sisu2019

Arguing with economic laws makes as much sense as arguing with gravity. The only reason you get as far as you do is that the level of econ education approaches zero in the general population. What you said is not even wrong, it's not well defined, it's not supported by any evidence and it betrays that you have absolutely no clue about how markets work at all. It's a lot like if you had said "falling down hurts as long as we don't abolish gravity".

okay, you first.

I am super anti sugar. I don't eat it except in fruit and I don't give it to my child.

I still don't want the government messing with nutrition. It's track record with that is just awful and there is no reason to think it's going to get better.

Politicians please do it as Hippocrates said: "First do no harm"

Before you ban, label or tax sugar you have to get your house in order: Stop distorting the food market with subsidies and stop giving people wrong information (Food pyramid etc).

it's a fun game: define poverty in terms of wealth inequality and presto if inequality goes up, poverty does too. But here is the thing that we forgot in the west because we essentialy abolished it: poverty is about material depreviation and that happens to be the one thing about it that would actually stunt IQ. We don't have material deprivation, not in Norway nor anywhere else in Western Europe, certainly not at an increasing rate. We have access to all the calories we want and at prices and qualities unequaled in human history. We also have endless free books btw.

> bananas

It should be obvious that Europeans don't need bananas for proper development. In addition that has nothing to do with poverty.

Also, fascinating that if you haphazardly connect the hand wringing topic du-jour with anything at all you get people that scour the internet for even the tiniest scrap of evidence for you.

> Yours isn't any more valid than theirs, so what did you add to the discussion?

At least I know some economics and history so of course my perspective is more valid. There has never been a time or place where everyone was better off materially and if you are not aware you and OP should start reading some of those books.

wealth inequality doesn't mean more poor people. I know it's a lot to ask nowadays but please be informed enough about economics to at least know the very basics if you are going to bring it up.

The idea that the food availabe to people is getting worse or less, in Western Europe of all places, is absolutely ridicolous. If anything the opposite is the case. As regards jobs we also have the opposite problem: too few simple jobs.

Literally the opposite is true. What is it about IQ that makes people straight up hallucinate the opposite of reality.

it's fine when they are gay or trans to please their parents but god forbid they go to bible study.

sounds great, sounds smart, is more true than not but the problem is, you don't have any solutions while the dumb-ass christians do.

> marriage wasn’t a tool of the patriarchy after all.

It so obviously isn't it's painful to imagine this is a widespread belief. Marriage exists to reign in men, monogamous marriage doubly so.

Progressives have no idea what they are toying with, they are literally children playing house with grenates.

> start to counter it

Please do try. I don't think what you are saying is true at all and it certainly isn't any thing like a universally accepted scientific truth.

I think the author makes an important point.

----- By contrast, membership in groups of necessity cultivate a rather different set of habits and expectations, certain virtues are inculcated because the group of necessity requires them to function. -----

Thats really the problem with all these virtual activities "on the computer". They beat the real thing by a mile while not providing the psychological sustenance human beings need. Online porn is a million women at your finger tips that will never reject you so why go talk to woman in real life? Why be funny or interesting or well groomed, that's so hard.

Instagram is full of beautiful vistas you can see without breaking a sweat so why go exploring in your back yard?

Games are full of achivments, ones you are certain to get so why work hard at anything real where it might be for nothing?

The problem is that we need all of that real life friction to lead a full human life and we really need to strive to find meaning. We need to sweat, we need to fail and we need to get rejected every once in a while, too. That's the real reason why if you live a mostly virtual life it feels so empty and bad that you want to kill yourself.

IQ predicts future income even if the subjects environement is controlled for. It's a very good meassure, probably the best we have in the social sciences. What it tells us is not nice, sure, but denying reality is not going to help anyone.