Why you don't always make more money by selling more.

[pitzerwm]

Pat, I guess my point is and as Ted points out, the brain is very complex and the thought process and ideas/solutions come from many sources. Lets just wait and see how smart Obama and the Dems are in the next 4 years. For my selfish self I hope they are genius. As I've stated before, I don't care who is in Washington, I just don't want higher taxes and more socialism. I'm a realist, what will happen will happen. We have yet to understand the savant and his talents. There is lots of data that the min. wage people have great ideas for a company.

I guess my point is just because you have a high IQ, you will succeed/etc.

I helped raise a kid with a high IQ and today he isn't worth a crap. Maybe because his mother spoiled him, he thinks the world owes him and so he has accomplished nothing.

 

[Patrick H. Crowe]

Bill:

I read you loud and clear. A very high I. Q., in my view, is a NECESSARY but NOT SUFFICIENT condition for success. That's why many very bright people don't get very far.

It is also why folks with average intelligence probably can't learn advanced Physics.
Simultaneously it explains why Bush & McCain (by no means average, let alone below) simply do not have the needed brain power from the get go - - sorry to have to report that and please remember both are ABOVE average but way below Obama.

In addition to BRAINS galore, the necessary condition which a person is born with, there's so much more in o0rder to be sufficient and Obama and his folks have it in spades. Look at his family - - usually all smiling - - peaceful, content, satisfied people - - check the smiles especially. This man is unflappable. Personal attacks on him, by McCain, produced smiles - -plain and simple.

If I had to name one more mental asset to meet both the Necessary AND sufficient conditions it has to be fierce determination - - LBJ had it in spades - - it has to be FIERCE determination. LBJ knew where the bodies were buried and according to Califano's biography almost everybody in DC knew good and well that you messed with LBJ at your own peril.

Obama is much better. Far more gentle, intelligent, persuasive. Far less defensive, threatened, worried. Much healthier, mentally and physically. The BRAINS to figure out the painless way to accomplish goals. AMAZING! Just ask yourself how in the hell a black man could possibly get the nomination? Then be elected? Genius!

In his first four years this man will amaze you. Watch and see. He's the first in many years to have the NECESSARY AND SUFFICIENT conditions to be president. Some had neither, some had only one, not the other - - look out now - - too bad he has such a monumental mess to clean up. He'll do it.

Patrick H. Crowe

 

[pcb]

Pat, first off could you please tell me the IQ of Obama, Bush, and Mcain. Also who conducted the IQ test and are they a trustworthy source. Second, your statement about how a black man can get the nomination baffles me. I don't consider myself a racist but do consider most who support Obama as the first black president a racist. My reason for this is it is my understanding he his half white. Therefore if he is only half black then why is all I hear about is him being black. I would consider him half and half. Now keep in mind i'm not at the top of the IQ pool so I could be totally wrong.

 

[Patrick H. Crowe]

Dear pcb:

I willingly admit that I do not know the I. Q. scores of Bush, McCain or Obama. Your point is well taken but here's what I do know.

If one explores the SAT (possibly ACT, GRE or LSAT) scores needed to get into Harvard, let alone Harvard Law then a person can quickly see the demand is extremely steep.

Moreover Bush boasts about being a "C" student. McCain boasts about being 5th from the bottom of his class. It seems to me both of these gentlemen want to "mock" folks with very high I. Q's, right? They are 100% free to do that.

Obama surrounds himself with appointments like the former president of Harvard. Does that tell you nothing about BRAINS?

My older brother is a world reknown scholar in his field (google him if you like). He was a full professor at Notre Dame. I asked him why he did not apply to a place like Harvard? He let me know that the academic standards there were extremely strict.

So., you tell me my friend. Does admission to and graduation from Harvard and the Law school there, not guarantee a very high I. Q. ? Do you believe you could get in? How many defensive posters think they could? Instead of admitting their own modest level of intelligence they want to claim super bright people probably lack common sense, right?

How sad?

As posted earlier I had decades of experience with super bright people. They are badly needed in the White House. I wish you could see that.

Patrick H. Crowe

 

[Red Baron]

I think a bigger obstacle than lacking a high I.Q., is not knowing it. Too many average people refuse to admit they're average. Knowing I am average gave me the advantage of knowing I had to offset that in other ways, i.e., work harder and longer than the next guy, be creative, etc.

I've found that working 98 hour weeks helps me keep pace with some of the high I.Q. guys.

 

[pitzerwm]

If I remember right I.Q. is the ability to learn not that you/they come pre-programmed with more knowledge than you/others. Pat, your description of Obama may be right or just your wishes/observations, but if you are right you also know that many of those attributes were also the same in many of the worlds worse despots. Many people thought and a few still do think that Carter was a good President, history shows that he really caused many of today's problems. Only history will tell us the truth. Lets hope that you are right.

