Increasing America's Mean IQ.

As detailed in Part 1, the mean IQ of those living in the western world has dropped about 18 points since the Victorian era. In the United States the average IQ of its citizens is decreasing about 1-2 points each generation. Changes of this size may seem, at first glance small and inconsequential but, unfortunately, this is not the case. As emphasized by Richard J. Herrnstein and Charles Murray on page 364 of their book The Bell Curve, "When the mean of an IQ distribution shifts a little the size of the distribution's tails change a lot." For example, if the mean IQ of the American population were to fall three points, from 100 to 97, the numbers of its citizens with IQs above 120 would fall by 31 percent and the percent of the population with IQs above 135 would fall by 42 percent. More importantly perhaps, if the nations mean IQ fell 3 points, the percentages of the population with IQs below 80 would increase by 41 percent and those with IQs below 65 (currently the bottom 1 percent) would rise by 68 percent. What are the consequences to American society for such shifts in the cognitive ability of its citizens? If the mean IQ of our population decreased 3 points, as it has in the past one and a half generations, the overall poverty rate would increase by 11 percent; the proportion of children living in poverty would rise by 11 percent; the number of men in jail would increase by 13 percent; the numbers of women on welfare would increase by 14 percent; and the high school dropout rate would increase by 15 percent. I would argue that this is exactly what we have witnessed in the United states over the past 60 years and that our nations woes are, in no small part, a result of the deteriorating American IQ. In any case, it should be readily apparent to anyone who is willing to address the issue from a scientific point of view, that a relative small shift in mean IQ of a population can produce important social and economic outcomes. But, for a moment, let's consider the oppose side of the coin. What if we could shift our nation's mean IQ in the positive direction by as few as 3 points? If our nations mean IQ could be raised from 100 to 103 points the statistics show that the present poverty rate would be reduced by 25 percent and there would be 25 percent fewer men in jail. Similarly, welfare recipiency would fall by 18 percent and there would be 20 percent fewer children living in poverty. I believe, without a shadow of a doubt, that the dumping down of the average America citizen has played a major role in the countries decline from its former supper state status to the debtor nation we have become; fortunately, we can reverse out slide into mediocrity, and this is how it can be done. As with most of the concepts on this book, the steps which must be taken to improve the nation's cognitive ability are relatively simple and straight forward; unfortunately, there may not be the will to implement the political changes we must take to improve the intellectual status of the nation, but it can be done if we have the will to do it. First, and possibly most importantly, we must stop illegal immigration in its tracts! We simply cannot close our collective eyes to the hordes of low IQ peoples of Mexican descent who are crossing our southern border and diluting our nation's gene pool with every passing day. As disused in the next chapter, we do this by denying illegal's the right to work in our country and by curtailing significantly the welfare they receive while they are here. Second, we must stop paying low IQ single females from having babies, the policies of Lyndon Johnson and this great society have been a unmitigated disaster in this respect and the sooner we take steps to curtail the rate of illegitimacy in the United States the better. At present we pay low IQ single mothers to have illegitimate cognitive deficient children. In fact, the more children they have, the higher is their government stipend. Illegitimacy is an extremely important factor because 65 percent of illegitimate children are born to dull to very dull women. This is an important statistic because low IQ mothers beget low IQ children. In this respect, less than two percent of high IQ women produce very low IQ children while 30 percent of low IQ women produce children with low or very low IQs. In short, unwed mothers usually are stupider than their married counterparts and they produced stupider children than do married women. No matter how much money is spend programs like aid to dependent children and head start, nothing will change this genetic reality. We must stop paying single low IQ mothers for having children out of wedlock and start paying then not to have illegitimate children. Fortunately, modern medicine has provided a solution to this problem, it is called Norplant. One Norplant injection will render a female sterile for five years, thereafter her fertility returns to normal. The attractive thing about a Norplant injection is that, unlike permanent sterilization procedures, its effects wear off in a relatively short period of time; thus, a women who has a Norplant injection is nor burning any long tern bridges when she elects to have this form of birth control. We could begin this national IQ enrichment program by paying single females on welfare $5000 to have a Norplant injection that would prevent them from becoming pregnant for five years. During this five year period all the financial support they receive from the federal and state governmental agencies would continue. After five years we would give these women another $5000 if they agreed to have a second Norplant injection. The five year payment program would continue until they reached the age of forty at which point their chances of becoming pregnant decrease significantly. The advantages of a pay them not to have