It's a general population survey, the UI appears to have broken when they've migrated to a new one but the item-level responses are still there. Play with the microdata if you want, it's there for the taking.
Where are the working links? I scrutinize both data and collection.
The fact of the matter is that in graduate enrollments, the majority of enrollments are supermajority non-Asian native born.
The fact of the matter is that the only ones who matter are the Asian and mainly Chinese STEM.
No, it's not. PhDs are NPV-negative for most US citizens and the idea that 5 years of lab work on an academic campus is somehow unusually transformative that 5 years of lab work on an industry campus is not is truly dumb.
That you're uneducated but think you know is truly dumb. What you said is basically that a factory assembly person with 10 years experience is the same as a trained engineer.
The idea that only "PhDs matter" is dumb
Saying that a 168% increase is less than doubling is truly dumb. How's that?
Only PhDs matter in a STEM setting. I didn't say that PhDs run the top ecelons of the world.
(heck, even 2 of the 8 founders of Fairchild didn't have a PhD),
So... 6/8 did, right? LOL Sounds like they know it's important. The whole family can't be smart.
nor do a large number of founders, even when you ignore the obvious endogeneity problem with PhDs and most education research in general (people that pursue higher studies are more capable to begin with and thus they would've achieved more at any level of education).
Founders rely on a functioning society to protect them. Functioning society relies on science. Science is made by PhDs. If you have the a team of founders and politicians and I have a team of PhD's, my society will run yours over.
You can slice and dice it all you want, ~16% of the US workforce is foreign-born and so unless your looking at exceedingly narrow slices of the workforce, it's all going to be supermajority US-born including, inter alia, the STEM workforce.
Yeah, we did this before. It's all the janitors and bullshit. Up at the PhD level, it's 50/50... in a population where Asians are like 3%. You can slice that all you want, but you can't figure out fractions of the pie without Asians calculating it for you.
Yeah, because its a competition only Chinese people really care about.
Then don't go. You go, you lose, then you say you don't care? LOLOL Yeah, you soon won't care about global power either.
Most US students, including at highly ranked majority white school districts simply don't have it as an offering. The idea that a self-selected cohort of a few dozen people is something you can run inferential statistics on is lulzy. An opt-in competition that is completely unnecessary and irrelevant to the academic careers will unsurprisingly, not result in
They compete against each other domestically to determine the team, stupid. You don't just volunteer and go.
Yes, the paper itself (the 100+ one that got published in the QJE) noted that foreign-born Asians may be different because of language ability and whatnot (including tax sheltering) and once you merge it with US-born Asians and their parents - the income convergence disappears conditional on parental income percentile.
So basically, it used data that excluded the most drastic group (first gen low tier, often illegal immigrants) and you have no answer for that other than this meaningless crap.
Thus the idea that there's unique human capital persistent in Asian culture or whatnot is dumb.
That you equated income with STEM contribution/capability is dumb. That you did it against after I told you once is dumb. That you won't be able to escape it but will try to say it again will be dumber.
Once again, engineers may not earn as much as stock brokers and investment bankers, but they are the backbone of society. Yours is a house of cards when they are weak.
Yeah, the key word there is "human capital". Asians are overrepresented in STEM (in large part from how the 1965 Immigration Act played out). They are still a minority in STEM.
The higher the level, the less that is true. In high school, everyone studies STEM. In college, more Asians, less white. In masters, the trend continues. At the PhD level, 50% Asians in a 3% minority society.
The idea that "suburban white kids" can't do STEM is also dumb
That you've used "dumb" to describe everything you try and fail to argue against is... du... pathetic. Don't you know other words? Almost anybody can do anything; a bear can swim. But doesn't swim like a fish, which is why most bears don't spend that much time under water, just like why most suburban white kids stay away from STEM.
it flies in the face of surging CS enrollments and successful completions and a massive growth in the US software publishing sector, or the large increase in engineering enrollments following the National Defense Education Act.
Well, it flew in their faces. You showed that data last time too and I showed that you cherry-picked the increases while running around the many many decreases. Then you ran away.
If the Asian STEM advantage was truly as large as you claim, there should be a large wave of Asian founders and companies founded by Asians should have substantial excess equity returns compared to other similar businesses. That doesn't exist. Plus, it's entirely logical - US human capital development has moved on by leaps and bounds since 1965, yet even before 1965 when Asians were completely banned from the country,
The Asian STEM advantage is that large in a modern setting, but let's just say Chinese because honestly, lots of Asians don't deserve to hitchhike on this ride. The PRC was founded in 1949; China only very recently became a country with the significant capital, and it already has megacorps in tech popping up. So your observation is wrong for the timing but correct in seeing what has started.
the United States was still far and beyond on the technological frontier
We took a few hundred year nap, let the critterlings run ahead for a bit. Reeling them in now.
Was that real? Do it again.
What? The steam carrier? You know China's ahead of that now, right? China's electric launch system is ahead of the Ford even.
the Interstate Highway System, etc).
LOLOL What?? China has better highways, more of them
You seem to have some racial resentment towards white people that seems to have evolved into "lol only Asians matter".
Only Asians matter in STEM. Only White people matter in law/politics (in the West). I give them their due, but they are not due anything in STEM.
By the way, I meant Americans and Western Europeans. I love Russians and they do great science, especially in Russia. They're as white as it gets.
Maybe you and Vivek can go together to therapy.
I don't hang out with Indians. Did he also note your weakness in STEM?
Yes, Asians are a high performing minority (~6% of the total US population) in the United States, but at best ~0.5StDevs above the population mean and in no way all clustered at the right tail in any academic field. An entire argument based on extremely narrow slices of the labor market and an extremely niche competition simply do not have any statistical power.
How do you know about standard deviations and statistical power? I thought they taught those after percentage calculations... Your math teacher was supposed to make sure you know that anyone over a 100% increase is more than doubling before teaching you statistics or based on such a flimsly foundation, your statistics calculations just can't be trusted.
#7848 basically concludes exactly what I said about America's STEM composition. Why did you post evidence against yourself? Because you're mathematically illiterate? With this evidence, you don't even need to find those links I asked from from line 1: this is already done.