 

[rph9168]

Mr. Crowe,

At one time I was licensed to give the Stanford Binet Individual Intelligence test. Part of the process of being licensed was the study of IQ itself. No where was there any reference to the ability to succeed associated with IQ. The simplest definition of intelligence is what is measured by intelligence tests. Even today scientists are not in total agreement to what intelligence really is. IQ is basically a measure of one's mental capabilities in relation to other individuals of the same chronological age. It is not a measure of one's ability to use that measure of intelligence.

Although you may have your own feelings about how important intelligence is related to success they are simply your thoughts, not supported by scientific fact or even theory.

You seem to feel that entrance into Harvard equates with superior intelligence and performance and later success in life. Why didn't Obama allow his grades and academic achievements (if any) be released? Seems to me if they were so great he would have wanted all to know. Bush and McCain were both admitted into very respectable institutions of higher learning and while not necessarily on the Dean's list they did graduate and performed very well in their lives. As far as an Obama's outward appearance of being happy and content that might be a sign of being ignorant of the facts or clueless of the circumstances rather than confident and reassured.

I hope that Obama performs well. Our country really needs it at this time. As far as your rationale, it is a bit arrogant and way off base.

 

[Jimmy Buffett]

Are the standards for acceptance at Harvard the same for a "person of color" as for a wasp?

 

[Patrick H. Crowe]

Dear Mr. Buffett:

I can't officially speak for Harvard, (OBVIOUSLY). I can tell you what I was told. 1. There is a minimum standard and folks failing to meet it are NOT accepted, period.

2. If a person meets (surpasses) the minimum standard then many other considerations come into play. They vary widely. I was told that if a student who met the minimum standards and his/her family gave over $100,000 a year on a regular basis that this student would merit "special consideration."

3. It was also generally believed that if an applicant who met the minimum standards of scholarship (SAT scores) but could demonstrate an ability to do so while over coming serious obstacles, that this merited special consideration. Examples: I was told about were extreme poverty and a gal with only one leg who became a chapionship skier.

4. Your question seems to me to imply that skin color got folks in who did not meet the minimum scholastic standards. Possible but not only very doubtful but a very sensitive area. In my view the Harvard folks knew, as I did at the private high school where I taught for decades, that accepting folks of "average" I. Q's was a serious disservice to them because they simply lacked the needed brain power to get by. Moreover it seems to me that "whites" who could never get in (average I.Q) relish the opportunity to suggest that if they had been black their acceptance was assured. Not so, in my opinion. To me this is the standard defensiveness of many. Why can't average folks freely and openly admit that folks like Obama are much "brighter" than they are?

Answer you question?

Patrick H. Crowe

 

[Jimmy Buffett]

Actually no you didn't answer the question. You just rambled as usual.

 

[rph9168]

Dear Mr. Buffett:

Why can't average folks freely and openly admit that folks like Obama are much "brighter" than they are?

Patrick H. Crowe

Pat,

Your ramblings are getting very tedious. Do you think you can "talk" people to death in order to prove your point? It seems that way when you obviously have no verifiable data to support your points.

Let's try this again. What is Obama's IQ and what were his grades? You seem to avoid these question. Do you know the answers? If not quit calling him "bright" without any proof.

 

[Jimmy Buffett]

In my opinion this election said a lot more about the brightness of voters than the brightness of the candidates. I would be interested in knowing the average iq of Obama voters compared to the average iq of McCain voters.

 

[Patrick H. Crowe]

Dear Mr. Buffet:

I hope you know that Dr. Phil has studies to prove that about 80% of questions are not autherntic questions at all. Rather these "pretend" questions are an amateurish attempt to hide what is really a statement by the "pretend" questioner. It's a well worn and ineffective trick. The questioner, you in this case, will of course plead 100% innocence with a statement like: "All I did was ask a SIMPLE question!".

To many of us, your poorly veiled effort was to suggest that Obama only did what he did at Harvard because he's black, meaning that's the only reason he got in. Implied in the fake question is that you, a simple wasp, got no such advantage and if you had you too would now be a graduate of Harvard Law.

Please tell us your SAT scores and let us judge the probability of your admission to Harvard. Then your LSAT scores so we can predict you admission to Harvard Law. My apologies if you graduated from there but that seems extremely unlikely.

The almost certain proof is that you would have been trained that folks with first rate educations can spot these non-questions a mile away; moreover we know what the response to a serious answer is apt to be - - as yours clearly was (is). You are unable to apprecite the complexity of college admissions at world class universities.

Faced with a brief explanation of same you become so defensive that you hurl meaningless, quite defensive accustaions at the person who politely grants you the courtesy of a serious reply. You strain the patience of many folks with this amateurish sort of behavior. Please reconsider such future attempts.

