IQ by nation

[Caveira]

13 minutes ago, fishbane said:

 I’m not sure what you are referring to.   You were the one that started the thread with the sweeping assertion that Somalis are “too ignorant to function independently in our society.”  
 

If you referring to the Flynn effect, Flynn’s initial work used actual US test results from 1932-1978 to calculate the increase in raw score increase rate of 3 points per decade over 4.5 decades.  That is significant.  I am sure the US IQ test data from 1932-present is higher quality and more comprehensive than whatever test data was used to calculate the national average IQ for Somalia you quoted.   

So why are 89% of them in federal assistance ?   There has got to be a reasonable explanation 

[fishbane]

2 hours ago, Caveira said:

So why are 89% of them in federal assistance ?   There has got to be a reasonable explanation 

There has to be an explanation, but it is likely more complex than "low IQ" or "lazy."  IQ could partially explain the low earnings of Somali immigrants.  A refugee from Somalia probably is only immediately qualified for low paying work.  Similarly if the average 25 year old American from 1900 were put in modern day Minnesota this individual with 4.1 years of education and an 11% chance of graduation high school would only be qualified to do low wage work.

As luchador pointed out national IQ test results are low across Sub-Saharan Africa.  Somalia is not an outlier in IQ test results in the region.  They aren't among the lowest.  Their IQ test results are right on the average for the region.  So this wouldn't seem to explain why the income of Somali immigrants in the US is among the lowest of African nations.  For example Ghanaian immigrants earn significantly more in the US, but the IQ estimates for Ghana are even lower than what Lucahador quote for Somalia.  So the national IQ estimates would appear to be a poor predictor of economic success.

I do not know why so many are on federal assistance, but I would caution taking some offhand comment by the president as fact.  All politicians are trash boss.

[Caveira]

7 minutes ago, fishbane said:

Similarly if the average 25 year old American from 1900 were put in modern day Minnesota this individual with 4.1 years of education and an 11% chance of graduation high school would only be qualified to do low wage work.

The avg intelligence debate 125 years ago is a distraction.   It’s irrelevant to the topic.   A country consciously importing large volumes of people who cannot support themselves will eventually consume the financial or other related resources of the Country.  It’s literally just a matter of time.    It’s a power grab get folks here to vote for your party.  Keep them poor and powerless.  But none the less…. Voting for you.  
 

 

Edited December 11, 2025 by Caveira

[mspart]

Just now, Caveira said:

The avg intelligence debate 125 years ago is a distraction.   It’s irrelevant to the topic.   A country consciously importing large volumes of people who cannot support themselves will eventually consume the financial or other related resources of the Country.  It’s literally a matter of time.    It’s a power grab get folks here to vote for your party.  Keep them poor and powerless.  But none the less…. Voting for you.  
 

The quote above in RED is objectively true.   The quote in PURPLE is an opinion I share but has not been shown to be objectively true.   I believe it is true but didn't quite work out with the Latino population.   But it has worked very well with the MN Somali population.   That is objectively true.  

mspart

[Caveira]

3 minutes ago, mspart said:

The quote above in RED is objectively true.   The quote in PURPLE is an opinion I share but has not been shown to be objectively true.   I believe it is true but didn't quite work out with the Latino population.   But it has worked very well with the MN Somali population.   That is objectively true.  

mspart

Ok.  Take the purple off.  I do believe it’s true but diff story.    With that said what’s the reasoning then behind mass migration of people who won’t assimilate.   Don’t wanna assimilate.   Won’t contribute.  And will be a forever financial burden.   It’s just bad business.   

Edited December 11, 2025 by Caveira

[fishbane]

2 hours ago, Caveira said:

The avg intelligence debate 125 years ago is a distraction.   It’s irrelevant to the topic.

The topic was the the IQ of Somalis compared with other countries and Lunchador tied it into immigration in the US by asserting "If we want to make America better, we should look at adding intelligence into the gene pool, not dependence."  That is the tie in are the scores on IQ tests determined by genetics or the environment.  If determined 100% by genetics then he would have a point.  If environment were more significant then adding dependence to the gene pool doesn't isn't really a thing.     

