem to do pretty bad in any society, including their own. They also generally fail on IQ tests compared to others.

What is it that I have been missing?

The island of choice? You have been pondering about it a bit longer here

[Rhyfelwyr]

Eh, didn't we just have this discussion recently?

Of course Kadagar's question in the OP is valid. Now, here are some equally valid questions to consider:

Why do people from poor backgrounds in the poorer schools perform poorly in educational tests?
Why do people from cultures that do not share Western Victorian-based values of education perform poorly in a Western Victorian-based education system?
Why are entirely artificial African states that just overcame a struggle over brutal imperialism not shining beacons of stable liberal democracy?
Why are Caribbean states formed from black slave rebellions with no native infrastructure not as advanced as their neighbours?
Why do you think skin colour is a meaningful method of categorization?*
How has the Backroom come to this?

etc...

*I'm not some leftist/PC ideologue - if you want to talk about Australian Aborigines, I'll grant you could at least make a case - this is understandable given their genetic isolation. The same is not true for 'blacks' as a whole.

[AntiDamascus]

This couldn't be a complex issue of humanities tribal nature, various socioeconomic, political, and military issues that span literally thousands of years into history and across the entire globe that cannot be fixed with even several generations of time. Can't be that... they must just be stupid.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

This couldn't be a complex issue of humanities tribal nature, various socioeconomic, political, and military issues that span literally thousands of years into history and across the entire globe that cannot be fixed with even several generations of time. Can't be that... they must just be stupid.

Well fine! Just show off your cognitive complexity. Next you'll be reveling in some kind of shades of grey reference. Reductio ad absurbum is good enough for the rest of us but not for you!

Toff!

[Kadagar_AV]

Uh, I have no idea what mod changed the title of the thread... But it's kind of misleading, as I mainly question why black people seem to fail in every society they join.

That they fail on IQ tests is more like a sidenote.

OK, everyone... So black people are as good? That is why every culture they join seem to look down on them?

Honestly speaking, in all countries I have been to, people look down on blacks. If it's only about poverty labels and cultural stigma, how come South American or Asian people joining western societies seem to do rather well?

Fishermen from Asia just as poor as Africans just seem to join the western society and thrive.

Again, Occhams Razor anyone?

It would be easy to show how black people are failing (just look at.... well pretty much anything). What I wanted from this thread was the clear evidence that blacks do as good as others, comparatively.

My honest opinion is that there is something in the black culture that's just rotten. I also think black people tend to be less intelligent. Plenty of evidence for it, what is the evidence against it?

I'm not looking for a racial discussion, I am looking for some clear evidence that black people do as good as others.

Are there any?

[Kadagar_AV]

If someone or some group does not adhere to my definition of prosperity and success, they must be literally retarded.

Thanks Kadagar for once again proving that European education is not what it is hyped up to be.

I'll mirror the question: How does black peoples definition of prosperity and success differ from western definitions?

[Montmorency]

You don't understand the usage of Ockham's Razor.

[Kadagar_AV]

You don't understand the usage of Ockham's Razor.

:bow: Your argument is overwhelming... :clown:

[AntiDamascus]

Uh, I have no idea what mod changed the title of the thread... But it's kind of misleading, as I mainly question why black people seem to fail in every society they join.

That they fail on IQ tests is more like a sidenote.

OK, everyone... So black people are as good? That is why every culture they join seem to look down on them?

Not really sure. I'll ask the Jews. Oh wait, serious answer. We've treated them as basically cattle for hundreds of years? Why are women looked down on in culture?


Honestly speaking, in all countries I have been to, people look down on blacks. If it's only about poverty labels and cultural stigma, how come South American or Asian people joining western societies seem to do rather well?

Yea why are those South American immigrants from Europe who killed all the natives doing way better in western culture.


Fishermen from Asia just as poor as Africans just seem to join the western society and thrive.

Ah yes "seem". Just like it "seems" like you're making this all up based on gut impressions. See how fun that was to use that word? It's technically true because it seems that way!


Again, Occhams Razor anyone?

Again yes, do you not understand history? Or racism? or politics? Do you just not know what people have done to each other?


It would be easy to show how black people are failing (just look at.... well pretty much anything). What I wanted from this thread was the clear evidence that blacks do as good as others, comparatively.

President Barack Obama. Secretary of State Condaleeza Rice. Secretary of State Colin Powell. Denzel Washington. Ben Carson.


My honest opinion is that there is something in the black culture that's just rotten. I also think black people tend to be less intelligent. Plenty of evidence for it, what is the evidence against it?

This is a few lines I just love. I rolled my eyes so hard it hurt. (In before "but but but you didn't answer it!")


I'm not looking for a racial discussion, I am looking for some clear evidence that black people do as good as others.

So you don't want a discussion on race. You just want clear evidence that the people who's culture you hate and who you think are basically just dumber than the rest of us.... aren't? Good call.

[Hax]

Yeah black culture is rotten.

Soul and blues music is of the devil.

[Montmorency]

*19.3% of black households are in the middle-quintile for income, while 20.2% of white households are
*24.6% of black households are in the top-two quintiles for income, while 42% of white households are


Unfortunately, I can't find any historical data for household income distribution by race (the quoted is current). If possible, it actually would be interesting to see how blacks and whites compare through quintiles. I mean, I have been able to find mean and median quintile-incomes by race for households down to 1967, but I just can't get, say, a breakdown by race for # of households within each quintile.

[Fragony]

Differences are relativily small here, might be best place to look. Most of the black people here are from Suriname and the Dutch Caribeans. The Suri's do well, Caribians do not. If you look at IQ world map the Suri's on the European average, the Caribians way below it. I would like to put mentality into the equation, Suri's find schooling very important, Caribians aren't exactly famous for that. Suri's are below the Northern European westeners but not very much. Also needs to be mentioned that a lot people in Suriname have studied here with exchange-programs.

[Montmorency]

Did more digging.

Reference 1 (http://www.infoplease.com/cig/economics/got-much.html): U.S. Household Income Limits by Quintile (upper limit of each quintile—with the exception of the fifth quintile, in current dollars, rounded to nearest 100)

Year 1st Q 2nd Q 3rd Q 4th Q

1970 3,700 7,100 10,300 14,700

The above is in 1970 "current" $. Since the census tables I found use 2007 constant $, I'll convert everything through an inflation calculator into 2012 $:



Upper Limits of Quintiles (in 2012 $)

Year 1st Q 2nd Q 3rd Q 4th Q

1970 21,900 42,000 61,000 87,000

Here (http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/income/data/incpovhlth/2000/f23.html) are the census tables I'll be using. They deal with "families" rather than households, but...

