The Family: Socioeconomics vs IQ – The Bell Curve

The election, work and a jammed family schedule have impacted not only the amount of recent blogging but the subject matter as well.  It’s been over a month since my last installment of the impact of IQ on the conditions of all of us.

The Impact of IQ on Family Matters

I’ve gone over subjects such as poverty, education and employment.  I’ve taken an approach that first shows the impact of the socioeconomic status of the folks involved; sometimes the parents or family and sometimes the individual himself.  Then I’ve come back to show what the circumstances look like when the population has been described in terms of IQ.  So far, to me, the differences are stunning.

Today I look to continue this by checking out the family.

Marriage

Because of the massive positive impact that being married has on society, it’s important to track who is getting married, when and why.  Earlier I showed a chart that described the state of folks at 30.  And because of the natural tendency of education to suppress marriage, both high school only and college graduates were displayed.  The chart below now includes taking IQ into account:

Most likely due to the fact that college is highly tracked to IQ, the differences don’t really matter.  But looking at the IQ of individuals without college education the impact i s large.  Of those with average IQs, 80% are married by 30.  Compare this with those of very low cognitive ability and their rate of 60%.

As I mentioned before, if marriage is important, then so is divorce.  And what does the comparison show?  Look:

The trends are interesting.  As individuals become wealthier, they are more likely to end their marriages in divorce.  But in a completely opposite way and manner, as the IQ of the folks increases, their likelihood of divorce decreases.

The subject of marriage is important because of the impact to the lives of the children of those families.  Because of this importance, it is required to look at the circumstances of birth.  Specifically illegitimate births.

The data are clear.  While the impact of the SES status is important, the top to bottom difference is 10 points, the impact of the IQ is even higher.  Where SES can show a 2 to 1 ratio, IQ shows a 7 to 1 ratio.

The last comparison is that of illegitimate births to white women already below the poverty line.  The data shows that as SES status increases so does the probability that a child is born out of wedlock.  If we include IQ?

Massive.

In perhaps the most glaring demonstration of the impact of IQ, this metric shows that women with higher cognitive ability avoid births out of wedlock at remarkable levels while women with lower cognitive ability are much less likely to avoid this condition.

In each of the 4 comparisons, IQ is shown to have a positive impact on the favorable conditions expected.  In some cases moderate, in others dramatic.

Next up – we look at the impact of IQ compared to SES and welfare.

President Obama, There You Go Again

As if it wasn’t bad enough that Obama lied his way through 3 debates, he’s out on the trail today and has been caught in another “whopper.”

Referencing Romney’s opposition to the auto bailout, Obama continued, “If you say you love American cars during a debate, but you wrote an article titled ‘Let Detroit Go Bankrupt’ — you may have Romnesia.”

Not only does Obama “forget to mention” that his plan eventually resulted in the bankruptcy of Detroit he fails to mention that Romney advocated federal assistance in that article.  The only thing that Romney objected to was the bailout; a view that in hindsight is 100% accurate.

And let’s not forget to mention that the sole beneficiary of that bailout was Obama’s union friends.

Obamnesia to be sure.

I’ve Said It Before … Obama Is A Liar

Incredibly I watched the whole debate last night.  I’m a well documented junkie now, but last night’s sleeper was just about as much as I could take.

90 minutes of boredom.  But there were some really good moments:

The first such moment is when Obama accused Romney of wanting to liquidate the auto industry.  By taking the position that the companies should have been brought through bankruptcy.  Obama said that Romney didn’t support Federal assistance.  Clearly he did.

There are more.  My next favorite is when Obama stood there, actually sat there, and said point blank that he did not support leaving troops in Iraq after the end of major conflict there.  Of COURSE Obama support that.  The condition is called Status of Forces.  And the President put Joe Biden in charge of securing it.  The fact that Joltin’ Joe couldn’t seal te deal doesn’t change the fact that Obama supported it.

On the subject of education Romney worked hard to demonstrate his state’s achievements while he was in office.  Romney mentioned the normal facts surrounding test scores, but then he moved into the “John and Abigail Adams Scholarships.”  Obama countered that fact by saying that had occurred before Romney came into office.

It’s hard to blame Obama.  He was defeated as soundly as any candidate in history during their first debate.  And last night it was Obama playing the role of challenger to Romney’s role champ.  Romney was simply playing defense and Obama was trying to … well, lie.

If Candy Crowley Were The Moderator

I’m CERTAIN she would have said, “Actually sir, it IS in there.  He did say that.”

Actually, I’m not certain she would have said that and I’m glad Bob didn’t.  But here is what Romney wrote in 2008:

The American auto industry is vital to our national interest as an employer and as a hub for manufacturing. A managed bankruptcy may be the only path to the fundamental restructuring the industry needs. It would permit the companies to shed excess labor, pension and real estate costs. The federal government should provide guarantees for post-bankruptcy financing and assure car buyers that their warranties are not at risk.