The Flynn effect is one of the main arguments that shows environmental impact to IQ test scores.  Genetics haven't changed much in a few generations but students in this country have scored better on IQ tests at a rate of +3 points/decade.  The difference has been attributed to educational improvements and environmental factors.  Looking environmental factors another way the average IQ score estimate for Sub-Saharan Africa is ~70 and the average African American student scores ~85 in this country.  Student of African descent in the UK score even higher.  This is likely caused by environmental differences. 

2 hours ago, Caveira said:

A country consciously importing large volumes of people who cannot support themselves will eventually consume the financial or other related resources of the Country.  It’s literally just a matter of time.  It’s a power grab get folks here to vote for your party.  Keep them poor and powerless.  But none the less…. Voting for you.  

Sure, but we aren't talking about that many people here.   Somalia was not in the top 80 countries of origin for immigration in 2023.  

Which party is doing the power grab?  Somali refugee arrivals where highest under the Bush administration.  Did the Republicans attempt a power grab 15-20 years ago, but it didn't work and now Trump wants them to leave, but can't do anything because nearly all of them are citizens? Did Biden attempt the power grab by letting in fewer Somali refugees in 3 years than Bush allowed in his most restrictive year?  I don't really see any plausible power grab at play by either party.

Edited December 11, 2025 by fishbane

[Caveira]

12 minutes ago, fishbane said:

The topic was the the IQ of Somalis compared with other countries and Lunchador tied it into immigration in the US by asserting "If we want to make America better, we should look at adding intelligence into the gene pool, not dependence."  That is the tie in are the scores on IQ tests determined by genetics or the environment.  If determined 100% by genetics then he would have a point.  If environment were more significant then adding dependence to the gene pool doesn't isn't really a thing.     

The Flynn effect is one of the main arguments that shows environmental impact to IQ test scores.  Genetics haven't changed much in a few generations but students in this country have scored better on IQ tests at a rate of +3 points/decade.  The difference has been attributed to educational improvements and environmental factors.  Looking environmental factors another way the average IQ score estimate for Sub-Saharan Africa is ~70 and the average African American student scores ~85 in this country.  Student of African descent in the UK score even higher.  This is likely caused by environmental differences. 

Sure, but we aren't talking about that many people here.   Somalia was not in the top 80 countries of origin for immigration in 2023.  

Which party is doing the power grab?  Somali refugee arrivals where highest under the Bush administration.  Did the Republicans attempt a power grab 15-20 years ago, but it didn't work and now Trump wants them to leave, but can't do anything because nearly all of them are citizens? Did Biden attempt the power grab by letting in fewer Somali refugees in 3 years than Bush allowed in his most restrictive year?  I don't really see any plausible power grab at play by either party.

No one likes commenting on why would a nation want to import a population that is 89% dependent on federal assistance.   Why is it not seen as bad overall for the country.    
 

not to mention electing reps that care more about Somalia than America.  

[JimmySpeaks]

Some people evolve faster than others.  It’s pretty simple. 

[fishbane]

7 minutes ago, Caveira said:

No one likes commenting on why would a nation want to import a population that is 89% dependent on federal assistance.   Why is it not seen as bad overall for the country.    
 

not to mention electing reps that care more about Somalia than America.  

As I said earlier I would caution against taking whatever number the president said the other day as fact - all politicians are trash, boss.  If you aren't referring to the President's comments, but rather referring to the 89% MSpart quoted earlier that was of households with children.  The percent of overall households receiving federal assistance was only 81%.   

The reality of having a refugee program in a country is that the refugees will require financial assistance.  Refugees arrive with very little...  They won't be on the Trump Gold Card program.  The median household net worth in Africa is a few thousand dollars and they might not be able to take much of that with them.  Regardless of the country of origin refugee households will require assistance.  Here is the result of the google AI summary for a search on the topic

"While specific data on refugee households versus all immigrant households varies, recent analysis (2022/2023) from the Center for Immigration Studies (CIS) indicates around 59% of non-citizen households (including refugees/immigrants) use major welfare programs, compared to 39% of U.S.-born, with high usage in food, Medicaid, and EITC, though refugees themselves might have lower direct usage due to eligibility rules and fear of status impact"

That says 59% of non-citizen households which includes households with both refugee and other immigrants.  The rate for refugee households might be higher than this number so 81% of Somali households isn't that high if the overall rate is somewhere north of 59%.  A refugee program will always be primarily a humanitarian effort, but data shows that refugees contribute in the long term.  Initially income levels are low with a median of ~$30,500 in years 0-5 but rise to meet the national average after 20+ years.

