U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Americas
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 04-13-2019, 12:23 PM
 
713 posts, read 474,943 times
Reputation: 396

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwartzmann View Post
There's a book called IQ and Global Inequality that says nations develop based largely on the average IQ's of their populations... the higher the IQ, the more developed the country. In Latin America, Uruguay and Argentina have higher IQs than the other countries of the region. Attached is a map that shows the average IQs by nation (color-coded).

It's pseudoscience. As there wasn't IQ info available for most countries, the authors made IQ estimations based on the racist premise that countries with more Blacks and Natives should have a lower average IQ.


Quote:
Central to the book's thesis is a tabulation of what Lynn and Vanhanen believe to be the average IQs of the world's nations. Rather than do their own IQ studies, the authors average and adjust existing studies and use other methods to create estimates.

For 104 of the 185 nations, no studies were available. In those cases, the authors have used an estimated value by taking averages of the IQs of neighboring or comparable nations. For example, the authors arrived at a figure of 84 for El Salvador by averaging their calculations of 79 for Guatemala and 88 for Colombia. Including those estimated IQs, the correlation of IQ and GDP is 0.62.


To obtain a figure for South Africa, the authors averaged IQ studies done on different ethnic groups, resulting in a figure of 72. The figures for Colombia, Peru, and Singapore were arrived at in a similar manner.

In some cases, the IQ of a country is estimated by averaging the IQs of countries that are not actually neighbors of the country in question. For example, Kyrgyzstan's IQ is estimated by averaging the IQs of Iran and Turkey, neither of which is close to Kyrgyzstan—China, which is a geographic neighbor, is not counted as such by Lynn and Vanhanen. This is because ethnic background is assumed to be more important than proximity to other nations when determining national IQ.

To account for the Flynn effect (an increase in IQ scores over time), the authors adjusted the results of older studies upward by a number of points.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_and...lth_of_Nations


IQ itself is a pretty poor measurement of intelligence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 04-13-2019, 12:43 PM
 
142 posts, read 26,236 times
Reputation: 28
Default Southern cone

1) let's make something clear , the southern cone nor any region in Latin America has a first world status
2 ) I didn't intend to use Argentina as an example but since its the largest country in the region I had to
3 ) I can't help but notice a pattern in your explanation about social standard, life expentancy , humans rights, education, lgbt and safety. In every measurement and section (in almost every segment , one country from the southern cone come first ) either, Chile or uruguay .
4) Argentina is not in anyway in its best moment YET another country of the southern cone is making news as the most developed (it seems that it's a cyclical thing ), but this cycle of good progress remains in the southern cone . (I wouldn't be surprised if Paraguay is next, since uruguay is way too small and south brazil doesn't seem it will get its independency any time soon (talking about o sul e meu pais movement)

5) I have to add there's a few exceptions in the tropics that do fine such as Costa Rica , Panamá, Singapore , Macau, Hong Kong (the thing with those nations is that they are just too small. , they don't count in the bigher sphere , plus it's well known that Singapore , Hong Kong, Macao are european expats destination

Last edited by Untasted; 04-13-2019 at 01:10 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2019, 12:45 PM
 
108 posts, read 36,803 times
Reputation: 77
Quote:
Originally Posted by joacocanal View Post
It's pseudoscience. As there wasn't IQ info available for most countries, the authors made IQ estimations based on the racist premise that countries with more Blacks and Natives should have a lower average IQ.


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IQ_and...lth_of_Nations


IQ itself is a pretty poor measurement of intelligence.
Leaving race aside, the U.S. military gives an "aptitude" test to all recruits, called the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB). It is essentially an IQ test.

Anyone scoring below a certain threshold on the ASVAB is not recruited.

The Department of Defense believes such recruits really can't be taught efficiently (quickly) enough to make it worth DoD's investment in them, i.e., they are more "takers" than "givers", at least in the military environment. Studies have shown that replacing a gunner who scored on the 20th percentile of the ASVAB with a gunner who scored on the 55th percentile of this test have a 34% greater likelihood of hitting a target: https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/b...lowest-our-low. Maybe the military knows something the rest of society does not.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2019, 12:55 PM
 
142 posts, read 26,236 times
Reputation: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwartzmann View Post
There's a book called IQ and Global Inequality that says nations develop based largely on the average IQ's of their populations... the higher the IQ, the more developed the country. In Latin America, Uruguay and Argentina have higher IQs than the other countries of the region. Attached is a map that shows the average IQs by nation (color-coded).
It makes sence , isn't it funny that countries with highest IQ are the ones with largest European migration also. Again , me and my correlation theory about .,
All regions and countries around the artic and antartica are the most prosperous because they received massive European migration. Usa, canada, australia, new zealand, southern cone (Chile, argentina, Uruguay, south brazil, Paraguay), south Africa
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2019, 01:06 PM
 
142 posts, read 26,236 times
Reputation: 28
..
.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2019, 05:49 PM
 
