Why are whites five times richer than blacks?

[Cyclone]

Because it is always infered that the white people were solely to blame for the ***** slave trade.

 

You're not exactly straw manning, the point you are furiously arguing is true. It's just not relevant to the earlier point that you were trying to refute. A case of misdirection perhaps.

[Cyclone]

It is important to understand that the article/report referred to in the original post is not about earnings.

 

It is about the aquisition of assets other than the home dwelling.

... and it is comparing the "wealth" built up by blacks and whites that have similar incomes.

 

i.e. what people do with the money they earn and how they can access other ways to increase their "wealth".

 

This is quite a key point though, why is it being ignored amidst the noise about who captured slaves?

[truconstruct]

Apologies, what I meant was reparations began 50 years ago.

 

Slavery was off the books, but black people were still slaves to the prejudices of society and its pay masters.

 

No problem, I think though its good to keep on target so to speak.

 

Personaly I think the subject is somewhat blured in the USA because you can't say that its just the blacks who didn't have anything to inherit after the civil war, I think you'll find all the whites were were robbed of their good and chatle so started from the same stand point also.

 

I note as well that the PC brigade totaly ignoored my quote from wicki that stated the IQ of blacks is less than that of whites (on average 17 points less) which I belive is probably the most significant factor here.

[truconstruct]

Probably because it has long been proven that the generic IQ test is an inaccurate method of telling how intelligent someone is.

 

IQ tests are tests of abilities, not intelligence, and if someone has had a lower standard of education their abilities will be lower. So the reason they have a lower IQ score is because they are unable to purchase the same standard of education as their white counterparts, for the reasons already explained.

 

Rubbish.

 

How many people go to public or state shcools in the USA verses private schools?

 

Show me some figures to back up what you're saying.

[truconstruct]

You might also take note that in the same article I quoted asians score better than whites.

 

What's the percentage of asians who go to 'paid' education verses whites?

[Cyclone]

Rubbish.

 

How many people go to public or state shcools in the USA verses private schools?

 

Show me some figures to back up what you're saying.

 

How can figures show you that an IQ test is culturally biased? It is widely accepted that it is. It's also possible to train for it, which pretty much proves that it isn't a test of some sort of inherent ability.

 

I'm not sure about your 17 points quote either, I remember reading the original papers that showed the differences in average IQ scored by race. Maybe I'm mis remembering, but I think it was more in the region of about a 5 point variance when comparing people of different races but similar societal backgrounds (ie blacks in the US with whites and asians in the US).

[donkey]

You might also take note that in the same article I quoted asians score better than whites.

 

What's the percentage of asians who go to 'paid' education verses whites?

 

Average IQs among all races have shown an unrelenting rise since the test was invented. There is also growing evidence that the average IQ gap between blacks and whites in the USA is now closing.

http://reason.com/archives/2006/12/01/closing-the-black-white-iq-gap/1

This gives a strong indication that the IQ test is more effected by cultural and environmental circumstances, than genetic/evolutionary factors.

[1ofTheseDays]

I think you'll find they were first taken 'prisoner' by some other BLACK tribe, sold to MUSLIM slave traders and then sold to a 'slave trade captain'.

 

The kids wont be told this in "Black History Month"

[truconstruct]

How can figures show you that an IQ test is culturally biased? It is widely accepted that it is. It's also possible to train for it, which pretty much proves that it isn't a test of some sort of inherent ability.

 

I'm not sure about your 17 points quote either, I remember reading the original papers that showed the differences in average IQ scored by race. Maybe I'm mis remembering, but I think it was more in the region of about a 5 point variance when comparing people of different races but similar societal backgrounds (ie blacks in the US with whites and asians in the US).

 

"It is widely accepted" By whome?

 

The gap is 17, you must have missed it, it is 5 between whites and asians though.

[purdyamos]

You might also take note that in the same article I quoted asians score better than whites.

 

What's the percentage of asians who go to 'paid' education verses whites?

 

One real difference that has been noticed between the population groups is not one of genetics, or even financial standing alone, but of cultural expectation. East Asian families regard education and learning extremely highly so children are immersed in a home life that encourages curiosity and hard work in furthering mental capacities. Wealthy white families are also keen for their children to succeed, but it's less intense (or it used to be). Poor black populations tend to have much lower expectations and sometimes, unfortunately, doing well at school has been frowned on as being 'white' behaviour with derogatory terms like Coconut and Bounty Bar. Having said that, poor white populations have a similar anti-education prejudice only it's based on class. Children are discouraged from developing their talents and intellect because it's seen as 'middle class' which is presented as something the child must avoid if they want to be considered acceptable.

 

A lot of the differences between racial groups are actually more about class than race. The difference between how well Indian and Pakistani children have done in this country is a perfect example of that, the two migrant groups tending to be from different social rungs but from the same continental gene pool. It also can't be underestimated how important the impact of the mother's education is in the formative years. Many women from some communities have had no education at all and are illiterate, which makes for a meagre foundation. So I would say the financial underpinnings are important but so are the expectations and levels of encouragement, and the two factors probably reinforce each other into an ongoing self fulfilling prophecy.

 

In Freakonomics, the raw data suggested that it wasn't just money that was the deciding factor, but how many books were in the household the child grew up in. Poorer kids who grow up around books still have a head start just in terms of a sense of potential and interest in learning