/sci/ - Science & Math

>>10898966
> You're asking for a chaotic shift that doesn't give people that chance to update their values to determine if the world they're creating by doing that would be one that they ultimately want to raise kids in.
What? Currently we do our very best to punish success. We increase tax progressively, we encourage intelligent women to delay childbirth first for tertiary education and then for their career, so they can desperately squeeze out a downs syndrome kid at the age of 39. These are very basic things we could correct or reduce the negative impact of with minimal disruption.
Reducing care and benefits for the children of irresponsible morons will be a tough sell, I agree, but it is essential. Being a burden on society should not mean you get a free pass to reproduce as much as you want with zero consequences.

This is the sort of shit we're dealing with here:
>https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-31128969
If I remember correctly from a newspaper story, she was incapable of caring for her children and they kept on being taken away from her.
>http://news.bbc.co.uk/today/hi/today/newsid_9714000/9714582.stm
These stories are even worse.

>>10824512

>>10610383
This whole post is delusional. There is no systematic monitoring of IQ and African countries do not participate in IQ substitute tests like PISA, but it's very doubtful the Flynn effect is increasing at such a rate it balances out their massive growth in population relative to high IQ countries. Also, don't forget African countries are experiencing dysgenic fertility themselves as well, the best educated and wealthiest have substantially fewer children.
>>10610356
Dysgenic fertility for men may have ended or reversed in developed countries, but for women it's still pretty bad, driven by greater education and work commitments for smarter women.