If 80% of the world had an IQ above 100, would poverty still exist?

if 80% of the world had an IQ above 100, would poverty still exist?

Attached: f1ipv0dk14y21.jpg (960x904, 103K)

Yes since poverty is linked to systematic oppression more so than intelligence

Yeah it still would but Id say the quality of life of people in poverty would be better than it is now

Poverty is relative. Do the Amish live in poverty?

Hard to say, I’d imagine that a majority of them would feel alienated by their disposition and commit sewisides.

faggots

Elaborate, there will always be poor and there will always be rich people. That is the simple truth

my definition of poverty is not being able to eat a large portion of vegetables and meat 2 times a day

Possibly.

Intelligence is normally distributed, so if you shifted the average to the point where 80% are above 100, then you would still have the same amount of people that are significantly smarter than those on the left side of the bell-curve. And since wealth tends to accumulate in the hands of a few, it would be more about relative intelligence than about absolute intelligence.

tl;dr - even if everyone becomes a little smarter, you would still have people that are a lot smarter and those would end up with most of the wealth

Since humans are social animals a heriarchy will always exist, there will always exist someone with money and power, so people in the lower class will always be considered the poor, tho their quality of life can be the same as a middle class American, as long as they are the lower class they are the poor

Also, the 20% left is above 85 IQ at least? Because they can end up creating crime and other types of social problems that will make the lower class live in a worst way

Would you?

Attached: SmileOnASnek.jpg (300x300, 20K)

america is the only 1st world country where it's possible to live below the poverty line due to the reasons you mention. it's a government problem that can be overcome

>poverty
has nothing to do with IQ

If anything higher IQ makes you NOT want to work for other people, high IQ people don't work for a boss.

What is poverty? Are you poor if you cant afford a car or food? Poverty is relative so there will always be poor people

Not being able or not having enough responsibility to stop buying scratchoffs instead of food?
Poverty in the USA is a mental problem, not a money one.

...

No because we would be smat enough to support Universal Health Care and Free Education.

This.

>Universal Health Care and Free Education.
and people will still be poor
you mean UBI?

IQ is relative and the average is always 100 so in order to have 80% above it you would need the remaining 20% to have a few extra chromosomes

>80% of the world had an IQ above 100
That is not possible you sub-80 iq retard.

capitalism needs poor people to subsist so there will always be poor people.

Depends on the definition of poverty, obviously.

Yes would just have slightly smarter peasants

even with a currently extant genome it's possible (ashkenazi jewish)

Appalachia is oppressed by wealthy black athletes apparently.

Poverty is manufactured through social chaos and war. If you don’t have security then everything you earn can be stolen, if your land can be confiscated you don’t put much effort into your farm. Poverty is needed to keep a constant flood of immigrants pushing to get into the west

Ashkenazi jewish are not smart, just evil.

Poor Appalachian whites are oppressed by wealthy whites.

High IQ idiots are a thing, unfortunately

I'd love it if everyone were 130 IQ or higher (I got 133 when I took the quick Mensa test online, even being really underslept).
More than that though, I wish everyone had the INTP personality type. I'd actually be able to relate to others, and have some friends. Things would be decided through realz rather than through feelz. Libshits wouldn't even exist, as far as I'm concerned.

and still commit less crime than wealthy black athletes

Attached: 1509989670483.png (986x995, 37K)

>Having a high IQ means you will be successful
Yikes

>might delete later
Why?
Are celt flutes offensive?

that's kind of how modern humans diverged from the earlier hominoids. being smarter provided some edge

The picture of hammer turkey on wall gets me I like this one

Amish are rich as shit.

>being smarter provided some edge
what the actual fuck do you think IQ is ?
take your good goy score point system and shove it up your golem ass

Attached: 43a.png (5028x2120, 845K)

>having a high iq makes you successful
no, but having an average iq does. something between 100-110 is ideal for normiedom.

>t. 138 and can barely hold a blue collar job because 'tism

What's your problem?

That wasn't really the question though. Obviously a wealth distribution would still exist, but with a higher baseline intelligence you'd have fewer people who are unemployable due to their intellect or due to low impulse control. It's quite possible that poverty would re-emerge as technology increased the baseline intelligence required for employability, though.

Obviously not, because there are more factors than just intelligence that affect success. If you look at 1000 people with an IQ of 120 as compared to 1000 people with an IQ of 100, the average earnings of the first group will be higher. Increased probability is not the same thing as a guarantee.

If 80% had an IQ over 100 then we'd readjust the scale so 50% would. That's how IQ works...

Why do retards on Jow Forums think IQ is some golden scale of intelligence?

now them was the days, voze fings cud belt out a propa choon

Attached: 1547849437864.png (556x835, 55K)

capitalism is not fair so yes

>t. 105 iq normie
cope harder retard. if you deny the significance of iq in measuring fluid intelligence you are stupid or a dishonest "only one race" faggot.

>If you don't get your nuts off for having a "really high iq" then u is dumb!!!
Anyone using IQ as their crutch for justification of their self worth is usually retarded. It's not some holy bible of "smartness", idiot.

lol but you objectively are dumb
you may be successful even but in terms of raw intelligence you just aren't smart. it's ok man, but don't try to say IQ doesn't mean anything just because you are of average intellect.
>crutch
wow nice argument

The guy you are responding to only has 105 iq I don't think he's bragging retard.

>still thinks IQ is important and lends credence to views
>still thinks it matters to anyone but narcissists in Mensa or some 16 year old who took an Ebaumsworld IQ test

It's a measurement of ability. It's not meaningless. At the same time it isn't an absolute sign of success.

I like to think of it as money, you don't have to be the richest man to be happy, but you sure as hell don't want to be impoverished.
A certain I threshold isn't necessary but it's implicitly present in people working most high end thinkeroo jobbers. You don't meat many 100 IQ mathematicians, you sure as shit won't meet any 80 IQ ones.

It's not everything, but it certainly bares significance.

Attached: 1551541244990.png (749x1010, 106K)

It's hardly useful as anything but a flag for the possible need to accelerate the learning pace for children. As you age it becomes less and less important, even. I've met plenty in my "high IQ" field that were retarded other than their savant fields and have met tested 100 +/- 5 point people who were the best in their class. It's practically useless.

What is your high IQ field? I am fairly certain I haven't met and straight up retards in academia for mathematics so far (maybe a few above average relative retards, but that's as far as it goes).
If you are in CS or engineering that makes sense since alot of it is group work so retards can slip through the cracks.

I can't think of a single successful person who takes iq or psychology seriously. It's always the contrarian fedora loser type of people who talk about this shit

Makes sense given the successful people you know probably aren't academics or psychologists. You stupid fuck.

Sure thing man.