From Google AI

"Refugee incomes in the U.S. start lower but grow significantly over time, with recent arrivals earning a median household income around $30,500, while those in the country for 10-20+ years see their median household income rise to about $59,000 to over $71,000, often meeting or exceeding the national average as they integrate."

[Caveira]

46 minutes ago, fishbane said:

81%.   

The reality of having a refugee program in a country is that the refugees will require financial assistance.

81% is still staggeringly high.   Unsustainable high.  
 

With that said.  They started importing somalies in volume right after the movie black hawk down.  That was In the 1990s.   So about 35 years ago.   We’re in what.  The second generation of this experiment?   If 35 years later 81% still haven’t assimilated …. Still haven’t figured out how to fend for themselves Wouldn’t you call the idea a failure?    
 

We don’t have an infinitely endlessly deep checking account to pay for earths refugees.   We’re a zillion dollars in debt.   The states are in debt.   The cities are in debt.   One day the kettle is going to break.  Before you say it.  Yes. Repubs are shit too in this department.   We just keep assuming someone else down the road will eat this hand grenade.  
 

Tis why politics and politicians suck boss.  All of them. 

[fishbane]

23 minutes ago, Caveira said:

81% is still staggeringly high.   Unsustainable high.  
 

With that said.  They started importing somalies in volume right after the movie black hawk down.  That was In the 1990s.   So about 35 years ago.   We’re in what.  The second generation of this experiment?   If 35 years later 81% still haven’t assimilated …. Still haven’t figured out how to fend for themselves Wouldn’t you call the idea a failure?    
 

We don’t have an infinitely endlessly deep checking account to pay for earths refugees.   We’re a zillion dollars in debt.   The states are in debt.   The cities are in debt.   One day the kettle is going to break.  Before you say it.  Yes. Repubs are shit too in this department.   We just keep assuming someone else down the road will eat this hand grenade.  
 

Tis why politics and politicians suck boss.  All of them. 

Also keep in mind that MSpart's figures both the 81% of all households and 89% of households with children was only for Somali households in MN not nationally.  I am not sure what propotion of Somali households in MN arrived more than 20 years ago.  He had a number for 10+ years that was 78%, but not 20+. It could be that it was a relatively small number in that group.  The movie Black Hawk Down released in 2001 which was only 24 years ago, so if that is when the volume import of Somali's started and only the earliest arrivals would be here 20+ years and maybe settling didn't start immediately.

Are you suggesting that refugee arrivals from Somali should be reduced?  That already happened during Trump's first term and it has remained low.  There were fewer refugee arrivals from Somalia under the Biden administration than Bush, Obama, or Trump's first term.. In terms of refugee arrivals from Somalia Bush>Obama>Trump 1>Biden.  

[Caveira]

3 minutes ago, fishbane said:

The movie Black Hawk Down released in 2001 which was only 24 years ago

Fair.  My joke there backfired.  It started after the actual battle of Mogadishu under Clinton.   But it was forever ago.  And you keep avoiding.  Why import  mass volume of people who are a burden financially and otherwise. 

Edited December 11, 2025 by Caveira

[Caveira]

5 minutes ago, fishbane said:

Are you suggesting that refugee arrivals from Somali should be reduced?

I’m suggesting yes reduce it to real asylum Seekers.   I’m also suggesting it shouldn’t have happened.    Why did we do it.   If we knew it would end badly.   

[fishbane]

31 minutes ago, Caveira said:

Fair.  My joke there backfired.  It started after the actual battle of Mogadishu under Clinton.   But it was forever ago.  And you keep avoiding.  Why import  mass volume of people who are a burden financially and otherwise. 

