And it's not over yet

I hate you Jebus, and I'm glad you died.

What to do? What to do?:

Leaving aside race and IQ (and that last post comes quite a bit closer than I am comfortable with to touching the subject with the proverbial ten-foot pole), IQ matters for social policy. We do need to know whether g, the general intelligence factor that IQ is supposed to measure exists, how much of it is simply genetic, and how much more of it consists of environmental factors that we can reasonably change.

Because, assuming that it exists, but that the biggest problem for low-income children is environment, I don't know what sort of policy interventions this reasonably implies.

And alternately, if g doesn't exist, and the test is working on faulty assumptions of how intelligence manifests itself, then we need a new way to argue against inner city schools.
And yet, despite public schools being a trick to steal money, we could use them to improve the g of poor kids.

Even earlier interventions might help somewhat, but the earlier you go, the more problematic such interventions become. The younger the kids are, the more individual attention they require, which is why preschool is more expensive than fifth grade. Even if you're willing to pay for it, where are you going to find these millions of highly qualified early childhood experts to become, in effect, the surrogate parents to these children?

The same place you'll find the staff for thousands of new charter schools across the country? Megan's inability to self-reflect seems to extend into her ideas.

Not that I'm against trying--early childhood intervention seems to me, like schooling in general, to be one of those goods that society has an obligation to provide children if their parents are incapable. But as I've written before, good early childhood programs have enormous scale problems; I'm not sure how we overcome them.

WITH VOUCHERS!!!!!!!1!111!!!!!!1!! What better way to improve a potentially non-existent characteristic of children than with an untested radical reorganization of every facet of the context in which their intellects are, presumably, developed? And who knows better how to deal with scale problems than the good people at corporations like McDonald's and Coca-Cola? These are problems with solutions, Megan. Sheesh.

Update:

Steve Sailer is all over Megan's comments, and not for the first time. I don't know that Megan can be faulted for his frequent visits, but it is interesting that rather than take issue with him or warn others of his dubious nature, she's giving his underlying concerns voice, while avoiding specifics. It's hard, at times, not to wonder what's in Megan's heart.