What does /biz/ think about the importance of IQ in financial success? I have an iq of 131. (according to the test administer that could be an underestimation tho). Assuming I put in the effort, how far do you think I could go?
On the balance of probabilities, it isn't very important.
The surest ways to financial success are,
1. Earning more than you spend
2. Investing savings sensibly.
Number 2 doesn't require that much intelligence.
As for number 1...spending less doesn't require that much intelligence...earning more is where intelligence can come in to it...but even that doesn't correlate very well.
I don't think it's all that important. IQ of 143 here. I can learn things pretty fast I guess, if I commit to it which is often not the case.
I think other factors are more important, and furthermore, that intelligence as a whole encompasses more than what the Intelligence Quotient can reasonably measure.
higher iq suggests one can be trained for compensative careers for less difficulty than a lower iq person would face. smart people typically don't stay poor, poors stay poor because they're bad with money (low iq). I don't completely cosign with ron swansons "capitalism is god's way of "determining who is smart and who is poor" but there is something to it.
A smart person can be unmotivated, perhaps as a result of depression, anxiety or a pessimistic disposition, which can lead to him/her not achieving financial success in life.
Wealth is a result of more than raw computing power, i.e. IQ.
>it isn't very important
>IQ is a meme
>I don't think it's all that important
>being average smrt
>absolutely no importance
The reality is that IQ is a fairly reliable indicator of financial success, but only for statistical purposes. Also note that I said "indicator" not "requirement." Its a case of correlation, not causation. But the correlation is strong.
It's impossible to take someone's IQ and make reliable predictions about their financial future. That's not how statistics work. We can predict that certain outcomes are more or less likely that others, and that's it.
>Also, the fact that >>1044467 and >>1045212 don't know understand the concept of correlation pretty proves that they lied about their IQ. Faggots.
Knowledge beats IQ every time. You can have an IQ of 200, but if you've never read a book or news article in your life, you're still going to be an ignoramus. It's more important to be well-read.
I don't have any data to back up my position, but I'm almost positive there's little to no correlation between an above average IQ and financial success--compared to people who are floating around an average IQ.
Having an IQ that's slightly below to anything above average does not really mean much, other than having a much lower chance of carrying a learning disability.
However, the limitations you might incur in life from having an IQ that's below average increases the further the IQ decreases, obviously.
As such, IQ tests are just a great way for psychologists and therapists to figure out if/what learning disabilities an individual might have.
The only reason I could see for a possible correlation between financial success and someone who knows they have a high-IQ is that the individual believes they have a genetic predisposition that makes them far superior than others whenever it comes to their learning ability. Which, for the most part, isn't true.
For instance, Einstein wasn't considered brilliant because of his IQ. He was smart because he stayed on task from a very young age and focused on a subject that he felt very passionate about. Those qualities can be found in almost every individual (with avg. to above avg. IQ) if they're placed in the right environment from an early age.
tl;dr: probably no correlation between high IQ and financial success. Having a low IQ means everything, but having above average means nothing.
Around 130 is about as much as you'll need to succeed. There are extreme diminishing returns after that, as there are not that many tasks (or jobs) that you could do better with an extremely high tail IQ bar academia and such.
It matters but you're better off not considering it.
A high iq won't build your life, it'll just make it a bit easier.
An IQ of 131 doesn't really have real limits. But you'll put more work in to learn something than a 140 iq person.
>The reality is that IQ is a fairly reliable indicator of financial success
Studies have consistently found a correlation between IQ and income, but not between IQ and wealth (which is what 'financial success' probably means to most people).
See for example https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Jay_Zagorsky/publication/222681959_Do_you_have_to_be_smart_to_be_rich_The_impact_of_IQ_on_wealth_income_and_financial_distress/links/547f21d60cf2de80e7cc7641.pdf
Interesting study, but you have to earn it before you can save it. Income is always the foundation of wealth management.
There's lot's of reasons why people with high IQ might run into wealth issues (more entrepreneurial, more abstract thinkers), but, at the end of the day, wealth growth is more about *discipline* than intelligence.
High IQ (income) + financial & investing discipline (wealth) = success.
Studies have shown that there is a correlation between earnings and IQ, but only up until about 120. After that, your ability to do well is more impacted by others things.
tl;dr you only need to be somewhat above average to do very well, if you can play the game.
Some of the most wealthy people I know are average/below average IQ. They just have great common sense, problem solving skills, and determination, they're just pretty stupid in other aspects. If you want a desk job, higher IQ can relate to higher earnings, but it's the least of your worries if you want to become wealthy.