713 posts, read 474,943 times
Reputation: 396
Quote:
Originally Posted by Untasted View Post
1) let's make something clear , the southern cone nor any region in Latin America has a first world status
2 ) I didn't intend to use Argentina as an example but since its the largest country in the region I had to
3 ) I can't help but notice a pattern in your explanation about social standard, life expentancy , humans rights, education, lgbt and safety. In every measurement and section (in almost every segment , one country from the southern cone come first ) either, Chile or uruguay .
4) Argentina is not in anyway in its best moment YET another country of the southern cone is making news as the most developed (it seems that it's a cyclical thing ), but this cycle of good progress remains in the southern cone . (I wouldn't be surprised if Paraguay is next, since uruguay is way too small and south brazil doesn't seem it will get its independency any time soon (talking about o sul e meu pais movement)

5) I have to add there's a few exceptions in the tropics that do fine such as Costa Rica , Panamá, Singapore , Macau, Hong Kong (the thing with those nations is that they are just too small. , they don't count in the bigher sphere , plus it's well known that Singapore , Hong Kong, Macao are european expats destination

not really, as I showed, Costa Rica is on top on several of these rankings, Panama too (in the ones related to wealth, income etc). Mexico, Brazil and other countries are on par with them in some of these stats. Uruguay is not on top of any index related to safety.


the Southern Cone is just a geographic term, it's just 3 countries. One of them (Uruguay) might as well be a province of the largest one: very similar accent, idiosyncrasy, etc. Chile has not nearly as much to do with Argentina as you think, both are pretty different countries. And it's not more "White" than many other countries in the region. It has more or less the same amount of "Whiteness" as Paraguay, Colombia, Venezuela and other countries in the area (as many genetic studies show). I don't see any pattern. Chile and Uruguay are among the most developed in the area but don't share many things in common culturally, demographically or politically speaking.



and supposing the Southern cone was something more than a geographical region, and Chile were as "White" as Argentina or Uruguay, then the 3 countries would have been consistently the 3 most developed in the region since Independence times. But Chile had the same GDP per capita as Colombia in the 80s; their development is mostly something that happened during the past 25 years. Argentina stopped being on the top of the most developed, and there is no indication that that will change in the short term. So, the "Southern cone" wasn't always the most developed area in LatAm, and it's not today. A country with strong Black admixture like Panama is on its way of becoming the wealthiest of the region. The Dominican Republic is growing very fast too.



Paraguay has grown a lot but it's far from the top, it's just reaching the level of countries like Peru, Ecuador or Colombia. According to your theory it should be more developed than these equatorial countries, but it never has been, nor Bolivia.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Untasted View Post
It makes sence , isn't it funny that countries with highest IQ are the ones with largest European migration also. Again , me and my correlation theory about .,
All regions and countries around the artic and antartica are the most prosperous because they received massive European migration. Usa, canada, australia, new zealand, southern cone (Chile, argentina, Uruguay, south brazil, Paraguay), south Africa
read my post above yours, it's not real IQ data, it's made up.


and the countries with the highest average IQ in that map are China (not a developed country), North Korea (impoverished dictatorship), South Korea and Japan. Not European countries.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-13-2019, 08:17 PM
 
120 posts, read 52,516 times
Reputation: 111
Bolivia's climate ranges from cold and dry to hot and humid. Its economy has been growing by leaps and bounds, averaging yearly growth of 4% to 6% for the last 10 years.

It has changed from being the poorest country just above Haiti to one of the fastest industrializing country in the region.
Multi-billion $ projects:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCG3...O7xMMMQ/videos
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2019, 08:18 AM
 
251 posts, read 189,676 times
Reputation: 229
Did anyone think to read a credible source on the internet about the economic history of the southern cone before coming to a forum like this one and seek answers from anomymous (and possibly ignorant) members???

There is a wealth of literature written by economists and economic historians about this subject (on Argentina in particular).

Argentina is an economic outlier. It is the only country in modern history that achieved economic development and then lost it...falling backwards into developing status.

Despite the economic recessions and defaults, the country is still endowed with the agrarian wealth and inherited infrastructure (from the nation's golden years 1880-1930) to give it an advantage over neighboring countries up north.

But anyway, I would suggest doing a little research of your own from credible sources online before coming back to this thread seeking an answer.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2019, 10:28 AM
Status: "Then everything change forever..." (set 11 days ago)
 
5,166 posts, read 8,017,583 times
Reputation: 4264
Quote:
Originally Posted by joacocanal View Post
A country with strong Black admixture like Panama is on its way of becoming the wealthiest of the region. The Dominican Republic is growing very fast too.
The DR is growing a lot and have a fast growing middle class, plus its the country in Latin America to converge the most. It went from a country that was poorer than Haiti (though Haiti wasn’t as poor as it is today) and the poorest Spanish-speaking country in the world to in the middle for the region all in 50 years or so.