I thought you might have meant the Battle of Mogadishu and not the movie.  I could only find Somali refugee numbers going back to 2001.  I think the arrivals from Somalia didn't really ramp up until a bit after the Battle of Mogadishu.  The battle was in 1993.  I found this plot of refugee arrivals by region on Wikipedia.  Arrivals from the continent of Africa stayed relatively low until the late 1990s.  This leads me to believe that most Somali households have been in the US less than 20 years. 

Another corollary from this plot is that most of the refugee households in the US over 20 years would be from Europe and Asia.  So it is possible the refugee households that went into that 20+ year number google AI found is mostly white and Asian households which out earn black households even in US born households.

[El Luchador]

5 hours ago, fishbane said:

There has to be an explanation, but it is likely more complex than "low IQ" or "lazy."  IQ could partially explain the low earnings of Somali immigrants.  A refugee from Somalia probably is only immediately qualified for low paying work.  Similarly if the average 25 year old American from 1900 were put in modern day Minnesota this individual with 4.1 years of education and an 11% chance of graduation high school would only be qualified to do low wage work.

As luchador pointed out national IQ test results are low across Sub-Saharan Africa.  Somalia is not an outlier in IQ test results in the region.  They aren't among the lowest.  Their IQ test results are right on the average for the region.  So this wouldn't seem to explain why the income of Somali immigrants in the US is among the lowest of African nations.  For example Ghanaian immigrants earn significantly more in the US, but the IQ estimates for Ghana are even lower than what Lucahador quote for Somalia.  So the national IQ estimates would appear to be a poor predictor of economic success.

I do not know why so many are on federal assistance, but I would caution taking some offhand comment by the president as fact.  All politicians are trash boss.

I absolutely guarantee if you time traveled a group of people from 1900 into today, they would not only not struggle, they would thrive. Within weeks they would surpass immigrant groups in self sufficiency.  Both of my grandfathers were born in the early 1900s. One was educated to 8th grade the other 6th. One was a farmer the other a machinist and then carpenter. He manually machined aircraft parts for Aurora aircraft. You likely couldn't staff 1 major manufacturer in America today with capable manual machinists. I was a manual mill and lathe operator in my earlier days. I couldn't imagine doing my job without a calculator yet alone a digital readout. They were amazing and skilled. 

[red viking]

12 minutes ago, El Luchador said:

I absolutely guarantee if you time traveled a group of people from 1900 into today, they would not only not struggle, they would thrive. Within weeks they would surpass immigrant groups in self sufficiency.  Both of my grandfathers were born in the early 1900s. One was educated to 8th grade the other 6th. One was a farmer the other a machinist and then carpenter. He manually machined aircraft parts for Aurora aircraft. You likely couldn't staff 1 major manufacturer in America today with capable manual machinists. I was a manual mill and lathe operator in my earlier days. I couldn't imagine doing my job without a calculator yet alone a digital readout. They were amazing and skilled. 

"Back in the good 'ol days" lol. 

[El Luchador]

3 minutes ago, red viking said:

"Back in the good 'ol days" lol. 

Smugness and arrogance is far from a compelling argument.

[mspart]

4 hours ago, fishbane said:

As I said earlier I would caution against taking whatever number the president said the other day as fact - all politicians are trash, boss.  If you aren't referring to the President's comments, but rather referring to the 89% MSpart quoted earlier that was of households with children.  The percent of overall households receiving federal assistance was only 81%.   

Do you realize how ridiculous this statement of yours is.   89% of families with kids were on welfare where ONLY 81% of overall households were on welfare.   

What an utterly ridiculous statement to make.   Both are serious problems.   Both need to be corrected.   That's more than 8 out of 10 household on welfare.  That's Crazy!   How would we all survive if that was the case across the board?  80% getting a ride with 20% footing the bill.   And how long would that last?   No society can work like that.   80% not contributing.   No that doesn't compute.  

mspart

[Caveira]

18 minutes ago, mspart said:

Do you realize how ridiculous this statement of yours is.   89% of families with kids were on welfare where ONLY 81% of overall households were on welfare.   