Following the tedious crunching, here's the result:


Household/Family Distribution Within Income Quintiles by Race, 1970 (+/- 0.5% MoE)



Race
1st Quintile (% Households/Families Within)
2nd Quintile (% Households/Families Within)
3rd Quintile (% Households/Families Within)
4th Quintile (% Households/Families Within)
5th Quintile (% Households/Families Within)


White
13.5
25
19.5
23.5
18.5


Black
12.5
52.5
15.5
13
6.5



While I acknowledge that my work is very rough and approximative, I think the following notes and comparisons are significant:

*In 1970, the absolute majority of black households were in the second income quintile
*65% of black households were in the first two quintiles in 1970; today it is about 56%
*The proportion of black households in the 3rd quintile has grown by about 4% since 1970
*5% more black households are in the upper two quartiles than in 1970
*Interestingly, white distributions do not seem to have shifted noticeably in the past 40 years; at most, the presence of a 5% Hispanic segment of the 1970 "White" demographic would be expected to drag down the distribution relative to the present "White non-Hispanic' group



Claims that there has not been significant progress along any measures must be re-examined in light of these data. My hypothesis that the black middle and upper classes have been quietly growing finds support in them. Despite the persistence of systemic antagonism and the yoke of poverty, disenfranchisement and disillusionment, considerable numbers of blacks have 'risen up', so to speak, bolstering the not-inconsiderable ranks of those who had already reached such a point in the Civil Rights Era. They are out there in their millions, they have not "failed", and they are growing. The perspective of black social difficulties must be balanced against the black successes, lest we be mired in unthinking stereotypifying fatalism. Widespread public recognition of these would assuredly drive improvement on most or all of the 'dispiriting' aggregate measures one might point to.

:bow:

[Husar]

President Barack Obama. Secretary of State Condaleeza Rice. Secretary of State Colin Powell. Denzel Washington. Ben Carson.

You missed a lot there buddy. These people aren't black. Black people are dumb genetically because of their race as shown by their skin colour. If however, a person with black skin is successful, that person is not black, never has been and never will be, it's just a whitey born in the wrong body. Because successful culture is white culture and everyone who enters it stops having genetic traits and in fact never had any.

[HoreTore]

A white supremacist thread?

Oh well, I guess it was overdue.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Because the culture that they value doesn't value educational attainment, on average. Even if it did, it is a downward spiral, generation after generation of individuals who value "keeping it real"ly dumb begets more and more ignorance. It needs to turn around somehow. The same thing is happening to white culture, so it really doesn't have as much to do with race, anymore.

[Husar]

I read something relevant on another forum lately:


The Mexican Fisherman
Author Unknown


The American investment banker was at the pier of a
small coastal Mexican village when a small boat with
just one fisherman docked.

Inside the small boat were several large yellow fin tuna.
The American complimented the Mexican on the quality
of his fish and asked how long it took to catch them.

The Mexican replied, "Only a little while."

The American then asked, "Why didn't you stay out longer
and catch more fish?"

The Mexican said, "With this I have more than enough to support my family's needs."

The American then asked, "But what do you do with the rest of your time?"

The Mexican fisherman said, "I sleep late, fish a little, play with my children, take siesta with my wife, Maria, stroll into the village each evening where I sip wine and play guitar with my amigos, I have a full and busy life."

The American scoffed, "I am a Harvard MBA and could help you. You should spend more time fishing; and with the proceeds, buy a bigger boat: With the proceeds from the bigger boat you could buy several boats. Eventually you would have a fleet of fishing boats. Instead of selling your catch to a middleman you would sell directly to the
processor; eventually opening your own cannery. You would control the product, processing and distribution. You would need to leave this small coastal fishing village and move to Mexico City, then Los Angeles and eventually New York where you will run your ever-expanding enterprise."

The Mexican fisherman asked, "But, how long will this all take?"

To which the American replied, "15 to 20 years."

"But what then?" asked the Mexican.

The American laughed and said that's the best part. "When the time is right you would announce an IPO and sell your company stock to the public and become very rich, you would make millions."

"Millions?...Then what?"

The American said, "Then you would retire. Move to a small coastal fishing village where you would sleep late, fish a little, play with your kids, take siesta with your wife, stroll to the village in the evenings where you could sip wine and play your guitar with your amigos."

[CountArach]

I agree Kadagar, clearly the amount of Melanin in one's skin determines educational attainment. I'm glad that someone else is here with me in the 19th Century.

[Fragony]

I read something relevant on another forum lately:

That's cleverly done

[AntiDamascus]

No one wants to be a landscaper but everyone loves to work in the yard.

[Strike For The South]

I don't know,

[snip]

[Kadagar_AV]

Montmorency, care to sum that up in an easy to understand way?

Husar, that story is originally a Daoist text, isn't it?

SFTS, Your arguments are trending down. Try to come by as sober for a change.



All, If you accuse white people of being stupid and unable to build functional societys, you get laughed at and have a wall of information hitting you.

If you claim Asians are generally stupid, you get even more laughed at, and an even larger wall of information hits you.

Jews, same there. Even though often scorned no one would accuse them of being stupid.

If you say black people are stupid, all you get is a "Dude, you can't say stuff like that!!"

I was just watching the Starcraft 2 championship. Where are the black guys? Where are the black chess or go world winners? How many Nobel economic or medical prizes have blacks got?

How come poor uneducated asians seem to thrive in pretty much any society, while blacks tend to be scorned in any society. Racism?

If racism is to blame, Jews should be seen as the great dumb ones, no? Basically, what every other culture than the black have in common, is that they look down on blacks. Funny that.

[CountArach]

Jews, same there. Even though often scorned no one would accuse them of being stupid.
[...]
If racism is to blame, Jews should be seen as the great dumb ones, no? Basically, what every other culture than the black have in common, is that they look down on blacks. Funny that.
No, they just get "owning the media", "running Hollywood", "hordes of Jew gold", etc, which are all the opposite of what you are saying. Which is still racism. These judgements are all built on culturally constructed ideas of 'normal' and 'other'.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Kad, you did not answer my questions.


How come poor uneducated asians seem to thrive in pretty much any society, while blacks tend to be scorned in any society. Racism?

Right, but just as I was saying above, there are a lot more factors influencing things here than melanin content. Although first off, I would like to point out that your claim about Asian success stories doesn't really hold up outside of the stereotype of hardworking US Asians. See for example, the experience of Koreans in Japan (http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/2384394?uid=3738032&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&sid=21102781319531), which SFTS once pointed out to me when I was on your side in this argument. They perform poorly in education, employment, and are referred to derogitarily by the Japanese.

Indeed, the experience of Koreans in Japan is typical of that of long-standing immigrant populations, who often face historic-based prejudice, or just the legacy of always having been at the bottom of the class system.