In a managed bankruptcy, the federal government would propel newly competitive and viable automakers, rather than seal their fate with a bailout check.

Obama took a lot of heat for not calling out Romney for his lies in the first debate.  I’m betting that those same people screaming for “lie free” debates are going to be relatively quiet about the fact that their Obama is a liar as well.

But that, I AM certain of.

Lilly Ledbetter And Fair Pay

During the second Presidential debate a question came up that spoke to equal pay for women in the work place.  Specifically the fact that women earn a fraction of what men earn.

In that back and forth, Mitt Romney mentioned that “they brought us whole binders of women…”

This has upset the left.  I suspect that this will play out like Big Bird.  But tonight I saw an interview of Ms. Ledbetter:

Watching the interview it struck me that she most likely deserved to get paid less than an average employee doing the same job that she performed.  Listen to her bullshit at 3:05:

It’s a fundamental American right to be paid and compensated …

It’s clear that this woman has no earthly clue about what she is talking about.  She is implying in her statement that pay and compensation must be equal independent of proficiency.  To be paid the same amount of another individual most certainly is NOT a fundamental American right.

Shifting Priorities

I’m a week late on this; it’s been in my stack for awhile and the latest polling numbers from Gallup and Real Clear Politics reminded me that I need to push this out the door:

Suffolk University pollster David Paleologos, whose polls are aggregated into mainstream averages to show where the presidential race stands in the swing states, said he’s finished polling in Florida, North Carolina and Virginia because President Obama has no shot of winning those states.

“I think in places like North Carolina, Virginia and Florida, we’ve already painted those red, we’re not polling any of those states again,” Paleologos said Tuesday night on Fox’s “The O’Reilly Factor.” “We’re focusing on the remaining states.”

To be sure, Suffolk isn’t a polling firm I’m familiar with and they may very well be wrong.  But when a guy is watching trends this is big.

An Extension Of And Then a Grabbing Of

That darn Mormon continues to pull ahead:

It would appear that the undecideds are deciding.  That, or the republicans that have been on the fence are gaining confidence and moving themselves from “Registered Voter” to “Likely Voter.”

And then the big news:

For the first time, Romney is now ahead in the Electoral Map.

To be sure, we have 20 odd days to go, a debate to digest and another yet to take place.  Much can, and will, happen between now and election day.

But momentum feels good right now.

The Candy Crawley Bias

Last night was the second of the three Presidential debates.  As I mentioned in last night’s post, Obama won, but only but a little.  And even that win will not likely change many minds.  Much work has yet to be done.

However, during the debate last night, I was struck by an intervention from the debate moderator; Candy Crowley.  More on that in a second.

I think we’d ALL love to see a debate where the candidates were in a place where they spoke through a microphone.  And that mic would go mute the second their time was up.  AND we’d like to see that debate take place where independent fact checkers could be identifying lies and false statements.

It would be grand.

But that debate didn’t take place last night.  It was more traditional, both in terms of live mics and in terms of truth stretching.  And while the moderator has a role in the former, she has NO role in the latter.  It is NOT the job of a moderator to fact check candidates.

Especially when the tide of the debate is at such a point as to determine a winner and a loser.

But that is exactly what Candy Crowley did last night.  She interrupted Romney when he had Obama so far in the ropes that the only thing the President could do was hold up his gloves and offer, “Continue…”

Why Crowley would perform in this manner is unbelievable.  And why she would do it during a time when the President was clearly being dominated is equally unbelievable.  And then, as if the critique of her couldn’t get worse – it does.

She was wrong, Romney was right.  And she admits it after the debate:

The President absolutely did NOT refer to Libya as terrorist attacks.  Not that day, not that night and certainly not for the next two weeks.  THAT is the whole point.  That is the issue at hand.

And Crowley rung the bell early and let the reigning champ get up and pushed the challenger back to his corner.

Obama won the debate to be sure, but Crowley lost it big time.

Who Won

I can’t know.

No one doubts that Obama had his ass handed to him in the first debate.  And I think that has been clouding everyone’s expectations for this one.

If Obama is anything at all Presidential he’ll do better than he did last time; which is “a win.”  However, winning means swaying voters.

Obama was much stronger than he was last time.  And Romney was much more, ahh, less CEO’ish than last time.  I think that adds up to an Obama win.  I think Obama gets it in a nod; 3-4 points.  But I said that about Biden too.

The real question – Did either win votes?

No.

Neither did well enough to sway independents.

 

UPDATE:

Both CNN and CBS have Obama by 7 points.  They are both calling it an “edge.”

I agree.  Obama did better largely on the fact that he didn’t suck as much as he did last time.  Neither sealed the deal.

Romney And Obama – Second Presidential Debate

Okay, kids are in bed and I’m in front of my TV getting ready to watch the debate.

