Education and Income. A tragic correlation.

[Jenner]

Children with amazingly high IQs are born into impoverished families, but because they are impoverished they cannot, do not, and will not receive the same access to amenities and education opportunities and outlets as privileged middle and upper-middle/high class families do. On this same vein, upper-middle and high class families can have children with disturbingly low IQs but those children will have access to infrastructures and resources to help them overcome and understand their disabilities and learning limitations.
Children born with the same IQ in different socioeconomic statuses grow up with different educations. The children with a higher SES are, on average, more intelligent, more capable of critical thought, more open minded and more able to draw realistic conclusions to problems and issues from their own upbringings and the lessons they learned from them. In comparison, on the whole, a child which started out with the same IQ is the high SES child in a low SES is less prone to question, less likely to approach their questions with logic, they are usually more narrow minded and have a more difficult time seeing beyond their own educational boundaries. They are less likely to draw accurate conclusions to problems and issues that arise from their own upbringing and the lessons they learned in them. In fact, the lessons a poor child learns from their up-bringing are stunningly different from the lessons a wealthier child learns.
Does this make the poor child stupid? Uneducated? When they had no control over their lot in life and the education they received? When they had no choice but to take what generosity and lessons were given to them? When their parents did not have the luxury of sculpting their children's upbringing and controlling the messages they received.
Children raised in poverty have a very shallow pool of world experiences and of world views. Have a very limited idea of diversity and differences. Their lives are so small and enclosed that many grow up without any knowledge of what certain things even are. They are devastatingly sheltered, as such, they do not receive a broad education from different viewpoints. They normally do not have access to literature that does not maintain the viewpoint of the area. They are discouraged from seeking out any literature of that form and encouraged by society to conform to the status quo and to accepted the biased information they receive. Does this make them stupid, is it their fault they do not understand? Is it their fault they fell through the cracks? Is it their fault there are major gaps in their education, in theircomprehension, in their understanding? Does it make the stupid? At what time did they make the choice to be cultivated for mediocrity?

Intelligent kids get lost every day, and the ones that struggle to understand are just shut down for being "stupid", for being shortsighted, for struggling to see beyond the boundaries they've lived with all their lives by the better educated people with no sympathy or experience in their ordeals. They never CHOSE to be ignorant, they were made it. When they try to expand upon it, they are held back by their own world views, by their own poor education.

We are all conditioned, but only the better-off children are truly conditioned to explore, and can truly choose to accept and not question. Poor children, never have that choice, they are never given that opportunity.

Does that make them stupid? They are trained to stubbornly disagree with issues that do not conform with their meager educations. The cycle is continued, and it is not intentional, so why does society treat them like it is?

Can there truly be a change in the cycle? I'm tired of being "wrong".

[Angelalex242]

Actually, that's not COMPLETELY true. Average and ordinary people can and do become wealthy...through entrepeneurship. Or commissions. Some of the wealthiest people in the world have crap people skills, and must therefore live on their inheritance. Some poor people, however, are gifted with people skills, and they can use their gifts, especially with commissions, to make an income 3 or 4 times what their parents made. All they need is the right opportunity to get what they want.

The most successful person isn't the one with the biggest IQ, he's the guy with the awesome people skills that hires all the guys with big IQs

[Kizyr]

To begin, IQ is a -Dragon Diamond- measure of intelligence. It's useful for diagnosing mental retardation and its severity, but beyond that it's only useful for people to brag about their intelligence and claim that they're a genius. It's the reason I refuse to take an IQ test or find out my own score: it's a poor and badly-used metric.

The idea that poor kids aren't exposed to diversity is also false, considering the ethnic makeup of poorer neighborhoods in major cities in the US. That might have been the case for you, or in rural/suburban Ohio, but in places like DC, New York, Nashville, poorer areas don't suffer from a lack of diversity. They suffer from a lack of access to other things (adequate education and security being the main things), but not diversity.

Your point becomes a lot smaller if you remove these two oversights. There's still a point to be made, though: if you're poor, you're less likely to have access to a good education or educational/employment opportunities. If you're less likely to have access to either of those things, you're less likely to be able to improve your condition. The stuff about IQs and diversity is arbitrary. KF

[Sonic#]

Actually, that's not COMPLETELY true. Average and ordinary people can and do become wealthy...through entrepeneurship. Or commissions. Some of the wealthiest people in the world have crap people skills, and must therefore live on their inheritance. Some poor people, however, are gifted with people skills, and they can use their gifts, especially with commissions, to make an income 3 or 4 times what their parents made. All they need is the right opportunity to get what they want.