Of course, contrast this with the experience of Asian immigrants in the US. And what is the difference? It cannot be their genetics. One explanation would be the nature of the immigration - I don't know all the particulars but a recent post by Montmorency elsewhere emphasised the role of family ties within some ethnic communities in helping to explain why so many immigrants from Russia to the US live the American Dream and become extremely right-wing.

Similarly, contrast the fate of Arabs in Sweden, who live in ghettos and refuse to do manual work, with those in the USA. Here are some stats which may interest you:

1. 61% of the US Arabs earned the highest university degrees versus 30% of the average US citizens. The Arab citizens are mainly Lebanese (40%), Syrians (12.3%), Egyptians (12%), Palestinians (6%), Iraqis, North Africans… earned the highest university degrees versus 30% of the average US citizens

2. The average “Arab” in the US earn $54,000 versus $43,000

3. 57% of the “Arabs” in the US own single family homes versus 43% of the average ratio.

4. The Arabs in the US hold the highest posts and the most private businesses than the other US minorities, including European, Japanese, and Chinese.

The same holds true for recent black immigrants to the US (especially Nigerians (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nigerian_American)), who, oddly enough, perform better than a community bogged down in a legacy of slavery, segregation and welfare dependency. From the Nigerian link:

Nigerians in the Diaspora, including in Britain and the United States have become well-known for their educational prowess, as witnessed by the academic accomplishments of many Diaspora Nigerians, such as Paula and Petter Imafidon, nine year-old twins who are the youngest students ever to be admitted to high school in England. The “Wonder Twins” and other members of their family have accomplished incredible rare feats, passing advanced examinations and being accepted into institutions with students twice their age.[8] Similar to England, there exists a large percentage of degree holders among Nigerian Americans. According to census data, almost 40% of Nigerian Americans hold bachelor’s degrees, 17% hold master’s degrees, and 4% hold doctorates, more than any racial group in the nation.

So, in light of such findings, I think this seriously challenges your view that race is the constant in explaining the experience of immigrant communities.


Basically, what every other culture than the black have in common, is that they look down on blacks. Funny that.

Blacks all come (relatively recently) from sub-Saharan Africa, a clear geographic region with a very shared and distinct experience of colonial oppression and independence struggles. That should strike anybody as a far better and more obvious explanation for the current state of Africa than something like genetics.

Look Kad, I used to be on your side on this. I thought it was the simple answer but at the end of the day I'm not obfuscating here, I'm giving you clear, plain as day examples of how your idea just doesn't hold up at all.

Or at least, if it does, it is vastly more complex that you make it out. You are not the one who should be playing the Occams razor card. I want to know why you think Arabs do well in the USA but not Europe. Why Koreans do well in the USA but not Japan. Why the Irish do well in the USA but not Scotland. Why Nigerians do well in the USA while other blacks do not.

I think it is you who has got some explaining to do...

[a completely inoffensive name]

I was just watching the Starcraft 2 championship. Where are the black guys?

Where are the white guys in SC2? I have been watching competitive SC2 since early 2011, and if you think that anyone but Koreans have a presence in the top tournaments, you are going to get absolutely wrecked by me.

[Kadagar_AV]

Rhyf, your posts deserve a more thought out answer, I'll address you tomorrow when I have more time.


Where are the white guys in SC2? I have been watching competitive SC2 since early 2011, and if you think that anyone but Koreans have a presence in the top tournaments, you are going to get absolutely wrecked by me.

Scarlett? Naniwa? There are other white people too, but yeah, Koreans dominate (as it seems to be their national sport).

[HoreTore]

I was just watching the Starcraft 2 championship.

You're watching a starcraft 2 championship while accusing others of being daft. Massive fail.

Also, that starcraft championship was run on technology invented in a large part by a black dude. Yet another fail.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Scarlett? Naniwa? There are other white people too, but yeah, Koreans dominate (as it seems to be their national sport).

Everything about this statement is ignorant. Naniwa (http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/NaNiwa) does so well because he isolates himself in Sweden for months at a time, rarely streaming his play and then cherry picks what tournaments he wants to enter to ensure that no one expects what is coming from him. He is a lone wolf and not representative of non-Koreans at all.

The only non-Korean to actually rise above most Koreans was Liquid Jinro (http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Jinro) back in 2010-2011, when SC2 was nowhere near as full of competitive Koreans as it is today with the introduction of KESPA teams (http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Korea_e-Sports_Association) earlier this year. Even then he never got past the Round of 4 in the GSL (http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/GOMTV_Global_StarCraft_II_League), and not a single non-Korean ever got close to him, except for Huk (http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/HuK) getting stopped in the Round of 16 I think once a while back. Stephano (http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Stephano) had the talent if he wasn't just clearly in the scene for raking the money so he could go to Med School, the foreign scene lost its greatest hope when he retired a few months ago.

Scarlett (http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Scarlett) got absolutely destroyed by JaeDong (http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Jaedong) at the WCS North America Season 2 finals, I watched it live in Santa Monica and she got completely outplayed. She is obviously one of the best of the "foreigners" but even her current play is miles behind the best which are all Koreans.

GSL was turned into a joke when it became under Blizzards orders WCS Korea, because now we have WCS America and WCS Europe and lets just go through all three seasons and see who the "representatives" are for each region:

WCS America S1: 1. Hero 2. Revival 3. Ryung 4. Alive (http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2013_WCS_Season_1_America) (all Koreans)
WCS America S2: 1. Polt 2. (http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2013_WCS_Season_2_America)Jaedong (http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Jaedong)3. TaeJa 4. (http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2013_WCS_Season_2_America) Scarlett (http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/Scarlett)(3 Koreans, 1 foreigner)
WCS America S3: Has not happened yet

WCS Europe S1: 1. MvP 2. Stephano 3. ForGG 4. DiMAGA (http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2013_WCS_Season_1_Europe) (2 Koreans, 2 foreigners)
WCS Europe S2: 1. duckdeok 2. MC 3. MMA 4. Grubby (http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2013_WCS_Season_2_Europe) (3 Koreans, 1 foreigner)
WCS Europe S3: 1. MMA 2. MC 3. Vortix 4. Genius (http://wiki.teamliquid.net/starcraft2/2013_WCS_Season_3_Europe) (3 koreans, 1 foreigner)

To spare everyone the time of harping on the same point once again, I will leave out the results of the Global Finals for each season, because it should be clear what the pattern here is.

Now you and everyone else might be asking why I am posting all this information? How is this relevant to the OP? It is because the fact of the matter is SC2 is not a national sport for Korea. Contrary to what people think here in the West, a young Korean deciding to play video games as a living is extremely shameful. Not to mention that SC2 as a game is woefully unpopular compared to League of Legends, World of Tanks, Tera, DOTA 2, various Asian grinding games, and yes, even Brood War is still more popular in the PC Bangs.