There is no way, none, that Obama can do worse than he did in the first debate.  He’s simply too competitive and too skilled to allow that to happen again.  I’m not sure what happened that first time; I suspect that the theory that speaks to his never having been challenged to be the closest to accurate.  That failure will be addressed this time around.

The key for Romney:

Continue to demonstrate that he has better plans and that those plans will directly help the average American.

The key for Obama:

Take responsibility and appear Presidential.  This includes not passing blame AND presenting a plan.

We’ll see.

UPDATE #1

Right.  Obama is not voting “present” tonight.  He’s much stronger and is going toe to toe with the Governor.

Romney – First and Last, he didn’t answer the question as to how he’s going to get Jeremy a job.

Obama – Left himself open on two points: GM Bankruptcy and Green Energy job.  Romney tagged him on one and missed on the second.

UPDATE #2

Obama’s answers on energy are the same as the answers when he ran the first time 4 years ago.  And his insistence that he’s for fossil fuel energy just isn’t believable.

Romney delivered a body blow in his answer; permits are down and production is down; though he did mix his % between the two.

WOW!  I love the direct back and forth.  I didn’t see that coming.

Hmmm……Crowley gives Obama a third whack at the question and is talking down Romney.  Out of bounds but good on Romney to muscle ahead.  Obama doesn’t help his cause with comments from the sidelines.

UPDATE #3

GREAT question on asking Romney to speak to the deduction he might consider eliminating.

And Romney addressed the main point with his first statement, “I want lower taxes for the middle class.”  His second point is also a strong one.  He clarifies his position that the wealthiest Americans will continue to pay the same proportion of taxes that they’ve been paying in the past.

In his response, Obama draws on Romney’s “60 Minutes” interview and delivers a strong blow to Romney.   It’s hard to defend the claim that “it’s fair” for Romney to pay a lower rate than a bus driver.  [Though to be fair, the pay the same rates].

Obama goes off the rails on his follow up response.  No one thinks that Romney is going to reduce tax revenue by $5 trillion.  The defense spending might score a point, but then Obama comes back with the continuation of the Bush tax  cuts for the wealthy.  He’s double counting that.

But Obama does score big when he challenges Romney on the specifics.

Let’s how Romney plays Obama’s tactic of rolling out the critiques in the last follow up.

Good on Crowley; she gives Romney an extra go at it.  But then he makes a mistake; he mixes up deficits and debt.  Obama DID promise to cut the deficit in half when he took office.  But Romney then mentions the debt has doubled.

UPDATE #4

Oh you poor little misguided woman.  I’m going to skip the update on this one because women do NOT earn 72% of the wages their male peers make.

UPDATE #5

Romney, dude, this is right to you – “Shut the hell up about equal time.  You look petty and dumb.”

So, how is Romney different than Dubya?  Sigh.  Serious?

He answered the question well enough but what people wanna hear, the money shot, is that he won’t get us into two foreign wars.  Romney didn’t touch on that and the moment is lost.

UPDATE #6

The man asked a question about how Obama would help his situation.  Obama talked and then Romney talked.  Neither one answered the man; all they did was repeat talking points.

Blah.

This is the late rounds of a heavy weight bout.  No knock downs and the fighters are “defending” waiting for the last round or two.  Fantastically boring.

UPDATE #7

Is it just me or does MSNBC always show the time clock in Romney’s shots but NEVER in Obama’s?

UPDATE #8

Okay, there’s the clock behind Obama.

Immigration.  Little difference I suspect between the two.  However, Obama goofed on the Arizona law.  Police officers may NOT stop one because they look foreign.  Once stopped they may request papers…..

Romney is clearly not listening to me.  Stay on topic and leave the whole, “I need to answer the President” bit alone.

That being said, holy moly but I love it when they fight!

UPDATE #9

One hour and eight minutes in and we get Libya.

Finally.

Obama VERY strong on the first response to this question.

Obama, “We are gonna find out who did this and hunt them down.”  He even choked on that part he sounded so much like Dubya!

Incredible how you can tell when the candidate is reading the script and when he’s not.

All in all, I’m impressed with Obama’s response.  He took responsibility.

Jeepers Romney is weak on the response.  It’s as if he didn’t rehearse this response.

Oh for fuck’s sake.  Romney rambled on to include “apology tour.”

Obama’s answer to Libya has been powerful, Romney was unprepared for the canned answer and was schooled in the give and take.

Ooo.  Obama just lost the gain by being happy to move off the subject.  Reminder of debate #1.

For the record, I’ve read the transcript, the President does not describe the incident as a terrorist attack.  In fact the administration continually took the position that the attacks were spontaneous and a reaction to YouTube.

Obama is lying.

UPDATE #10

Okay, now I’m tired.

However, the question is outsourcing jobs.

Romney has an answer in two parts:

1.  America doesn’t make it attractive to hire here.  He’s right.

2.  He’s going to label China a currency manipulator and will impose tariffs.  He’s wrong.