Lel, not at all. You can have a high IQ and be some entitled faggot that no one likes and go no where... or you can have an high IQ, work hard, and be successful. Same is true for a lower IQ. I'm sure theres some correlation but does anyone actually give a fuck? No.
IQ tests are far from accurate, that is they are designed to identify the extremes (really smart or really dumb) not give a truly refined score. That is why there's usually a fairly high standard deviation. People who believe that a short meme test can truly tell how smart or successful you are/ be are just autistic faggots.
it isn't accidental. the ability to earn does to a non-negligible degree reduce to the ability to learn. Not perfectly, there is more noise on an individual level but in broad strokes
You're not very bright, huh? I specifically said correlation, NOT causation. Learn to read before you post.
Or preferably, just don't post ever. You're too dumb and you're just wasting photons.
Top kek. I do agree with you though.
Just remember, intelligent people with high IQ's can see things, think things that people with lower IQ's cannot, that is why it is so hard to discuss things with them using logic and reason. So it is almost useless.
Think of high IQ as a elevator and low/average IQ as a ladder.
For someone with high IQ, all they have to do is put in the initial effort, and it takes off for them as the rest of the process comes naturally to them.
For someone with low/average IQ, financial success is very much a ladder. They have to put the initial effort in, and much more or they risk losing it all. They also tend to stay away from calculated risks due to having a lower IQ, and thus weaker understanding of finance. This makes the climb to financial success very much a menial process, such as a climbing a ladder.
IQ in itself has little correlation to financial success.
Ambition, determination, risk-tolerance, creativity, connections, etc. All of these matter more than IQ.
I can be a very ambitious, hard-working, creative person of average intelligence who happened to stumble across an untapped profitable venture, and I can just hire the high IQ guys to make more money for me, see >>1045212
You guys are fucking delusional.
Do you understand the concept of a standard deviation?
Why is it every nwrd and NEET seems to think theyre 130 and above? Never average?
Also They did a study and found that lots of physicians were clocking in at the low 100's barely above notmal. Hence persistence and the ability to read books trumps youre little snowflake delusion of genius
You just really felt the need to post something -- anything -- no matter how retarded, huh? It's important to be part of the group, anon, even when the group thinks you're a fuckwit.
Nothing in the graph I posted has anything to do with standard deviations or the rarity of certain IQ results. It shows the correlation between IQ and income. Period. Which has ziltch to do with the prevalence of the IQ deciles in the population.
And speaking of your low IQ and your misunderstanding of statistics ... what does some anecdotal evidence about the IQ of some doctors have to do with anything? Not all doctors have high incomes. So your little factoid adds nothing to the discussion,
Please God, make the morons go away. This is exhausting.
IQ is literally what sets nations apart. All the 3rd world shitholes have average IQs of 80 or less. All the countries with averages of 100 IQ top the charts in any field that matters, be it science, prosperity or actual gold reserves (bar some idiots who literally spawned on oil for example). If your IQ is > 125, you are in the top percentile of human intellect. Get healthy, fit and motivated. Eat well and work out plus pick a goal in any field that interests you and is not totally useless like women studies. You have the potential to do something great, and if anything you will outcompete those 100iq sheep screaming IQ does not matter and live a good life.
Also remember that for the less intelligent, making you think you are not so special is a goid strategy. This is why a lot of high IQ people feel ashamed of "being smart", since they get attacked for it throughout their youth. To lose these kind of traumas and bad behaviors I recommend the book "unlocking the emotional brain" by Ecker et al.
Much like money, IQ is only worth shit if you use it. Do you spend your brainpower making a difference for yourself, or are you just playing puzzle games for kicks?
Also, absolute numbers like 131 aren't as reliable as percentiles. Personally, I got scores as high as 148 and as low as 105 on different IQ tests.
Correlation is not causation. IQ test questions may have biases that favor the people of the country/culture where the test was developed, not to mention the wide gaps in education standards. Saying IQ is what sets countries apart simply isn't true until someone proves that IQ is a direct cause of being in the 3rd world.
It makes it much easier.
1) The highest paid jobs go to the highest calibre applicants. To those who have natural ability to achieve tough qualifications and to succeed and gain experience in previous jobs. Studies show that high IQ correlates with job performance. So a carpenter/plumber/mcdonalds server with high IQ is more likely to rise to the top of their profession with increased responsibilities and income.
2) Higher IQs are able to make better financial decisions and are more able to delay gratification. So they invest money for future rewards instead of blowing it on instant dopamine hits such as expensive food, fast cars, drugs, foreign travel, designer clothes, brand new apple phones etc.
TLDR: It's easier for intelligent people to make money and then keep it.
>Studies have shown that there is a correlation between earnings and IQ, but only up until about 120.
Sure those were studies?