It has to be given another 20 years to see if Haiti doesn’t bring it down. Haiti is always some sort of problem to the DR. In the past it was a stronger country of the two and sort of a military bully to the DR, hell bent to takeover the Dominicans for much of the 1800. In 1805 Dessalines made a widespread killing and burning of all the towns on the way to Haiti. After 1844 Haiti was bent on killing the entire Dominican population to ensure the whole island would be theirs. Then they choose that they can’t take over the Dominicans, so they make sure it remains a weaker country than having Spain or the USA take over. Now the DR is the stronger country, but has an immigration problem from Haiti that is aggravated by Haiti not developing. It would take Haiti 100 years growing at 7% a year to reach current levels of DR. We have to wait and see if DR is able to put an end or slow down considerably the numbers entering from Haiti. Otherwise, the DR will resemble Haiti in the future.

Everything else you said is spot on.

Last edited by AntonioR; 04-14-2019 at 10:37 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 04-14-2019, 10:30 AM
 
142 posts, read 26,236 times
Reputation: 28
Default Southern cone

[quote=joacocanal;54934699]not really, as I showed, Costa Rica is on top on several of these rankings, Panama too (in the ones related to wealth, income etc). Mexico, Brazil and other countries are on par with them in some of these stats. Uruguay is not on top of any index related to safety.


the Southern Cone is just a geographic term, it's just 3 countries. One of them (Uruguay) might as well be a province of the largest one: very similar accent, idiosyncrasy, etc. Chile has not nearly as much to do with Argentina as you think, both are pretty different countries. And it's not more "White" than many other countries in the region. It has more or less the same amount of "Whiteness" as Paraguay, Colombia, Venezuela and other countries in the area (as many genetic studies show). I don't see any pattern. Chile and Uruguay are among the most developed in the area but don't share many things in common culturally, demographically or politically speaking.



and supposing the Southern cone was something more than a geographical region, and Chile were as "White" as Argentina or Uruguay, then the 3 countries would have been consistently the 3 most developed in the region since Independence times. But Chile had the same GDP per capita as Colombia in the 80s; their development is mostly something that happened during the past 25 years. Argentina stopped being on the top of the most developed, and there is no indication that that will change in the short term. So, the "Southern cone" wasn't always the most developed area in LatAm, and it's not today. A country with strong Black admixture like Panama is on its way of becoming the wealthiest of the region. The Dominican Republic is growing very fast too.



Paraguay has grown a lot but it's far from the top, it's just reaching the level of countries like Peru, Ecuador or Colombia. According to your theory it should be more developed than these equatorial countries, but it never has been, nor Bolivia.



read my post above yours, it's not real IQ data, it's made up.


1) first of all. I am Pro-Hispanic America unification

2) I'm glad to hear good news about Panama and Costa Rica (but I still believe they're just too small in the bigger sphere , not a fair comparison between small and big countries )

3) Southern Cone is not just an economical region that indeed it includes only arg-chi-uru. (it's also cultural and it includes Paraguay and southern Brazil ), beside the language barrier, only in this region you see mostly homogenous population in Latin American (70% strong European admixture ), the rest being mestizos , very low pure indigenous and blacks population. Another uniqueness here is their so beloved MATE . (Which has an Indigenous origin), but the high compsuption of it was actually influenced by the british, since the British empire had a profound interest in the southern cone and still has .

4) when you say Argentina and Chile are (sooo) different , sounds like North Americans (from USA ) and Australians are (Soo) different as well �� (eye rolls), we all know their all causins with the same background. Yes californians and New Yorkers are sooo different yet they are in the same bag (eyes rolls), Britishs are soo different from Americans and Australians right , so different from other (Europeans) to even want to keep being in the EU knowing they will be screwed up

5) southern cone indeed is the region with the highest European migration in latinamerica , but (like any other former European colony soil suchs USA or Australia ) southern cone is not Europe (I live in Europe and still remains as the whitest region in the world ). (In fact the most indigenous zone in southern cone would be North Chile and North West Argentina since they are located in the Andes area)

6) your comparison between Chile and Colombia is very unfair for both countries (first because Chile is less populous, second ,chile has achieved a milestone as an emerging serious country faster , only Chile can presume not needing a VISA to enter the USA as a tourist among Latin countries)

7) again another unfair comparison (Paraguay vs Colombia Ecuador and Peru ?), Those countries are way more populous with huge high and lows ,but if we compare Paraguay to those 3 , Paraguay did better since its beginning and it certainly is a safer and with a better quality of life than many Latin regions suchs as Venezuela, central America and northern regions In Brazil ), (little Paraguay has a funny unknow history) , it was one of the first countries to get Independecy in Latin America along with colombia and Venezuela ., It was also one the first countries in southern America that had a railway system . At some point Paraguay was doing really good until 2 collosal countries ,Brazil and Argentina , plus Uruguay run over the country with a war that lasted for years and almost wipe out the population ,(allegedly) the British empire itself had its hands on this war because since the empire was interested in the river plate region it wanted to create turmoil so they could get more power over the Rio de la Plata region
. (regardless) of why the war happened we had to wonder why such major powerful countries made sure a small country like Paraguay didnt succee., Also ironic that Paraguay is among the fastest growing countries in the world (coincidence?)

8) my theory is no longer a (theory), just grab a world map and look at it, the fact is there .

Last edited by Untasted; 04-14-2019 at 10:38 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > World Forums > Americas
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top