The most successful person isn't the one with the biggest IQ, he's the guy with the awesome people skills that hires all the guys with big IQs

I don't think the ability of a poor person being rich is at dispute, but rather that, all things being equal, a rich person with the same natural inclinations as a poor person does not have to try nearly as hard to maintain an acceptable degree of status as the poorer person does to reach it. The logic of equal opportunity tends to stretch when we realize that everyone is not born into equal families with equal resources to provide for their child, and the institutions like public education do not fully mitigate that difference. Elevation, along economic terms, is possible, but the playing field is sloped, and one question that lurks in the background is how we've come to see such a slope as level.

Also, there's issues with the narrative of elevation as well. What does it mean to become successful, and what gets left behind? Can you still relate to the families and communities you know and love when you've attained a certain status that places you outside of that community? Is your status seen as a betrayal of the community? We assume that earning lots of money, doing good deeds, and knowing a lot of things are all virtues (and they are, I'd argue), but we never think to justify why that's so to communities that might have a different view, either one of practicality (you only need to do this) or victimization (only "the man" does this).

[Angelalex242]

I have no sympathy for victim mentality. If you don't like your situation, fix it yourself. Entrepeneurs who leave their old communities and families behind do exactly that.

Indeed, one of my leaders did that. He used to be a papermill worker. His wife worked at Nordstrom's. Through hard work and dedication, he now makes 750k a year. A YEAR.

What do you suppose happened to his friends? They faded away...and he got new ones that saw what he saw. His community? He moved...from the cheap little house he used to live in to a mansion. And who's his community now? Other people that live in mansions. And what do you think happened to his family? They now ask him for money their finances get tight, and he's in the position to help. You never know the truth of 'it's better to give then receive' until you've got enough money that you don't mind giving.

Another of my leaders did that. Former prison guard and stay at home mom. Prison guard paid 2200 a month for a family of 5. Guess how well that worked? Now they make over 160k a year...and they were trained by the guy making 750k. And how do you suppose their lives changed? See above, only on a slightly lesser scale cause they're not making quite that much yet.

There are victims, and people born to better themselves. May I never be so cursed as to belong to group 1.

[Werefrog]

I have no sympathy for victim mentality. If you don't like your situation, fix it yourself. Entrepeneurs who leave their old communities and families behind do exactly that.

First, it's not that easy at all. Just because you know some people that have bettered themselves, this does not mean that every single person can. There are mitigating factors. Perhaps, your friends had people who helped them along. Maybe, they are simply exceptional in some way or were just at the right place. I know that this is hard to swallow because we want to believe that everything we have in life was due to our merit. It wasn't. Many students face a lot of adversity even applying for college simply because their parents never went through, and they don't know how to cut-through the red tape.

Second, I'm not entirely sure that it's healthy to leave everything behind. You're really opening yourself open to depression by completely cutting yourself off from your support structure.

I mean you're right to an extent. It is important to realize that people can still better themselves with help. That's where the government should step in with training programs and other things that bring up the quality of life up for everyone. The gap between the rich and the poor in this country is ridiculous.

There are victims, and people born to better themselves. May I never be so cursed as to belong to group 1.

This makes it sound like you think this is destiny, contradicting the rest of your post.

Edit: Wait, was that a joke at the end? Disregard my final statement if it were.

[Angelalex242]

Sorry, you're right. I phrased it badly.

I should've said 'victim mentality' and 'success mentality.' It's a state of mind.

My last statement should read, 'victims, and people with the DESIRE to better themselves.' For those who really want to succeed, nothing can stop them.

Anyways, my leaders always say they're average, ordinary people who have done extraordinary things. There's nothing particularly grand about a Papermill worker, or a Nordstrom's worker, or a prison guard. Those are all pretty crummy low end jobs, if you think about it. Anyone from any economic background could work there. But they found something better...a better life. And went for it.

[BattleMedic]

http://blog.wired.com/wiredscience/2009 ... pment.html
Maybe it's stress?

[exigence]

Sorry, you're right. I phrased it badly.

I should've said 'victim mentality' and 'success mentality.' It's a state of mind.

My last statement should read, 'victims, and people with the DESIRE to better themselves.' For those who really want to succeed, nothing can stop them.

Anyways, my leaders always say they're average, ordinary people who have done extraordinary things. There's nothing particularly grand about a Papermill worker, or a Nordstrom's worker, or a prison guard. Those are all pretty crummy low end jobs, if you think about it. Anyone from any economic background could work there. But they found something better...a better life. And went for it.

i agree 100% and would just like to add that success has nothing to do with money its all about who you know and getting your name out there any one who's successful can tell you that making a name for yourself is the most important.

[Werefrog]

Well, you know, money helps you stay off the street and prevents you from dying of starvation. It also helps you get an education if your definition of successful involves being educated. Granted, there are probably times where money didn't make an impact on someone's success. I would say though that those times are outliers.