Culturally, Koreans are just as disadvantaged as Americans (who perform by far the worst out of all the regions) when it comes to playing a video game for a living.

But why do the Koreans completely dominate the sport then? It is for the same reason that blacks and other minorities perform worse in the US according to other metrics. Infrastructure, infrastructure, infrastructure. Koreans have fast internet and cheap access to PC's anywhere in the nation, the eSports teams are there and are stable (more or less) and they are able to obtain income without compromising their players practicing time. Yes, it is true that the Koreans are much more disciplined than Americans and Europeans, but this discipline is derived from the stability of the infrastructure surrounding them since they do not need to worry about housing, food, and good practice on a month to month basis like many American and European players do.

What is still evident from all of this is that Koreans are not naturally smarter or better at real time strategy games. When certain outliers like Naniwa and Stephano were able to achieve the same kind of infrastructure stability that many Koreans enjoy, they were able to out compete and out perform.

This is why people keep hammering the same damn point into your head when you bring this racist argument along. Look at the history of the blacks in America, of the Arabs in Europe. Policies of discrimination and segregation were not just culturally divisive in the long term, but it actively suppressed and undermined the infrastructure that minorities used to build themselves up. Since the 1960s, blacks have had greater access to the same infrastructure that whites use, and thus we see the rise in certain African-American demographics over this period, but for many minorities, the infrastructure is still not there, and policies at building the infrastructure up has always ended up with corruption preventing progress such as inner city schools getting well paid admins and shit tier classrooms and teachers.

What is hilarious about all of this is how quickly you defended the whites who by your metric would be classified as "Real Time Strategy Retards" by throwing out one or two token whites. If I threw out a few token black scientists, leaders and artists like George Washington Carver or Booker T. Washington at the beginning of the thread you would have reverted back to your "stats" about blacks in general being lazy and functionally dumber.

Like all racism, when flipped on itself, reveals itself to be groundless in reality and hypocritical when different metrics are used.

[AntiDamascus]

All, If you accuse white people of being stupid and unable to build functional societys, you get laughed at and have a wall of information hitting you.

Whoa man. I needed a good laugh. You obviously haven't seen the vast majority of white people in the US. Those are some pretty stupid people. You can look at almost any poll of the US population and laugh/cry. Turn on a TV here and look at what people are watching/saying. You'll get a pretty good argument that white people are stupid.


If you claim Asians are generally stupid, you get even more laughed at, and an even larger wall of information hits you.

Asia has well over 4 billion people in it. Are you implying they're all some kind of super geniuses? If you want, I can sound off all the problems in China and India. That can include how many people live in poverty there.


If you say black people are stupid, all you get is a "Dude, you can't say stuff like that!!"

As opposed to? "Well sir, you are wrong, let me give you all this evidence I have laying around that I would totally have for other races but not blacks."


I was just watching the Starcraft 2 championship. Where are the black guys? Where are the black chess or go world winners? How many Nobel economic or medical prizes have blacks got?

Finally ladies and gentlemen. Proof black people are stupid. They don't compete in StarCraft 2 tournaments. :dizzy2:


How come poor uneducated asians seem to thrive in pretty much any society, while blacks tend to be scorned in any society. Racism?

HAHAHAHA. Oh man. Whoooooo. You are funny.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Just for the sake of complete information, WCS America S3 is already guaranteed to have 4 Koreans as top 4, I am rooting for Polt to win it all tonight.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

So far, I am forced to conclude that Kad' should return to America-bashing.



Fun little story from my drive-around-to-member's-houses days as an insurance agent.


Riding up one rural road on Virginia's Middle Peninsula, I noticed a dilapidated, tin-roofed home with a huge Confederate battle flag hanging from the roof and running about half the length of their front porch. I shook my head. On the return trip, I looked at the other side of the road where 3 homes, children of apparently African descent playing in front, were clustered on a side street that had obviously been named by the homeowners when the county started letting folks name their own little side streets. They'd named their road "Isandlwana Lane." I damn near ran off the road laughing, wondering if the crackers across the street had ever figured it out.

[PanzerJaeger]

Fun little story from my drive-around-to-member's-houses days as an insurance agent.


Riding up one rural road on Virginia's Middle Peninsula, I noticed a dilapidated, tin-roofed home with a huge Confederate battle flag hanging from the roof and running about half the length of their front porch. I shook my head. On the return trip, I looked at the other side of the road where 3 homes, children of apparently African descent playing in front, were clustered on a side street that had obviously been named by the homeowners when the county started letting folks name their own little side streets. They'd named their road "Isandlwana Lane." I damn near ran off the road laughing, wondering if the crackers across the street had ever figured it out.

Home ownership is one factor that seems to hold blacks down in the US. They do not seem to understand and/or care about the importance of home maintenance and how that is linked to property value. I have noticed throughout the country, anecdotally of course, that black people tend to treat home purchases like car purchases: they buy them, use them until they start to break down, and then sell them for whatever they can get. It doesn't seem to matter where you are geographically or what income level a particular neighborhood is, there just do not seem to be a lot of blacks replacing roofs or updating kitchens. I live in a gated community with nice homes and a higher income profile. A black family moved in a few years ago; both parents are doctors. The HOA has had to constantly send them letters to clean gutters, maintain landscaping, fix rotten wood, and pick up trash after parties. They are perfectly wonderful, intelligent people, but maintaining a nice home just does not seem to occur to them.

This particular cultural trait is especially damaging in a society in which most wealth in the middle/upper middle class is tied up in home ownership. Instead of one's biggest expense being put towards an (at least theoretically) appreciating asset, it just gets thrown down the same rat hole car payments and other expenses associated with disposable consumer products go with no hope of recovering any of it. Instead of building multi-generational wealth that can be parlayed into other ventures, blacks are relegated to chasing monthly payments and living paycheck to paycheck. Living in a majority-black community gives one a completely different perspective on the much decried 'white flight' and the proliferation of HOAs and gated communities. Nobody wants to live in a trash heap. I've seen high income white neighborhoods turn in mere years. They will pay the price of entry, but they just don't think far enough ahead to keep things nice.

[ReluctantSamurai]

The HOA has had to constantly send them letters to clean gutters, maintain landscaping, fix rotten wood, and pick up trash after parties. They are perfectly wonderful, intelligent people, but maintaining a nice home just does not seem to occur to them.

Dunno where you live...but the local community group has to send that letter mostly to the whites where I live:creep: Homes that are privately owned (not rented or leased) are well maintained as are the yards and landscaping. Even the rentals have to at least keep yards mowed and do maintenance on the house (exterior painting, roofing, etc.)