babies program would be twofold. First, and most importantly, it would reverse the present trend where in high IQ mothers are having fewer babies than their cognitive deficient counterparts. The discrepancy in the birth rates of high IQ and low IQ mothers must be reversed if we are to have any chance of improving the overall IQ of the nation. Paying low IQ mothers not to have children is one way to accomplish this goal. When one considers the staggering social and financial costs the nation pays for tolerating illegitimacy, I believe a program that pays low IQ single mothers not to have children would also be cost effective. To test my theory, let's begin by paying the nation's 13.7 million single moms not to have additional children. All of the monies provided to them by the government to support their families would be continued, but we will give them an additional $5000 if they agree to have a Norplant injection and, if they agree to continue in the program, we would pay them an additional $5000 when they had their second Norplant injection five years later. This voluntary birth control program would be continued for a total of 20 years at a cost of $20,000 per recipient, thus assuring that the vast majority of single mothers who participated in the study would not conceive again during their child bearing years. (I should get the Nobel Prize for economics for this idea!) In any case, the total cost of the program, assuming full participation by all single mothers in the country, would be about $27.5 billion. Admittedly, this is a lot of money to spend on a trial balloon. But maybe cheap, at twice the price, if you consider the alternative, which, of course, is to continue the status quo. Consider this statistic. Benjamin Scafidi PhD, a Georgia State University Economist, has shown that single mothers cost the tax payers a whopping $112 billion a year. These expenditures in tax, or more correctly increases in the national debt, does not begin to reflect the burden of single motherhood on society, because you can't measure the pain and suffering of crime victims who have been raped, robbed and murdered by the low IQ children of unwed mothers in dollars and cents. It is hard to believe that society would not be better off if these criminals had never been born. Now you may be thinking, after all these years, we should have learned our lesson, why not just stop paying single women to have babies, sure as hell would be a lot cheaper! Well, sure it would, but you are never going to be able to sell such a change in social policy to our gimme-gimme society, not in a thousand years you won't, especially since the democrats depend on the votes of the underclass to stay in power! However, for the most part, we are dealing with a group of unintelligent and illiterate women here and I'll bet my last dollar that if you pay them enough they will end up doing the right thing, despite their natural tendency to reproduce like rabbits. Yes, Mable, not having kids out of wedlock is a goal worth fighting for, no matter what the liberal intelligentsia tell you, and we can achieve that goal for far less than we are spending now to support the offspring of the dependent class! I will leave it to the economists to sort out the details of a Norplant program that would increase the mean IQ of the nation by decreasing the birth rate of unwed mothers. However, I believe it could be accomplished for far less than we are now paying for the failed social programs that caused the problem of illegitimacy in the first place. In this respect, the moneys that would be saved by reducing the numbers of children entering our failed head start programs each year alone would go a long way towards financing such a project. Finally, addition steps that can be taken to reduce the birth rate of cognitive challenged women include: oral contraceptives, the morning after pill and, yes, abortion on demand! All of these medications and abortion services should be made available at no charge to financially strapped cognitively challenged women of all races. Women of means, of course, can pay for their own contraceptives and abortions. However, one way or the other, educated working women are not the problem; rather, it is their low IQ uneducated sisters that society must come to grips with. The primary emphasis, of course, should be on the prevention of unwanted pregnancies, especially those of low IQ single mothers on welfare. However, no matter how much one detests abortion, it is difficult, if not impossible, to argue that the nation's mean IQ would not be much lower than it now is if abortions were not readily available to single mothers. For example, in the black community alone, over 684,000 black babies are aborted each year. Seventy-two percent of these abortions were performed on single black mothers. I know that abortion, especially late term abortion, is a bitter pill for most conservatives to swallow; however, for all practical purposes, a women's right to choose is here to stay. At this point in time, our goal should be to limit the procedure to the first trimester of pregnancy. As an aside, the liberals find themselves in a box when it comes to the issue of abortion. On the one hand, they must support abortion on demand or face the wrath of the feminists, the largest liberal voting bloc. On the other hand, by supporting liberal abortion statutes the democratic party have significantly decreased the size of their black voting base. In this respect, since 1973 16 million black women have had an abortion. Without these abortions the potential black democratic base would be 16 million larger than it now is. In summary, we can increase the mean IQ of Americans by curtailing illegal immigration; decreasing the rate of illegitimacy; and by encouraging all forms of birth control including first trimester abortion on demand.