Sure that's not just some arbitrary number spat out by warren buffet?
I did not take an online test for my IQ. I took a Wechsler test, geared for children, when I was 11, administered by a psychologist. The score of 131 correlated to the 2nd percentile. I know IQ can change in children, but generally not by a very large amount after the age of six or seven. My question was less geared to whether or not IQ was a ticket to financial success, but if you could go farther with a higher IQ than someone working just as hard as you with a lower IQ. I ask this because in general people who are billionaires, or simply in the top of the financial sector, have relatively high IQs, in the case of hedge funds I've heard that many researchers and analysts have IQs in the 160s.
Is Warren Buffet really the nice jolly grandpa that he portrays? Any links or stories of him being his business self?
My name is Christopher Langan and I have an IQ of around 200.
Here is a video of me doing an interview a few years back.
I also wrote this.
My dick is bigger: I have 152.
IQ matters up to a point, son; after that, it's all diminishing returns. Being very intelligent can actually play against you: people start getting jealous as all hell and are actually very, very afraid of you making them look dumb, so they go out of their own way to fuck your shit up.
It costed me my first job and I learned it the hard way: hide your intelligence and only use it when it will make you come out ahead (i.e.: not as a douche, but as a helpful very smart guy who worked with a team).
Being cunning is way more important than being intelligent in business.
People with very might IQs actually make poor lower and middle management as they are always "thinking" and trying to put out fires that dont exist yet.
A lot of working in large companies is actually you just sitting there and going through the motions of your job
Class A asshole, just good at keeping it out of the press.
An example: Most Berkshire owned companies have terrible ratings on glassdoor. Frequent compaints are low pay and understaffing. But that's not uncle warren, oh no, that's the management's fault. It's not like Berkshire hands down strict ROI targets and fucks up any manager who doesn't hit them. Nope, not Uncle Warren.
Same with taxes. Warren says rich people should pay higher income taxes. But all of his income is untaxed. That's why his effective rate is so low. Marginal tax rate could go to 100% tomorrow and he would still be a billionaire, but doctors would get fucked. Taxing income is literally pulling up the ladder behind you, since wealthy people don't need income as much as poor and middle class people do. But Dems like Warren get lots of positive press for encouraging the destruction of the middle and lower classes at no cost to themselves.
Warren says people should invest in indexes. Do as I say, not as I do: how much does Berk have in index funds? Buffet's money came from private equity deals and futures contracts. But everyone else should just buy indexes and let Mr Market (who Buffet acknowledges is retarded!) decide when they retire. Complete cognitive dissonance.
That's nice; how many do you read and write?
I otherwise agree with you though. If you're smart and working your way up in a company you have to turn your brain off for the most part until you get to a certain level. Most companies would rather have someone who is obedient and social than someone who is particularly smart but this really depends on the job.
Yeah... I mean, I wouldn't necessarily say "turn your goddamn brain off". Don't get on the high horse just because you're quicker than most because otherwise you'll get into all sorts of trouble. There's something people hate more than losing money, and that's looking stupid or meeting someone who is obviously smarter than them.
Cunning > Intelligence. I repeat, I learned the lesson the hard way. The only way you can be smart in an office setting is by being very smooth about it, you gotta learn to give off this "I'm very smart and I know it but, you know, that's not all, and I'm actually here to make things simpler for all of us" kind of attitude. I repeat, I learned this the hard way. Be humble. People are actually very, very sensitive to highly intelligent people. It really messes with a person's self-esteem to meet someone smarter, and if they're well connected fuckers they *will* take you down.
Getting back on topic, I believe what managers want from their low-level employees is someone who is dependable..., someone they can trust, who won't just disappear when shit happens, and will actually lend a hand in putting the fire out (or don't complicate things in the very least).
Smart people fill this role, but as we all know smart doesn't necessarily mean 'intelligent', as in 'high IQ'.
Smart people are resourceful, and to be resourceful in an office environment you actually have to be likable because most of your resources are, well, people.
there might be an arms race effect going on. although high iqs alone does not mean you on a higher strata of society, but if you are in the higher strata higher iqs are more likely.
3) Why aren't we talking about something important, like the weather?
Oglivy, the PR mogul got tested and scored 100-something. He was moping for like 15 minutes. Then he realized that he was so successful that it didn't really matter.
>people with lots of spare time
>spend the spare time on crossword puzzles etc
>scores higher on IQ test than single parents with three jobs and no spare time
Gee, wonder why?
No, it isn't. It's no controverse to say it's totally wrong.
I would say iq often correlates with your thinking capacity, memory and creativity too.
But online iq tests are meme. Everybody (even the monkeys i know) can get 130iq of those online tests