[exigence]

thats the kind of attitude that holds people back

[meg]

i agree 100% and would just like to add that success has nothing to do with money its all about who you know and getting your name out there any one who's successful can tell you that making a name for yourself is the most important.

this might surprise you, but the "who you know" people are usually people with money. having money in the first place makes it far, far easier to know those people. and, btw, getting your name out there usually ALSO costs money. and time--time that the very poor are often devoting to basic survival.

there's a great deal more luck involved in success than most people are willing to admit.

[meg]

thats the kind of attitude that holds people back

also, i'd like to point out that you sound middle class. the middle class no more understands "poor" than they understand "rich." certain kinds of existences need to be experienced. and i don't mean slumming it for a weekend. i mean stuck in the lower-income housing with the rest of the very poor with no foreseeable way out in sight, for a significant length of time.

they're not lazy, or stupid (although studies have shown that the stress of being so close to homeless does kill the IQ of children in these situations)--but that kind of living does suck the hope out of you after awhile. and such places will do everything in their power to keep you there. that's the sort of thing you ALSO have to experience to understand.

it takes a lot to break free of it. basically, take the story of Lot, and sodom and gomorrah as a parable--if you so much as look back on your way out, you're trapped again.

[Werefrog]

Yep. I've read that the difference between Harvard and a good state school was not in the quality of the education. The difference, rather, is that the Harvard students are able to network with the country's elite and form connections that will help them get super jobs outside of the university.

Meg, I'm not sure if I agree that the middle-class can't understand it. It's mostly that the middle-class doesn't want to understand it because so many of us want to associate themselves with the upper-class. Besides, if we admit that the poor may possibly have forces (not literal, but figurative) conspiring against them to keep them down, what hope do we have to move from middle-class to upper middle-class/upper class and fulfill our American dream?

[meg]

Meg, I'm not sure if I agree that the middle-class can't understand it. It's mostly that the middle-class doesn't want to understand it because so many of us want to associate themselves with the upper-class. Besides, if we admit that the poor may possibly have forces (not literal, but figurative) conspiring against them to keep them down, what hope do we have to move from middle-class to upper middle-class/upper class and fulfill our American dream?

you have a point. but speaking from personal experience--i'm one of those saps that takes the homeless out to lunch if they tell me they're hungry. i tend to be naturally sympathetic, even when i don't understand what i'm hearing. i have a few friends who grew up in ghettos--and while i might consider myself clever and insightful, i did not understand it myself until i:

a) lost my job
b) lost my apartment
c) spent several months couch hopping, and;
d) landed in the ghetto with my boyfriend (now husband)

we signed a year lease. it was the cheapest place we could find. $400 a month.

i don't especially want to talk about that year. suffice to say, we cut our health insurance to be able to afford to move out, and consider it a good trade. most of my neighbors didn't have that option to make.

[Sonic#]

i agree 100% and would just like to add that success has nothing to do with money its all about who you know and getting your name out there any one who's successful can tell you that making a name for yourself is the most important.

It's not about who you know, or even about who knows you, but rather who knows your abilities. Do they know that you are capable of doing a certain thing in a certain way? It's about reputation, the sort that you get through talking with people, networking, and working competently in entry-level jobs. As Werefrog said, going to school in the right place helps. As Meg pointed out, having enough money to have the same social opportunities helps.

There was a period in my life... about three months... when I was an Ayn Rand Objectivist. I thought that determination could always result in a decent living, and talent plus determination meant an even better living. People don't start with equal opportunity, but they can through determination arise to the level of their competency. I still believe that's true, and even Meg isn't discounting that.

However, a few point of contentions arise.
1. The less you have to start with, the tougher it is. That does not make it impossible, but it requires very tough decisions - tougher than forgoing health insurance to get a better place, even. What if your family isn't supportive? What if you already have to work to support them? What if you've got no health insurance, and you get sick? What if your car breaks down and you have no way of getting to work except to walk ten miles a day? You make do. You probably don't have enough time or energy to do more than that.
2. By extension, stuff happens even to determined entrepreneurs who have the resources. The results of determination are also bound to the laws of probability, as the stock market shows.
3. Related to 1, I don't know what it's like to be poor. I earn over 40 billion City of Heroes Influence points a year, which doesn't convert to much, but I've got safety nets like my parents who could cover expenses if things went horribly wrong. So I don't have much money, but I'm still living securely. Many people, those really impovershed, don't have such resources. So I can't properly say what it's like, or whether they are equally capable of social ascent. What I've read tends to argue against that idea, but thus far only Meg seems to have that background in experience. If I were arguing against her, I'd want to bring more evidence to bear on how money does not matter for lower income success, or at least that lower-income people fail for reasons not related to income.