This particular cultural trait[...]

Cultural trait, you say? When I lived in Upstate NY, the term "trailer trash" brings back memories of rat-infested, broken down homes where people kicked their trash out the back door along with appliances that no longer worked; had their own little auto junkyard on the property along with small mountains of old tires; didn't have a single speck of paint on their entire home; and never, ever kept the yard mowed.....and not a single one of these places was occupied by a black person, or any other non-Caucasian.


Living in a majority-black community gives one a completely different perspective on the much decried 'white flight' and the proliferation of HOAs and gated communities.


I have noticed throughout the country, anecdotally of course,

In other words, you don't actually have first-hand experience, so please do tell exactly what this 'different perspective' is:inquisitive:

[Fragony]

Lol... neighborhoods that tell you what to do? That's absurd.

I understand it on a military post, but that's about it.

If yo really ignore your house or garden you will be reprimanded here as well, not just because of social-hygine but also because of the value of the houses surrounding it. If you don't care to do so the government will do it for you and send you the bill.

[HoreTore]

Lol... neighborhoods that tell you what to do? That's absurd.

I understand it on a military post, but that's about it.

Hi GC. Allow me to introduce you to my good friend, Communism. He's European.

[Andres]

Hi GC. Allow me to introduce you to my good friend, Communism. He's European.

I'd call him civilisation.

I very much prefer a neighbourhood where somebody tells people to mow their lawn, keep their trees under control and not to dump their junk in their front- or backyard over a "free" neighbourhood that looks like a "dump yard meets wilderness".

[Andres]

Home ownership is one factor that seems to hold blacks down in the US. They do not seem to understand and/or care about the importance of home maintenance and how that is linked to property value. I have noticed throughout the country, anecdotally of course, that black people tend to treat home purchases like car purchases: they buy them, use them until they start to break down, and then sell them for whatever they can get. It doesn't seem to matter where you are geographically or what income level a particular neighborhood is, there just do not seem to be a lot of blacks replacing roofs or updating kitchens. I live in a gated community with nice homes and a higher income profile. A black family moved in a few years ago; both parents are doctors. The HOA has had to constantly send them letters to clean gutters, maintain landscaping, fix rotten wood, and pick up trash after parties. They are perfectly wonderful, intelligent people, but maintaining a nice home just does not seem to occur to them.


My neighbours are white. A couple with two kids who both go to university. Very nice and friendly people, but their garden looks like a wilderness. They hardly mow their lawn and in fact, they only do it when I think it's getting a bit too much and complain. They are very friendly, apologise, and do it. Their house looks like it needs renovation. For 4 years now, they tell me they're going to work on it; so far, I haven't seen any movement.

My other neighbour was busy renovating, but then he fell into a depression. The house was half done and didn't even have windows. Eventually, it was sold to somebody else who did the job in a few months.

All white people.

When my parents' neighbours died, their children tried renting out the house. A white older couple moved in. Within a year, the garden was transformed into a junk yard. We threatened to sue them and the owners and eventually it was sold to decent people. Both the older couple and the decent people are white.

All of this is anecdotical of course. I don't want to give the impression that I believe that there is something in white genes or culture that makes half of them preferring to live in a ruin with junk yard or wilderness.

EDIT: jobwise, I have seen many, many interiors of houses in all kinds of neighbourhoods and I can tell you, with my hand on my heart, that in my experience, the dirtiest people are white. Even some, allthough rare, of those of the higher middle class and upper class live in circumstances you can't even imagine. I've also seen poor people living in simple, modest, but clean and well maintained houses. Anecdotical, I know.

[Fragony]

I'd call him civilisation.

I very much prefer a neighbourhood where somebody tells people to mow their lawn, keep their trees under control and not to dump their junk in their front- or backyard over a "free" neighbourhood that looks like a "dump yard meets wilderness".

I have a collective insurance with my neighbours, works fine. If something needs a paintjob or cleaning it has already been payed for. Houses here are old so it's really needed.

[Andres]

To put it short: **** yeah, I would claim Asians are more developed in the cognitive field compared to their white counterparts.

I have a problem with blacks because many nations, mine included, WANT them to be as good - and bend over in every which way to make facts vanish.

So, Kadagar_AV, do you consider blacks human or are they another species, in your opinion?

And how exactly do you want those many nations, including yours, treat the blacks then, given that you are not satisfied with how they are treated now?

It's one thing to say you're not satisfied with something, it's a whole different thing to explain to us what the Kadagar way would be. I'm all ears.

[spankythehippo]

It's the case of Nature vs Nurture. Nurture wins, in this case. Every single black guy I know is incredibly smart. Why? Because they grew up with discipline. Granted, this is Australia, so black people generally don't have an aggressive hoity-toitiness, tough-as-nails attitude.

The equivalent of the black "thugs" of America is Australia are the "lebos" i.e. Lebanese. Every single Lebanese person I've met who isn't a "Lebo" are quite astute and intelligent. The "lebos" on the other hand, borderline illiterate. Once again, Nurture not Nature.

If I were chucked into the Kalahari, I wouldn't survive. But the bushmen (who are black, duh) will. Judging a race based on their "success" in a western based society is completely and utterly stupid. Why are all the 100m sprints in the Olympics predominantly done by black people? They're physically stronger than your average puny white guy. In a way, they are far from failing, they are a success.

If your argument as to why a race is failing is because of their lack of achievements on a western scale, then I highly doubt you are the epitome of "success". Who knows? Maybe the Africans would have dominated the world if they lived in a resource rich and a not-so-hostile environment?

As much as I hate to say yolo, it's true, you only live once. Don't waste your life hating other denominations of people.

I see no difference between you and this guy, except your subject of hatred.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ha7smLPz2GY

The OP was so riddled with stupid, I was almost knocked unconscious.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Maybe the Africans would have dominated the world if they lived in a resource rich and a not-so-hostile environment?

In many ways being resource rich has been Africa's greatest curse, look at the Congo for an example of that.

Africa was more developed in pre-colonial times than people realise. What allowed Europe to dominate the world was the sort of things you wouldn't expect - the Black Death for example played a big role in breaking up the stagnation of the old feudal order and allowing for social mobility and entrepreneurship.

[Fragony]

In many ways being resource rich has been Africa's greatest curse, look at the Congo for an example of that.

Africa was more developed in pre-colonial times than people realise. What allowed Europe to dominate the world was the sort of things you wouldn't expect - the Black Death for example played a big role in breaking up the stagnation of the old feudal order and allowing for social mobility and entrepreneurship.

More than a few would say it't the introduction of gunpowder that did that. What good is living in a fortification if it can be shot down. Some assume gunpowder was also the reason for the courtlife that emerged.

