-
Speaker to Animals
- Posts: 38685
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm
Post
by Speaker to Animals » Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:14 am
StCapps wrote: ↑Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:10 am
Speaker to Animals wrote: ↑Thu Jun 20, 2019 7:44 am
StCapps wrote: ↑Thu Jun 20, 2019 7:14 am
It is relevant, because you say the reason for single motherhood is the IQ of mothers, yet the IQ of mothers does not explain the increasing rates of single motherhood, because IQ isn't falling in correlation with single motherhood rates rising. Your theory is debunked by the data.
Try to unpack that logically and you will see it's invalid. Your assumption is that the rates of single motherhood have to remain fixed, which is silly. It takes time for societies to transform. Right off the bat you still had women married who had no intention of leaving or changing their ways. It takes time and each generation (for both races) the rates of single motherhood increased. However, the rates increased less for white women because their average IQ still offers them better opportunities than single mother welfare for the most part. It's only women in the bottom quartile of the white IQ distribution that are actually better off either married as housewives or living as single mothers. But it's the majority of black women.
The amount of women in bottom quintile of the IQ distribution hasn't changed significantly since 1965, yet rates of single motherhood have changed, and IQ is not an adequate explanation of that phenomenon, no matter how hard you squeeze your butt cheeks together in an attempt to make it so. Rates increased less for white women than they did for blacks, but there is no evidence that this is because of IQ, if it was based on IQ the rates wouldn't have increased at all, they would be dropping, like they were before 1965.
It doesn't fucking matter, capps. Nobody argued that it changed, or that it even fucking matters.
Spend more time trying to understand what people are saying than you spend arguing just for the sake of arguing. You obviously still do not comprehend what I have told you, and your responses have nothing to do with anything posted here.
-
StCapps
- Posts: 16879
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 10:59 am
- Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Post
by StCapps » Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:16 am
Speaker to Animals wrote: ↑Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:14 am
StCapps wrote: ↑Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:10 am
Speaker to Animals wrote: ↑Thu Jun 20, 2019 7:44 am
Try to unpack that logically and you will see it's invalid. Your assumption is that the rates of single motherhood have to remain fixed, which is silly. It takes time for societies to transform. Right off the bat you still had women married who had no intention of leaving or changing their ways. It takes time and each generation (for both races) the rates of single motherhood increased. However, the rates increased less for white women because their average IQ still offers them better opportunities than single mother welfare for the most part. It's only women in the bottom quartile of the white IQ distribution that are actually better off either married as housewives or living as single mothers. But it's the majority of black women.
The amount of women in bottom quintile of the IQ distribution hasn't changed significantly since 1965, yet rates of single motherhood have changed, and IQ is not an adequate explanation of that phenomenon, no matter how hard you squeeze your butt cheeks together in an attempt to make it so. Rates increased less for white women than they did for blacks, but there is no evidence that this is because of IQ, if it was based on IQ the rates wouldn't have increased at all, they would be dropping, like they were before 1965.
It doesn't fucking matter, capps. Nobody argued that it changed, or that it even fucking matters.
Spend more time trying to understand what people are saying than you spend arguing just for the sake of arguing. You obviously still do not comprehend what I have told you, and your responses have nothing to do with anything posted here.
You have spent no time trying to understand what I am arguing, you do not comprehend what I have told you, and your responses have nothing do with anything posted here. It's all projection on your part.
You just don't like losing an argument and backwards rationalize a way in which you are actually winning, to protect yourself from admitting defeat, and this results in projecting your own faults on others, so you can easily dismiss their arguments.
Last edited by StCapps on Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:18 am, edited 1 time in total.
*yip*
-
Speaker to Animals
- Posts: 38685
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm
Post
by Speaker to Animals » Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:18 am
StCapps wrote: ↑Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:16 am
Speaker to Animals wrote: ↑Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:14 am
StCapps wrote: ↑Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:10 am
The amount of women in bottom quintile of the IQ distribution hasn't changed significantly since 1965, yet rates of single motherhood have changed, and IQ is not an adequate explanation of that phenomenon, no matter how hard you squeeze your butt cheeks together in an attempt to make it so. Rates increased less for white women than they did for blacks, but there is no evidence that this is because of IQ, if it was based on IQ the rates wouldn't have increased at all, they would be dropping, like they were before 1965.
It doesn't fucking matter, capps. Nobody argued that it changed, or that it even fucking matters.
Spend more time trying to understand what people are saying than you spend arguing just for the sake of arguing. You obviously still do not comprehend what I have told you, and your responses have nothing to do with anything posted here.
You have spent no time trying to understand what I am arguing, you do not comprehend what I have told you, and your responses have nothing do with anything posted here. It's all projection on your part.
I perfectly understand what you are trying to claim, and it doesn't stand up to reason. Unpack it to see the assumptions you left unstated. Namely that the rate of single motherhood should remain fixed from the 1960s onward. That's silly, Capps.
The reason so many black women are on welfare is because they are better off there than working in a ditch.
-
StCapps
- Posts: 16879
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 10:59 am
- Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Post
by StCapps » Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:20 am
Speaker to Animals wrote: ↑Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:18 am
Namely that the rate of single motherhood should remain fixed from the 1960s onward. That's silly, Capps.
The reason so many black women are on welfare is because they are better off there than working in a ditch.
