Why is it that brunettes in north america tend to be poorer than blonde ones?

why is it that brunettes in north america tend to be poorer than blonde ones?

Attached: 1564974810999.jpg (1080x1350, 238K)

because they don't have enough money to buy hair dye

I don't think that's the case in the US really at least not in Texas
If it is the case, it's probably because rich boomers having blonde bimbo "trophy wives"

Based on what statistics?

he is not wrong

Attached: 32145.jpg (285x727, 73K)

Because they're less valuable
Anyone who isn't poor or a pleb prefers blondes

Attached: sanne-vloet-alexis-spring-summer-2019-13.jpg (1280x2050, 218K)

I'm blonde and so is my entire family, I find brunettes and latinas far more attractive

Attached: 1565382576969.jpg (839x1259, 188K)

>Lithuanian American
>Swiss American
>Tauwanese American
>they all have an article

You will grow out of this phase, all roads lead to blond

>Belgian American
>Swiss American
We have people who identify as these? probably just immigrants

Brunettes are R1b, that's why.

the girl in OP's pic is far better looking

She's barely white so no she isn't

Attached: 7e85eb843e33addfee0595be8f56916d.jpg (1200x1800, 277K)

t. non-blond

Pale girls with naturally black hair and light eyes are the peak aesthetic. The thinking man of fair traits realizes this.

Please dont increase the demand on blondes and women in general as their value would increase

she has an ugly manface

Attached: 1557466587196.jpg (1080x1346, 1.57M)

>She's barely white
Even better. That explains her unequaled beauty

How on earth does she look like anything but of white European descent? non-blond =/= non-white

They dont have anything outstandish to them

All non-blondes have non-white DNA

lmao cope

Attached: biscuits1.jpg (1920x1080, 356K)

do amerimutts really?

Welcome to the family, kinsmen

based brainlet
I'm blond tho, and I'm fine with non-white girls. How am I coping exactly?

What?

Germans and Dutch settled flyover shitholes so you're wrong.

Attached: 1334668588491.jpg (495x454, 39K)

Most flyovers are way less shitty than relevant places like LA or NYC
Texas and Florida are the only non-flyovers that arent trash, and even those are nothing compared to say, Wyoming, Montana etc

They're poorer, which is the observation that OP was making.

IIRC they have less wealth inequality, and being poor compared to NYC (I believe it's considered the richest city on earth on average? Could be wrong but I know it's top 3) doesn't say a lot

Nah, flyovers are shitholes

Give me an example of a flyover that's a shithole aside from West Virginia (which is still quite a based state. Most poverty stricken state in the union, but everyone there lives on like 20 acres of beautiful land, which is more valuable than money IMO)