[HoreTore]

In many ways being resource rich has been Africa's greatest curse, look at the Congo for an example of that.

Africa was more developed in pre-colonial times than people realise. What allowed Europe to dominate the world was the sort of things you wouldn't expect - the Black Death for example played a big role in breaking up the stagnation of the old feudal order and allowing for social mobility and entrepreneurship.

There's the argument that we don't need to explain Africa - what we need to explain is the last 500 years in Europe. "The west" is the exception and in need of explanation, while "the rest" represent a natural human way of living.

And in discussions like these, we have a tendency to forget that the wealthiest country in Europe had a massive famine which toppled the government and instituted a reign of terror just 200 years ago, when it was at the height of its power.

Also, technological innovation does not occur when you're rich; innovation occurs when the rope is around your neck and you desperately need to come up with something to survive.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Home ownership is one factor that seems to hold blacks down in the US. They do not seem to understand and/or care about the importance of home maintenance and how that is linked to property value. I have noticed throughout the country, anecdotally of course, that black people tend to treat home purchases like car purchases: they buy them, use them until they start to break down, and then sell them for whatever they can get. It doesn't seem to matter where you are geographically or what income level a particular neighborhood is, there just do not seem to be a lot of blacks replacing roofs or updating kitchens. I live in a gated community with nice homes and a higher income profile. A black family moved in a few years ago; both parents are doctors. The HOA has had to constantly send them letters to clean gutters, maintain landscaping, fix rotten wood, and pick up trash after parties. They are perfectly wonderful, intelligent people, but maintaining a nice home just does not seem to occur to them.

This particular cultural trait is especially damaging in a society in which most wealth in the middle/upper middle class is tied up in home ownership. Instead of one's biggest expense being put towards an (at least theoretically) appreciating asset, it just gets thrown down the same rat hole car payments and other expenses associated with disposable consumer products go with no hope of recovering any of it. Instead of building multi-generational wealth that can be parlayed into other ventures, blacks are relegated to chasing monthly payments and living paycheck to paycheck. Living in a majority-black community gives one a completely different perspective on the much decried 'white flight' and the proliferation of HOAs and gated communities. Nobody wants to live in a trash heap. I've seen high income white neighborhoods turn in mere years. They will pay the price of entry, but they just don't think far enough ahead to keep things nice.

At the time I was an agent up in Virginia, both of my immediate neighbors were of African descent. One neighbor was a nice guy, but his front mulch beds were a festival of weeds, he was always behind the curve on mowing, and his self-built backyard fence was both a travesty of engineering and aesthetically repulsive. He also had the only neighborhood dog that bit the kids in the neighborhood and neither got rid of it nor got it trained. On the other side of the house, the yard was neat and clean, the place was kept up and the only time they fell behind on the lawn was when he was deployed to Iraq -- so I mowed it. Two neighbors, both of the same "race," both personable, but both living very different lives. I do concur with you that the maintenance thing is more important than most realize. Christopher Nuttall's books gave me a new perspective on its value, so now I am more assiduous with my HVAC filters, garage door batteries and the like. Still hate weeding though.

Gelcube:

Not sure about the Peoples Republic of Eugene where you are, but east of the Appalachians most states and commonwealths have passed laws requiring new property development (particularly sub divisions) to have an HOA with some form of overwatch authority. It is surprisingly difficult to NOT live under the auspices of a homeowner's association with its concomitant attenuation of individual property rights -- the older neighborhoods that don't have such HOAs are still there, but often involve buying a property with a significantly older physical plant, higher maintenance costs, etc. Any of the new development stuff is HOA'd from the get-go.

[ReluctantSamurai]

Lol... neighborhoods that tell you what to do? That's absurd.

Not if you are a homeowner. Why?


also because of the value of the houses surrounding it.

The community doesn't actually have any legal powers, so notices sent can be ignored if the homeowner wishes. But....eventually the local municipal government will be notified, and said owner gets a fine for every day the violation persists.

Such community organizations are one (not the only, by any means) of the reasons for young, educated people buying homes in the city and creating a sort of exodus back into cities.

[Ironside]

There's the argument that we don't need to explain Africa - what we need to explain is the last 500 years in Europe. "The west" is the exception and in need of explanation, while "the rest" represent a natural human way of living.

And in discussions like these, we have a tendency to forget that the wealthiest country in Europe had a massive famine which toppled the government and instituted a reign of terror just 200 years ago, when it was at the height of its power.

Also, technological innovation does not occur when you're rich; innovation occurs when the rope is around your neck and you desperately need to come up with something to survive.

Nah, innovation isn't that low. The upper class are poor innovators though, I agree with that (they're busy keeping what they alrady got). Innovators needs the education, ideas and means to proceed.

Early China was also quite innovative, before they started to completly loose themselves in the traditions thinking.

Early European global success was based on shipbuilding as well. Having good ships with superior cannons, capable of destroying the ports are very good negotiation tools, if you're a poor barbarian who doesn't have much useful stuff to offer.

[Montmorency]

Also, technological innovation does not occur when you're rich; innovation occurs when the rope is around your neck and you desperately need to come up with something to survive.

And from another angle, that certainly goes a ways to 'explain the underdevelopment' of non-European peoples...

As for Europe in general, it's the idea of manifold small-state rivalries leading to the consolidation of political power to increase military size and efficiency, and then technological change and mass-mobilization leading to an advantage for the countries that were both richest and had the option of conscripting a populous citizenry on a large scale. For technology and economic development in Europe: elements of the Protestant Reformation create new emphasis on enterprise and experimental hard-science, and quickly influence the rest of Europe to follow suit. I'm confident that this is a good outline for European development.

***

Panzer introduces an important point: for whites, home values and business assets represent a larger share of individual wealth than for blacks.

However, it is not fair to blame blacks for 'being slovenly' - the fact is, minorities tend to congregate, and wherever minorities congregate home values magically drop on a linear scale. Rich white neighborhoods have higher property values than similarly-rich minority or mixed neighborhoods, and poor white neighborhoods tend to have higher property values than similarly-poor minority or mixed neighborhoods. There is clearly a racial component here, especially when you consider the reverse: when whites move into majority-minority or mixed neighborhoods, their home values tend to drop as well. And it's certainly not the case that all the neighborhoods in question are just :daisy: places, as that is controlled for in addition to homeowner income in neighborhoods. The clincher: blacks who move into neighborhoods where the vast majority is white get similar value-appreciation to whites - as long as they remain an unnoticeable proportion of the neighborhood demographics.

So I don't accept the notion that blacks across the board have some sort of cultural spur that leads them to mistreat property, and that this is the overwhelming cause of low black-owned-property value.

A third factor in wealth is participation in the stock market, and that actually is one place where blacks across the income-spectrum are underrepresented compared to whites: blacks just don't invest in the financial sector very much. I'll leave you to discover some cultural fault behind this.

