They were under the thumb of the regime. They produced whatever the government told them to produce. They had a predetermined profit margin that the government dictated to them. German capitalists certainly fared relatively well, but their influence and prestige was greatly reduced compared to the past. Nonetheless they took that deal because the alternative was literally communism.
Very cool! I'm working on something similar but a little more wysiwyg and collaborative (think gdocs meets gsheets rather than word meets excel). Let me know if you want to chat - email in profile
> There are no well-established genetic predictors of IQ
Common misconception, sadly untrue. There are known genetic predictors of intelligence, they're just not simple genes that the layman can wrap his head around.
I think you'd have to be a bit of an expert to understand these results, just because of words like 'intelligence', that could mean anything, really, and I think accounting for 20% of the 50% heritability of intelligence is not exactly blowing the question out of the water.
All the same, I guess I am out of date (in 2017, they were getting 1% - perhaps in 2030, they will be up to 50%? Or back down to 2%?)
In general, I don't think there's any problem with saying some traits we call intelligence are heritable and that has a genetic component. I'm less sympathetic to the idea that intelligence is a simple scalar (the Q in IQ) or a quantity that should be used to prejudge candidates for given technical or social tasks. I mean, if somebody is good, does it matter that they are dumb as hell? I certainly would rather a talented dumbass than a useless genius as a coworker.
True, intelligence is not simple. But no matter how complex it is, the difference between an IQ of 100 and an IQ of 70 is undeniably a difference in intelligence.
The difference between a society with an average IQ of 100 and a society with an average IQ of 70 is one of intelligence. That's why, for example, any policy that allows emigrations from IQ 70 societies to to Western countries, which usually average around 100 IQ, is a bad policy for those Western countries.
> The difference between a society with an average IQ of 100 and a society with an average IQ of 70 is one of intelligence.
Strong claim, hard no.
In 20th century scientific records that's about the difference between pre WW German country schools and the same regions in the later part of WWII under siege and under supplied.
That large difference has been attributed to nutrition rather than intelligence given the same genes, the same schools, the same society, etc.
> True, intelligence is not simple.
At yet there you are, mere sentences later, over simplying it and ignoring significant confounding factors. Deliberate malfeasance, oblivious blind ignorance, ... ?
I mean, nationality is obviously an enviromental factor, right? There's no 'german gene'. Ethnicities like 'French' don't actually exist in genes. So even if there is this nation-by-nation IQ variation, it shouldn't matter if you let people live where they want.
Theres no one size fits all answer yet, but if you just want to test it out there are many commercial offerings on which you should be able to get some results for under $10k.
Sadly, the best public material is the technical marketing for GCP, see the following for example (a few other materials can be found in this comments section):
Warm regards,