My assumption is that rates of single motherhood would have kept decreasing, if not for the welfare state, affirmative action and identity politics, like those rates were decreasing before 1965. You are the one not reading and making up idiotic strawmen to argue against to make yourself feel like you are winning the argument.
The reason so many black women are on welfare has little to do with the long-term detriment of being on welfare, and everything to do with short-term benefits of it with no regard to the negatives, because they aren't thinking that far ahead, and are actually voting against their own interests by supporting politicians who will increase the gibs.
Last edited by StCapps on Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:23 am, edited 2 times in total.
*yip*
-
Zlaxer
- Posts: 5377
- Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2016 5:04 am
Post
by Zlaxer » Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:23 am
StCapps wrote: ↑Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:20 am
Speaker to Animals wrote: ↑Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:18 am
Namely that the rate of single motherhood should remain fixed from the 1960s onward. That's silly, Capps.
The reason so many black women are on welfare is because they are better off there than working in a ditch.
My assumption is that rates of single motherhood would have kept decreasing, if not for the welfare state, affirmative action and identity politics, like those rates were decreasing before 1965. You are the one not reading and making up idiotic strawmen to argue against to make yourself feel like you are winning the argument.
Welfare is not identity politics - whites get welfare too. A 200 bump for being black on a college app is identify politics.
Count to 100, then go back a re-read what StA is actually saying.
-
Speaker to Animals
- Posts: 38685
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm
Post
by Speaker to Animals » Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:25 am
StCapps wrote: ↑Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:20 am
Speaker to Animals wrote: ↑Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:18 am
Namely that the rate of single motherhood should remain fixed from the 1960s onward. That's silly, Capps.
The reason so many black women are on welfare is because they are better off there than working in a ditch.
My assumption is that rates of single motherhood would have kept decreasing, if not for the welfare state, affirmative action and identity politics, like those rates were decreasing before 1965. You are the one not reading and making up idiotic strawmen to argue against to make yourself feel like you are winning the argument.
Single motherhood rises or falls based on whether it benefits low-IQ women. You need other factors like destroying the families with easy divorces as well. It takes time for these things to evolve.
Affirmative action has had ZERO bad direct impact on minorities, though. It only negatively impacts them indirectly as it does everybody else by placing incompetent people into critical roles because of their race rather than their qualifications. Affirmative action has provided blacks in particular with far more resources and access to success than white people possess. We succeed more than blacks because our average IQ is significantly higher.
-
StCapps
- Posts: 16879
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 10:59 am
- Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Post
by StCapps » Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:25 am
Zlaxer wrote: ↑Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:23 am
StCapps wrote: ↑Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:20 am
Speaker to Animals wrote: ↑Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:18 am
Namely that the rate of single motherhood should remain fixed from the 1960s onward. That's silly, Capps.
The reason so many black women are on welfare is because they are better off there than working in a ditch.
My assumption is that rates of single motherhood would have kept decreasing, if not for the welfare state, affirmative action and identity politics, like those rates were decreasing before 1965. You are the one not reading and making up idiotic strawmen to argue against to make yourself feel like you are winning the argument.
Welfare is not identity politics - whites get welfare too. A 200 bump for being black on a college app is identify politics.
Count to 100, then go back a re-read what StA is actually saying.
Never said welfare is identity politics. Welfare hurts whites too. Affirmative action hurts blacks long-term, for all the reasons I've already pointed out. Getting into a college you shouldn't be in and can't hack it in, isn't of benefit, getting into a college you should be in is of benefit, affirmative action doesn't do the latter, only the former. It is counter-productive, no matter how counter-intuitive it may seem to you, the results don't lie.
Affirmative action sucks dude, perception of it helping does not match reality, people sometimes vote against their interests without realizing it, that's what is happening here, they don't vote for it because it actually helps, they just think it does because they either wittingly or unwittingly ignore the results because it doesn't mesh with their confirmation bias.
*yip*
-
Speaker to Animals
- Posts: 38685
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 5:59 pm
Post
by Speaker to Animals » Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:33 am
Affirmative action absolutely benefits black people. Stop being so stupid about it.
Do you think you wouldn't benefit if you could get a higher paying job you otherwise would not have qualified for? What about free rides in college, and preferred admission to the most advantageous universities?
Think before you post.
-
StCapps
- Posts: 16879
- Joined: Wed Nov 30, 2016 10:59 am
- Location: Hamilton, Ontario
Post
by StCapps » Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:36 am
Speaker to Animals wrote: ↑Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:33 am
Affirmative action absolutely benefits black people. Stop being so stupid about it.
How is getting thrown in the deep end before knowing how to swim a benefit? It isn't. You're being stupid about it, the results show it hasn't helped the black community, the community has only gotten weaker since it's introduction. Your "common sense" argument is not backed up by the facts, because your "common sense" is half baked nonsense, you simply haven't thought it through, and you refuse to acknowledge that the stats do not back up your pet theory.
*yip*
-
Zlaxer
- Posts: 5377
- Joined: Fri Dec 02, 2016 5:04 am
Post
by Zlaxer » Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:39 am
StCapps wrote: ↑Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:36 am
Speaker to Animals wrote: ↑Thu Jun 20, 2019 8:33 am
Affirmative action absolutely benefits black people. Stop being so stupid about it.
How is getting thrown in the deep end before knowing how to swim a benefit?
BC professors won't fail them for the same reasons HS teaches do not.
They will graduate and get high paying jobs - society is damaged in the long run - but affirmative action individuals benefit massively in the short run.