I shall avoid your fake questions in the future.

Patrick H. Crowe

 

[Patrick H. Crowe]

Dear Red Baron:

I agree 100% that working 98 hour weeks can produce very unusal business income. Success?. This is especially true if you own the company. I've had quite a few conversations about such situations.

Suppose you are a union electrican - - a student of mine was. Scale, without bennies was $38 an hour. At the time the river boats were under construction here any electrician could have ALL the overtime he/she wanted. Time and a half for anything over eight hour and double time for weekends and holidays. All were expected to work a minimum of six twelve hour days because the contractor got "incentives" to finish ahead of schedule.

Now look at a 98 hour week (less?): 40 hours at $38; 20 more at time and a half; 24 more at double time and that's just an 84 hour week. Total salary for the week: 40x38=1520; 20x57=1440, then 24x76=1824. Add 'em up. Just short of five grand a week.

I ran some fairly successful businesses - - once in a great while I'd make five grand in a week but rarely.

My point is simple: 98 hours a week proves fierce determination. My compliemnts to you, kind sir, very well done. But consider work smart, not LONG, please.

My student, the electrician, told me this: Most folks just can't do 84 hour weeks for very long no matter how high the pay is - - just too tough. A few weeks? O. K. But there's a definite limit.

How many 98 hours a week can you do? Isn't it clear that hourly wages, no matter how high, can never poroduce incomes like those of the Buffets, Gates, and so on.

I claim the dirrernce IS BRAINS!

Patrick H. Crowe

 

[pcb]

Dear Mr. Buffet:

Faced with a brief explanation of same you become so defensive that you hurl meaningless, quite defensive accustaions at the person who politely grants you the courtesy of a serious reply. You strain the patience of many folks with this amateurish sort of behavior. Please reconsider such future attempts.



Patrick H. Crowe

Pat, I hope you were speaking of yourself when you wrote this. In case you haven't figured it out, that paragraph could not explain you any better. Thanks for the clarification of what it is you are doing.

Also, I may not be as smart as you think obama is. I may not have ever been a gifted student professor. I didn't finish college because I don't like listening to something I don't care about. Yes I pay the price for it everyday. Also, i've never won the spelling bee. But, despite all of these shortcomings I have, I can still spell better than you. I guess you don't have to be able to spell to teach gifted students. Are you sure they were really gifted.

 

[soapy]

To get back on point here are a couple of things Bob Clements once told me at a ICA convention. Having 5 wash locations was when he was the most profitable. Once he got above 5 locations he had to grow to 20 locations to match the money he made with just 5 due to the increased layers of overhead he had to have to run that many washes. His presentations were always filled with details that most operators would not share with others. Many of his wash locations were put in small towns of 2 to 5 thousand people. After a while people started building washes right across the street in these towns making it almost impossible for either wash to make any money.

 

[Jimmy Buffett]

Actually I attended The University of the South in Sewanee, Tn. Sewanee rejects about 87% of the applicants to the school. Where did you go Pat? Did you miss the question about the iq comparison between McCain and Obama voters?

 

[Patrick H. Crowe]

Mr. Buffet:

My undergraduate degree is from Notre Dame's College of Science. My graduate degree is from Washington University (St. Louis).

Does "attended" suggest you did not graduate? If not how many semesters did you complete?

Frankly, the percentage of rejections means little. More telling is the avergae or minimum SAT scores of those accepted. Do you have that number for your school?

I have not checked recently but at Harvard the SAT's had to be in the range of 1250. Notice these are "aptitude" scores which many educators believe mean more than I. Q. scores alone. In addition many applicants took subject matter sections of the SAT's which indicate neither I. Q. nor aptitude but how much content from a given area was known; e.g. the Calculus test made clear how much Calculus was known and not how much could be learned.

As you probably know an SAT score in the range of 1250 proves the test taker is extremely bright - - roughly speaking in the top 4-5% of all people.

Patrick H. Crowe

 

[Patrick H. Crowe]

Dear pcb:

You took my quote completely out of context and then strayed way off point. Amateurish tricks just like statements pretending to be questions.

The context was the use of fake questions to make statements. To be in context you could have said you did not believe that fir the questions under discussion. You could have cited example from Crowe where he did the same. The point is there are many ways you could have preserved the context and you did not do that.

Instead you turned to another amateurish trick. It's known in debate circles as the "ad hominum" case. It means that you launch a personal attack on your "opponent". Almost all debate judges would note to your coach that you were not only wildly out of context but that personal attacks are the hallmark of rookies and never facilitate dialogue and thus you need help.

Patrick H. Crowe

 

[Jimmy Buffett]

The iq of Obama voters was at least 20 points below McCain voters. Not only graduated but the people I graduated with still LIKE me. That's because I'm a likable guy. I wonder if ND could beat Sewanee in football.