Harvard Professor Says Income Gap is Genetic

Andrew Anglin
Daily Stormer
January 29, 2014

Greg Mankiw is Chairman of the Economics Department at Harvard University.

He has drawn up a math equation that proves that the income gap has almost nothing to do with the quality of education and “availability of opportunities,” and everything to do with genetics.

This is, of course, obvious.  But it is always nice to have a respected academic tell us we are right.

He writes:

When people think about inequality of incomes, a key issue is inequality of opportunity. Some people are born to rich parents who can afford private schools, summer camp, SAT tutors, etc., while others have poorer parents who cannot easily afford such things. One might wonder how much of the income inequality we observe can be explained by differences in the resources that people get because of varying parental incomes.

Let me suggest a rough calculation that gives an approximate answer.

The recent paper by Chetty et al. finds that the regression of kids’ income rank on parents’ income rank has a coefficient of 0.3. (See Figure 1.) That implies an R2 for the regression of 0.09. In other words, 91 percent of the variance is unexplained by parents’ income.

I would be willing venture a guess, based on adoption studies, that a lot of that 9 percent is genetics rather than environment. That is, talented parents have talented kids partly because of good genes. Conservatively, let’s say half is genetics. That leaves only 4.5 percent of the variance attributed directly to parents’ income.

Now, if you let me play a bit fast and loose with the difference between income and income rank, these numbers suggest the following: If we had some perfect policy invention (such as universal super-duper pre-school) that completely neutralized the effect of parent’s income, we would reduce the variance of kids’ income to .955 of what it now is. This implies that the standard deviation of income would fall to 0.977 of what it now is.

The bottom line: Even a highly successful policy intervention that neutralized the effects of differing parental incomes would reduce the gap between rich and poor by only about 2 percent.

This conclusion does not mean such a policy intervention is not worth doing. Evaluating the policy would require a cost-benefit analysis. But the calculations above do suggest that all the money the affluent spend on private schools, etc., explains only a tiny fraction of the income inequality that we observe.

[Note: Mankiw may be a Jew, I’m not sure. It does seem like a position that would be held by a Jew, and his name is a bit Jewy.  However, it doesn’t really matter here – the point still stands, and this is simply science.]

How wonderful would the world be if information such as this were allowed to be acted on by the state and the larger culture?  No longer would we cry about the poor, miserable unfortunates.  No longer would we pretend that the minority groups fail to perform like normal people because of some vague “oppression.”  We would, in fact, be able to move forward into the future, rather than guilt-tripping ourselves to allow the lowest of society to drag us down to their level with their constant moaning.

We would also be in a position to make a very clear, logical and scientific argument for the repatriation of blacks and other nonwhites to their own homelands.

We should make it clear here that these numbers are relevant to the present system, which is corrupt and abusive.  Poverty is the fault of the Jew, and the lower-income Whites of this country deserve a better income and a better life than they presently have in this system, and the Whites who make 500 million a year should be shamed for doing so.

Still, it is important to understand that even within the White race, there are those who have higher intelligence and those with lower, and that each has a role, equally vital to society, but different.

There is no reason that people with lower intelligence should go to college.  Sending everyone to college is part of a Jew indoctrination and money-making scam.  We see clearly that it has almost nothing to do with learning anymore, and this is, in large part, because the colleges are populated by people who’s nature is not to desire learning.  They are also filled with women, who at twenty should, all things being equal, have a baby or one on the way.

Men with working class backgrounds, if they do not exhibit special skills in their youth, should be given occupational training after basic education (perhaps the program could start at twelve, and they could do half days at school until they were fifteen), for which they know they will get a decent pay, which they will be capable of comfortably supporting a family with.  Once NAFTA and GATT are repealed, we should have no trouble supplying our working class with enough work and pay to allow them a comfortable lifestyle.

Without the men who build the roads and cars and run the electricity and keep all of this working, the scientist would not be able to do his work.  A society should function like a family, where everyone plays a part, and everyone takes care of one another.

It is no use to rid ourselves of the Jew, if we allow his system to remain in place.