?

1.5% of the population is roughly 4.5 million.

If IQ, and other intelligence-based tests such as the SAT are only determined by "access to education, i.e. money," then WHY do the poorest whites in USA, still score higher than the richest blacks?

"Socioeconomic factors

Controlling for SES only reduces the US Black-White IQ gap by a third or 5 points. If there are racial genetic differences, then this figure is overstated since part of the differences in parental SES are due to differences in parental IQ. Furthermore, an environment only explanation predicts that the IQ gap would be smaller at higher levels of parental SES since these children would be less exposed to the environmental factors lowering IQ. However, the gap is actually larger at higher parental SES levels.[3]

There are also studies finding higher average IQ for East Asians, American Indians, and Inuit with similar or worse SES than Blacks. Studies have also found that when comparing Black and White children regarding the geographical areas of their homes, the schools they attend, and other fine grade socioeconomic indicators, then the Black children from the best areas and schools (those producing the highest average scores) still average slightly lower on IQ than the White children with the worst socioeconomic factors.[3]"

SOURCE: http://en.metapedia.org/wiki/Race_and_intelligence

I hear this "diversity is our greatest strength" mantra being pushed by European, and European-founded countries. . . Yet nobody can tell me, supported with evidence, as to how diversity makes a country so great? Other than food, or music (neither of which you need diversity to enjoy of different cultues). I mean, look at Japan, they are racially homogenous up to 99%, and nobody says "they need diversity"? Why does this only apply to WHITE COUNTRIES? And, as the question asks, why should white people be so embracing of diversity? All it does is create tension, and problems? Middle East. . . USA (racial tensions). . . South Africa (whites who built the country, and feed the country by farming, are experiencing genocide). . . Countries with the lowest violence HAVE NO DIVERSITY!!! Japan, Saudi Arabia. . .

Minorities want to come to OUR COUNTRIES, and complain that "whites are over-represented in jobs, music, movies, government, etc." UMMM, WELL, YES! IT'S OUR COUNTRY!?! Should we not have that right?

So yeah, tell me again, how does diversity improve a country, and make it more peaceful, and prosperous? GIVE ME ONE REASON SUPPORTED BY EVIDENCE!

Why aren't other wealthy countries like Japan, Korea, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Dubai. . . Hell, even Argentina, Uruguay, and Chile (although these are white countries, created by Europeans too).

Why are these white countries being flooded with immigrants? And why do whites in these countries get called "racists" for not wanting foreign immigration? Why does nobody call the Japanese, the Koreans, the Saudis, the Qataris, etc. racist for having "hostile" immigration policies that limit foreign immigration, thereby enabling them to stay 99% racially homogenous?

I don't get it? Does Euorpe, and European-founded countries not have the same right of self-determination as Japan, and Korea?

Why do we give them so much money? Why do we hold their interests just as important, if not more so, than our own? Why don't we just let them handle their business, and we handle ours?

That doesn't mean we have to become enemies, but why can't we just keep them like any other ally?

Don't you think this would help us improve relations with other Middle-Eastern countries, and ultimately establish a better rapport between the west, and middle-east?

Finally, why the hell are so many jews in positions of power in USA, when they are only like 1.5% of the total population?

Lol, now a decade and some change later, literally, the exact opposite is the case - Americans, and boxing in general is trying to hype up, and find the "great black hope," to dethrone the white, European "two-headed champion" that is the KLITSCHKO BROTHERS. . . Ruling with iron fists.

Heavyweight boxing in general now is dominate by white-Europeans. LOL, oh man, how the times change. . . It's just so funny seeing that movie come on HBO now. . . .

After he made the racial remarks about "never losing to a white boy," and then in fact, subsequently losing to a "white boy"?

On a scale of 1-10 - 1 feeling not stupid at all, and 10 feeling extremely stupid.

So anybody watch Friday Night Fights tonight? Aside from being impressed with Gradovich, who just beat 50 Cent's promotional-signee Billy Dib for the IBF featherweight title in only his 16th professional fight, Willie Nelson looked absolutely brilliant in his first round KO over Michael "Murder Man" Medina.

Medina is definitely not a pushover either. At best his talent parallels that of a fringe contender; at worst he's an upper-echelon journeyman, or gatekeeper talent. A mediocre journeyman, he is not.

At 6'3'', possessing an 81" reach @ 154 pounds, Nelson definitely has the size. Unlike a Paul Williams, though, he sits down on his shots, and picks his punches very well, thus taking fully advantage of his physical gifts. I mean, that right hand down the pipe was textbook-perfect.

Anyway, I think he'll be challenging for a title, or one of the marquee names/talents @ 154 by 2014.

Of course, there's still unanswered questions - and in boxing those can't be answered until he fights a legit world-class talent. . . .

Notwithstanding the outcome of Kessler/Froch II, and Hopkins/Cloud, I can see these two meeting in a championship fight at 175 pounds in the near future. Right now I'm leaning towards Froch cinching out a decision against Kessler (at 168), and Cloud getting an ugly, ugly, but deserving SD nod over Hopkins.

I can see this fight going either way, and being a FOTY candidate. Kessler is a bit more precise, adn technically sound, but Cloud is more athletic, and probably hits harder (and is bigger/more natural at 175).