[HoreTore]

And from another angle, that certainly goes a ways to 'explain the underdevelopment' of non-European peoples...

As for Europe in general, it's the idea of manifold small-state rivalries leading to the consolidation of political power to increase military size and efficiency, and then technological change and mass-mobilization leading to an advantage for the countries that were both richest and had the option of conscripting a populous citizenry on a large scale. For technology and economic development in Europe: elements of the Protestant Reformation create new emphasis on enterprise and experimental hard-science, and quickly influence the rest of Europe to follow suit. I'm confident that this is a good outline for European development.

I'm not entirely on-board with the "competitive states"-model for European development, especially since it's usually contrasted with a supposed unified Chinese Empire, which then seems to be falsified by the many, many periods of Chinese fragmentation.

That model for development also seems to be falsified by the development during the Islamic Golden Age.


And yes, I will leave my counters without offering an argument of my own. This is simply because I haven't found a good argument to explain Europe yet(though I suspect it's a combination of several of the factors already presented, as it usually is).

[Montmorency]

I'm not entirely on-board with the "competitive states"-model for European development, especially since it's usually contrasted with a supposed unified Chinese Empire, which then seems to be falsified by the many, many periods of Chinese fragmentation.

Then again, China spent many periods relatively unified. After Rome (which didn't represent a unified Europe anyway), Europe has never been unified.

[Beskar]

Technology stagnated during the Roman Period anyway. A lot of the innovation came from the expansion and the assimilation of new technology from their new subjects. Naval technology especially stagnated due to no desires or need to tackle the challenges of the North Sea and the Atlantic.

It is a combination of:
Rivalry/Obstacles - New technology and methods to counter rivals technology and methods. The need to develop to overcome a certain obstacle or goal.
Assimilation/Cooperation - Bringing together ideas, results and experiments, finding practical uses of technology to be used for different purposes, such aerospace technology bringing brought over for use in medical technology, something BAE systems did which resulted in a few medical breakthroughs.
Innovative Ideology - The strive for better, stronger, faster, going against tradition and previous thoughts on issues to do the unknown. Defying religious taboos and going against the grain of the 'old guard' elements of society.

In many ways, it is the combination and influences of these opposites clashing together which produce the greater yields.

[HoreTore]

Innovation stalled during the Empire?

The Roman Empire itself was an innovation. Previous(and many later) empires had relied on complex systems of local chiefs and allegiances. Rome had an actual state control presence throughout the lands through successive leadership changes. That in itself is a major innovation, and the state systems required to keep it going even more so.

As for rivalry, it was only when the number of European states started to drop that we saw an innovative drive in Europe again. When the rivalry in Europe was at its fiercest, the dark ages/early med, we saw little progress. Innovation also occurred when puritanism was all the rage, and the catholic church pales in comparison to that.

[ReluctantSamurai]

I truly had no idea that having your own habitat dictated to you was an acceptable thing. Screw that.

That is perhaps too extreme. Most of what neighborhood organizations try to do is maintain some sort of standard level of appearance that helps keep property values up (as far as appearances can affect that). Overgrown jungles are certainly a no-no; junk vehicles is another; trash and other debris must be taken care of...things like that. Would you want to live next to someone who lets their grass get a foot high, has a junk car parked in front, or has a dog that barks incessantly all night, and leaves bags of garbage lying about the property? I would think not:shrug:

Noone tells you what color to paint your house, or what types of vegetation you can use for landscaping, or anything else that pertains to personal taste (at least in my community). I'm a country boy from way back and if I want to walk out on my back porch and take a whizz while staring up into the starry night sky, I can always move back there~;)

[Montmorency]

I've always lived in Apartments. I can understand periodic inspections if you're renting, but if you own your own house? My yard would look like jumanji just to make a point.

If it's the kind of neighborhood in which houses are basically lined up side-by-side, then it should absolutely be a requirement to suitably maintain the exterior.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I've always lived in Apartments. I can understand periodic inspections if you're renting, but if you own your own house? My yard would look like jumanji just to make a point.

County and state ordinances require most of the properties to have HOAs. You are not permitted to purchase the property unless/until you sign your willingness to comply with the HOA regulations and grant them authority to enforce same. All nice and legal. Jumanji-style would get you fined and, as the fines grew, would allow them to take your property to offset the liens.

[ReluctantSamurai]

I've always lived in Apartments.

This is why you don't understand, IMO. If you had just plunked down a hefty five-figure downpayment for a nice home, and will be spending a large chunk of your income paying for and maintaining it, you would certainly be in favor of having some way of insuring that investment against folks who could care less what kind of pig sty they live in, which ultimately drives down the value of your home.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

That's just silly. And you people wonder why upward mobility seems constrained? The "middle class" puts on airs. Why would anyone who didn't grow up in such a lock step situation want to move into a neighborhood like that?

I said that there were functionally few choices for a neighborhood NOT covered by an HOA -- not that I was a big fan. Some of the HOA groups are more than a little draconian.

'Samurai in #78 above is giving the classic riposte. HOAs became more common beginning in the 1960s when the "old values" seemed to have been swept aside and neighbors would leave their own property an eye-sore and thereby damage your property's value. Some of that may be the typically halcyon lenses people apply to "the way things were," but Samurai is exactly on target as to what is prompting the trend.

Local government loves it because it leaves the citizens paying the cost of enforcing property standards without any government funds being allocated. Moreover, the local governments, most of whom get significant revenue from the property value via property tax, are the only one's reaping an ongoing benefit from the HOA. The homeowner only reaps the benefit when they sell.....

[Montmorency]

The overlooked problem is of allowing one's property to become a welcoming home for all sorts of undesirable creatures. When properties are lined up side-by-side, the spillover threat is very real.

Of course, that says nothing about the effect on public property (i.e. sidewalks).

All I'm saying is, nobody wants a raccoon jumping out at them from 5-ft grasses, and pity the postman who has to deliver through a lawn like that should there be no stone/concrete path.

[Papewaio]

Because my mortgage was less then renting and I also had the home go up in value.

Other reasons:
No real estate house inspections.
Don't get kicked out so the landlord can put up the rent.
Can put up posters, hang pictures, paint the walls.

=][=
So anyone read Guns, Germs and Steel? Used to be the Backrooms go to book...

[Husar]

First world problems. :shrug:

Home ownership all seems like a big ripoff to me. Even should I find myself wealthy, why would I not just rent a cheap apartment in an urban area? Its a transparent social engineering tool to make the debtor-class feel beholden to and invested in the concept of upward mobility.

Property value is relatively stable and somewhat immune against inflation and so on.

