Hi

The Zagorsky article appears to go out of its way to make the case for
a lack of relationship between IQ and wealth.  Just a couple of
observations.

1.  From figures 1 and 2, Zagorsky points out disparity in upper
quadrants for income but not wealth.  That is, more people of high
income have high IQ than low IQ, but about equal numbers for wealth. 
But looking at figure 2 (wealth), it is clear that the (ignored)
quadrant of low income and low wealth is much denser than the (ignored)
quadrant of high income and low wealth.

2.  In Table 2, average wealth (Net Worth) is presented for groups of
different average IQ levels.  The relationship is clearly linear with
only one reversal.  In fact the correlation between the aggregate
figures (IQ and net worth) produces r2 = .963, only marginally less than
IQs correlation with income for these aggregate data, r2 = .968.  Much
lower correlations for individual scores appears to be more due to noise
in the data than to a lack of relationship.

3.  The regression analyses, some of which actually show a negative
relationship between IQ and wealth, appear problematic to me because
they include predictors that are at least moderately correlated and
arguably serve as mediators of relationships.  For example, IQ and
education correlated .62 according to Table 1 and both correlated about
.16 / .17 with wealth.  Including both in the regression analysis means
that one is examing the relationship between wealth and IQ controlling
statistically for education.  That is, what is impact of IQ if education
level does not differ.  Is that really a sensible thing to do if the
causal path is IQ *> Education *> Wealth or Income?

My main take from this study is if you want to be wealthy ... don't get
divorced, don't be born Black or Hispanic or in the USA, be
self-employed (good luck) rather than a professional, don't marry
someone who works (presumably wealthy people can keep their spouse at
home), don't smoke heavily (good advice at the best of time), and don't
be the primary earner (anyone looking for a partner to keep at home to
make themselves wealthy, give me a call ... but don't tell my wife and
ignore the fact that you would be the primary earner!).

Personally I think this is a good candidate for the correlation (i.e.,
non-experimental) does not imply causation book, despite the seeming
sophistication of the analyses.  One final note ... anyone wanting to
give away IQ points can also give me a call.  I find that one can never
have enough!

Take care
Jim


James M. Clark
Professor of Psychology
204-786-9757
204-774-4134 Fax
[email protected]

>>> "Mike Palij" <[email protected]> 06-Oct-09 8:04:33 AM >>>
The Motley Fool website (a website that provides stock and
investing advice) has a little article titled "Are You Too Smart
to Be Rich?" in which the author goes over the reasons for 
why "smart people" (aka Big Brain/High IQ types -- I think
that's a Jungian category :-) do badly at getting wealthy.
Although skimpy on details (e.g., Michael Lewis wrote about
the collapse of Long-Term Captial Management, an investment
house with a couple of Nobel prize winning economists and
heavy duty quantitative modelers and the collapse was not as
simple as presented here; Lewis' article appeared in the NY
Times and I provided a link to in a previous post to TiPS, so
one should be able to search the archives for it).

For more, see:
http://www.fool.com/investing/value/2009/09/28/are-you-too-smart-to-be-rich.aspx


To provide a sense of the presentation consider the following
quote:

|Economist Jay Zagorsky ran a study to determine whether 
|brains translate into riches. His conclusion? "Intelligence is not 
|a factor for explaining wealth. Those with low intelligence should 
|not believe they are handicapped, and those with high intelligence 
|should not believe they have an advantage."
|
|In his book Outliers, Malcolm Gladwell explored example 
|after example of how the successful became so. He concluded 
|that "once someone has reached an IQ of somewhere around 120, 
|having additional IQ points doesn't seem to translate into any 
|measurable real-world advantage."

I'm not a fan of Gladwell so I haven't read "Outliers" but I presume
some Tipsters are fans and wonder if they can confirm that Gladwell
actually says that one doesn't get a benefit for having an IQ over
120.  Some people seem to believe in this as shown in the following 
quote:

|Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE: BRK-A) (NYSE: BRK-B) billionaire 
|Warren Buffett seems to agree: "If you are in the investment business

|and have an IQ of 150, sell 30 points to someone else."

Anybody know where one can sell some excess IQ points? ;-)

-Mike Palij
New York University
[email protected] 




---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([email protected])

---
To make changes to your subscription contact:

Bill Southerly ([email protected])

Reply via email to