What an utterly ridiculous statement to make.   Both are serious problems.   Both need to be corrected.   That's more than 8 out of 10 household on welfare.  That's Crazy!   How would we all survive if that was the case across the board?  80% getting a ride with 20% footing the bill.   And how long would that last?   No society can work like that.   80% not contributing.   No that doesn't compute.  

mspart

But if we give the em a chance from 1992 until 2025 they will get smarter.  Assimilate more into American society and not become career welfare families.  
 

Wait.   No.  Not only do we pay for most / all their stuff.  They repay us by sealing $$$$ and sending it to Somalia and or terrorists in Somalia.   
 

here is looking at a gift horse in the mouth 

Edited December 12, 2025 by Caveira

[Caveira]

Nothing to see here lol

 

[Caveira]

Speaking of low iq.    (I don’t know if she married her brother so ignore that)

Elon is dumb and lucky?  Is she dense?    You don’t have to like him.  But damn liberals have no idea what smart is do they?

Dumbest and luckiest to exist on this earth.   Lol.  

Edited December 12, 2025 by Caveira

[WrestlingRasta]

On 12/10/2025 at 5:25 PM, Offthemat said:

I don’t know anything about drug trafficking routes, but I did hear that the the Admiral made the call based on advice from JAG Officers.  As far as the tanker, and Venezuelan oil in general, it was headed for China, which I believe has been sanctioned.  That would also mean it’s being sold off-market, which has several adverse consequences.  It may be something about the Monroe/Trump Doctrine.  I must say I appreciate you keeping us informed on these developments. 

Have read up on this ship a bit, and appreciate what you said about it.  Again as usual will preface with if the reporting is true, it is certainly up to some shady stuff, and don't have an issue with the seizure itself.   There are definitely some bigger picture things about it however that raises a lot of questions.   If it has been engaging in nefarious activity for awhile, why are we just now seizing it during this current campaign.   If we can easily commandeer this huge ship with a huge crew, why can we not do the same with little tiny boats (that aren't even headed to the US).  If we can release video showing military personnel, including special ops soldiers, in the midst of conducting their operations to take over this boatwithout risking security or procedures or ops, why can't we release video of a missile hitting a crashed boat for the second time when the reasoning we are given is those very concerns?

As for the legal counsel during the strike, it was stated there was legal counsel present, but the Admiral did not say in his briefing what that counsel was, what advice was given, again if the reporting is true.

I did chuckle at "Monroe/Trump" doctrine however.  

[red viking]

19 hours ago, JimmySpeaks said:

Some people evolve faster than others.  It’s pretty simple. 

WOW!!

[JimmySpeaks]

5 minutes ago, red viking said:

WOW!!

Yep.  Sucks to be you 

[Offthemat]

32 minutes ago, WrestlingRasta said:

Have read up on this ship a bit, and appreciate what you said about it.  Again as usual will preface with if the reporting is true, it is certainly up to some shady stuff, and don't have an issue with the seizure itself.   There are definitely some bigger picture things about it however that raises a lot of questions.   If it has been engaging in nefarious activity for awhile, why are we just now seizing it during this current campaign.   If we can easily commandeer this huge ship with a huge crew, why can we not do the same with little tiny boats (that aren't even headed to the US).  If we can release video showing military personnel, including special ops soldiers, in the midst of conducting their operations to take over this boatwithout risking security or procedures or ops, why can't we release video of a missile hitting a crashed boat for the second time when the reasoning we are given is those very concerns?

As for the legal counsel during the strike, it was stated there was legal counsel present, but the Admiral did not say in his briefing what that counsel was, what advice was given, again if the reporting is true.

I did chuckle at "Monroe/Trump" doctrine however.  

Legitimate questions.  What I’ve heard about the difference in tactics was along the lines of the narco boats being so much faster than a tanker.  And that there is a danger of a helicopter and crew being shot down.  A single rifle can take one down.  Strikes like these are nothing new, other than these are at sea.  Attacking drug cartels from the air have been done since, at least, the 1960s.  They didn’t get near as much attention, though.  
 

Chuckles?  I watched a speech by the woman who won the last Venezuelan presidential election, in which she said Venezuela has already been invaded, that the Russians, Chinese, Iranians, and drug cartels are involved in running Venezuela.  Trump’s intention is to put a stop to influence within this hemisphere. He’s said Columbia could be next.