[spankythehippo]

First world problems. :shrug:

Home ownership all seems like a big ripoff to me. Even should I find myself wealthy, why would I not just rent a cheap apartment in an urban area? Its a transparent social engineering tool to make the debtor-class feel beholden to and invested in the concept of upward mobility.

Yeah, I understand where you're coming from. I'd much rather live in an apartment than a house (which is what I currently reside in). Having to maintain the exterior is annoying. I'd prefer to have a wilderness as my front lawn. At least it would be unique.

[Montmorency]

Are you kidding? A house is much better.

You can do all sorts of things in the cellar...

[Beskar]

I would like to own my own home, because then the landlord cannot say "Times up, get out of here!".

Also, you can design your home to your tastes, opposed to being forced to live in a specific formation with certain wallpapers and what not.

[Fragony]

First world problems. :shrug:

Home ownership all seems like a big ripoff to me. Even should I find myself wealthy, why would I not just rent a cheap apartment in an urban area? Its a transparent social engineering tool to make the debtor-class feel beholden to and invested in the concept of upward mobility.

Not if you pay it off as fast as you can, all I pay now is electricity and water. I pay 70 euro a month for an appartment that would cost over a thousand if I hired it.

[ReluctantSamurai]

I guess maybe a sense of communal conformity and security (real or imagined) plus the potential (however rarely realized) to make a profit as opposed to just paying rent down a black hole

My HOA is very active in the community and sponsors all kinds of social activities for the folks living here to do. There are gatherings (in some ways a lot like the old fashioned barn raisings of yesteryear) to help those too infirm or elderly to do all those exterior maintenance projects. Someone invariably cooks, and it turns into a neat way to meet neighbors I wouldn't ordinarily even see.

If you are of the handyman or contractor type, you can make potentially a lot of money by buying homes that need work, doing the repairs and upgrades, and then selling at a profit. And you have a place to live, in the process. Renting is, indeed, a black hole for your hard-earned cash, IMO.


I suggest that most middle class homeowners are the butt of our socio-economic joke.

That certainly can happen if you bite off payments far in excess of what you can chew. There are certain guidelines (rules, if you will) to smart buying. Do your homework for "comparables" (values of homes like the one you are looking at) in the area; know what you can afford to buy the house for, what you can afford to put into it in the way of improvements, and pick the location very carefully. I've owned several homes in my time, and made very good money on each of them at resale time....

[Seamus Fermanagh]

Buying real estate may not, for you, make much of a difference when compared to renting. It is, however, a time-honored means of developing wealth for one's family -- especially if the recipe is buy and hold.

Manhattan Island, for example, is owned by 13 families, some of whom can point to original purchases when it was Nieuw Amsterdam.

[spankythehippo]

Are you kidding? A house is much better.

You can do all sorts of things in the cellar...

I don't think many houses in Aus have cellars. It would be cool to have one, though.

[AntiDamascus]

Lots of place don't have them because the ground isn't good for them. And I think we've completely derailed.

[spankythehippo]

Lots of place don't have them because the ground isn't good for them. And I think we've completely derailed.

In the case of this thread, that's a good thing. Let's stay away from racial discrimination as much as possible.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

I think I hear the faint rhythm of a dancing lock as it approaches this fair thread.....

[rajpoot]

I think I hear the faint rhythm of a dancing lock as it approaches this fair thread.....

I for one would miss this thread. Certainly one of the more entertaining threads I've been following lately.

[Montmorency]

Speaking of entertainment:


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZPBLpzWd_p4

[AntiDamascus]

That's..... I'm not sure I even want to click on that.

[Beskar]

Innovation stalled during the Empire?

Yes. A lot of technology stagnated a lot (like Naval, for example) and other technology was lost to the annals of History, only to reappear hundreds of years later. Even concepts such as central heating, fast-food or even Roman cement. Even then, you are mostly referring to both the Golden Era and the Silver Era of the Roman Empire, not the decline.


As for rivalry, it was only when the number of European states started to drop that we saw an innovative drive in Europe again. When the rivalry in Europe was at its fiercest, the dark ages/early med, we saw little progress. Innovation also occurred when puritanism was all the rage, and the catholic church pales in comparison to that.

Yet, you missed out in my post "Assimilation/Cooperation" so whilst you are trying to rebuff what I said, you are in fact further reinforcing what I am saying. So I am not actually understanding your objection by pointing out to a period of virtual anarchy in some cases where there was next to no cooperation, then point out that later on, there were greater degrees of cooperation and stability, things improved. It is exactly what I was referring to.


In fact, what I am saying ends performing the basis of modern technological innovation. The concept of cooperation and rivalry, the intermingle of arguments and debates in scientific journals as not only do people read and learn from each others research, they also attempt to disprove the hypothesis, look for alternative hypothesis, expand on hypothesis... It is in operation in places like CERN as we speak. This is what I mean by generalities of rivalry and cooperation as examples.

[HoreTore]

Even then, you are mostly referring to both the Golden Era and the Silver Era of the Roman Empire, not the decline.

I was indeed referring to the Republic and the first century or so after Caesar. I have a tendency to forget the last 500 years of the Romans ever existed...

[Beskar]

I was indeed referring to the Republic and the first century or so after Caesar. I have a tendency to forget the last 500 years of the Romans ever existed...

You are correct during that point there was great innovation and advancement. Rome did a good job of assimilating a lot of the best elements from her enemies.

I will give you a interesting piece of information. Did you know that since the Moon landings, Nasa has lost technology ? As you know, there was a great rush and rivalry against the Russians, they rushed so much, they didn't actually write down what everything did and conducted very sloppy record keeping. Since there is talk and agenda for a landing sometime on Mars, they went back to the old documents as research and found the situation so bad, they decided to reverse engineer the Gemini and Apollo systems to work out what they might have functioned as and found some of the computers are that old, no one knows how to access the data on them.

[Noncommunist]

I was indeed referring to the Republic and the first century or so after Caesar. I have a tendency to forget the last 500 years of the Romans ever existed...

What about the other millennium of Roman history after those 500 years?

[Rhyfelwyr]

I want to know why you think Arabs do well in the USA but not Europe. Why Koreans do well in the USA but not Japan. Why the Irish do well in the USA but not Scotland. Why Nigerians do well in the USA while other blacks do not.

I still waiting for Kad's response to this.

[Andres]

I still waiting for Kad's response to this.


He's probably busy mowing his lawn and cleaning the junk in his garden after receiving a nasty letter from his HOA... :balloon2:

[ReluctantSamurai]

~D:bounce:~D

[Kadagar_AV]

I'll reply Rhyf, will also reply to the rest (was a good question about what we should do about it IF it was true I'd like to respond to as well).

Not here though, as we seem derailed.

Mods can close this thread.