Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by cmn32480 on Wednesday December 28 2016, @07:34PM   Printer-friendly
from the carry-a-four-leaf-clover dept.

How much is a child's future success determined by innate intelligence? Economist James Heckman says it's not what people think. He likes to ask educated non-scientists -- especially politicians and policy makers -- how much of the difference between people's incomes can be tied to IQ. Most guess around 25 percent, even 50 percent, he says. But the data suggest a much smaller influence: about 1 or 2 percent.

So if IQ is only a minor factor in success, what is it that separates the low earners from the high ones? Or, as the saying goes: If you're so smart, why aren't you rich?

Science doesn't have a definitive answer, although luck certainly plays a role. But another key factor is personality, according to a paper Heckman co-authored in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences last month. He found financial success was correlated with conscientiousness, a personality trait marked by diligence, perseverance and self-discipline.

Why aren't you rich? You obviously slept with the wrong people!


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 4, Interesting) by darkfeline on Wednesday December 28 2016, @10:24PM

    by darkfeline (1030) on Wednesday December 28 2016, @10:24PM (#446874) Homepage

    TFA and the comments posted so far all assume that everyone universally wants to be rich. If you're smart and not rich, it must be because you weren't able to get rich. Surely it can't be because you don't WANT to be rich, right?

    Being rich is more effort than it's worth. I don't really want or need five yachts, and I'd have to find and pay people to maintain those yachts for me and trust them and treat them well. It costs time and effort to use that wealth, and time and effort is far more valuable than money (which is why I'm browsing SN, obviously).

    --
    Join the SDF Public Access UNIX System today!
    Starting Score:    1  point
    Moderation   +2  
       Insightful=1, Interesting=1, Total=2
    Extra 'Interesting' Modifier   0  
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   4  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 28 2016, @11:55PM

    by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 28 2016, @11:55PM (#446893)

    If my current work offered me a 25% cut in salary in exchange for 20% cut in hours worked, I'd say, "3 day weekends every weekend here I come."

  • (Score: 3, Interesting) by rleigh on Thursday December 29 2016, @12:08AM

    by rleigh (4887) on Thursday December 29 2016, @12:08AM (#446899) Homepage

    Agreed. The article here has the presupposition that the metric for "success" is "being rich". But not all of us measure success by material wealth alone. Working as a scientist in a university, I'm surrounded by hundreds of very intelligent people. Many of them are successful scientists, but very few are rich as a result. While few would have any complaints if it resulted in a big financial benefit, that's simply not the driver here. Only a few get rich off spin out companies, textbook sales and other revenue generators.

    That's not to say I disagree entirely with the article: factors other than IQ such as existing family capital, business connections, random chance, good timing can all contribute to financial success. As for personality and conscientiousness, this is something I would argue is necessary for success of any kind in most fields. That boils down to caring about doing a good job, and you'll find that a trait of good people across the board from businessmen to cleaning staff.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 29 2016, @05:07AM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 29 2016, @05:07AM (#446970)

      You must not have any climatologists at your university then.... I hear they are money grubbing, morally lacking and ethically challenged pricks.

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 29 2016, @01:12PM

      by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 29 2016, @01:12PM (#447061)

      The article summary has it right: "doing a good job" and "working pretty hard" are found to be strong corollaries to becoming wealthy. Right next to "having a budget to know where the money goes". As of this morning, my wife and I have a 563K net worth at age 30. I have a PhD, she has a MS, both in engineering. We haven't 'worked' more than 10 hr/week for the last three months (although we are both about to resume full-time avg. 30-hour weeks). We are 'smart' (both tested gifted/genius), but not 'rich', although we should be financially independent w/in 3 years through low expenses. We have quite a bit of 'time freedom', which we both value more than financial freedom. We have little desire to be 'rich', although we will be millionaires (I guess) soon.

  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 29 2016, @12:45AM

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday December 29 2016, @12:45AM (#446908)

    Hmm, is rich wealth, and is wealth happiness?

    The author mistakes that smart people are supposedly more able to become rich, by the author's measure, and happier as a result. There are plenty of smart people that don't play to get a high score. They play to enjoy the game, even against people playing to win. And, people that enjoy the game often are winning even if they can't buy a yacht, and plenty of people with yachts are still seeking that next thing to briefly make them happy.