
America's top earners are Asian men - jgalt212
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2016/07/01/the-group-that-seriously-out-earns-white-men/?tid=pm_business_pop_b
======
RealGeek
Asian immigrants are the top earners because they come from the top talent
pool in their home countries.

If you are in India or China, you can not just board a plane to US. The best
way to immigrate to US is to perform well in STEM education, then go to US for
higher studies. Since it is difficult for them to get a US visa, most of the
people who are able to go through the whole process are usually the top
performers who work very hard.

~~~
shripadk
I don't understand this "selection bias" argument at all. How is it that in
all other countries in the World with a significant minority Asian population
do Asians always top the rest with respect to earning? I'm sure not all
countries in the World have as strict an immigration policy as the USA.

~~~
akshatpradhan
You're only accounting for one form of selection bias when in reality there
are two.

The first form of selection bias is inside your country. If you don't already
have status and wealth, then you won't even be able to overcome the
cognitive/emotional load that's required to leave your country.

The second form of selection bias is when the Immigration Officer says yes or
no.

The first form of selection bias is far more effective at weeding out the
"low" earners and ensuring the top earners are pre-selected for immigration.

There is a third form of selection bias but that may not help with this
conversation, and that's geographical. Crossing an ocean has historically been
seen as riskier then crossing land, so that weeds out the risk averse.

~~~
shripadk
These do not fall under "selection bias" when you take this article into
context. According to the definition of "selection bias": "Selection bias is
the selection of individuals, groups or data for analysis in such a way that
proper randomization is not achieved, thereby ensuring that the sample
obtained is not representative of the population intended to be analyzed."

> The first form of selection bias is inside your country. If you don't
> already have status and wealth, then you won't even be able to overcome the
> cognitive/emotional load that's required to leave your country.

But what you said doesn't reflect reality. Many of those who migrate to the US
(or equivalent developed country) are either through scholarships/grants or
already have a job offer. They do not have any sort of cognitive/emotional
load. I'm sure every country allows a greater portion of immigration for
competent people (irrespective of their social standing or economic stability)
as opposed to those who have wealth/status and not contribute back to their
society.

> The second form of selection bias is when the Immigration Officer says yes
> or no.

How is this "selection bias" and how does it apply to the context of the
article we are discussing?

> The first form of selection bias is far more effective at weeding out the
> "low" earners and ensuring the top earners are pre-selected for immigration.

Why would a "top earner" want to go to the US if he is already a "top earner"?
This makes no sense.

> There is a third form of selection bias but that may not help with this
> conversation, and that's geographical. Crossing an ocean has historically
> been seen as riskier then crossing land, so that weeds out the risk averse.

I think you are confusing the term "selection bias" as applied to this article
with issues faced during immigration.

My question has nothing to do with the problems one faces during immigration.
It has more to do with those who have already immigrated and earning
substantially more than the natives (according to the article about 117%
more). My question is why this gap between the immigrated vs the natives with
respect to median income.

------
wallace_f
The gap b/w Asian men and white men is the same as the gap b/w white men and
white women.

Clearly the only explanation for this is institutionalized racism, gender bias
and bigotry. Could you imagine affirmitive action covering white men to close
the gap?

~~~
danso
IIRC, The UC system has changed its admissions policies in a way that reduces
the proportion of admissions based on the metrics that Asians do most well on:

[http://www.nbcnews.com/id/30393117/ns/us_news-
life/t/asian-a...](http://www.nbcnews.com/id/30393117/ns/us_news-life/t/asian-
americans-blast-uc-admissions-policy/)

A few decades ago, UC schools were investigated for allegedly being biased
against Asians in admissions:

[http://articles.latimes.com/1988-11-18/news/mn-452_1_uc-
berk...](http://articles.latimes.com/1988-11-18/news/mn-452_1_uc-berkeley)

~~~
Dr_tldr
In practice, many parts of the rhetoric of "diversity" and "inclusion" end up
using the same tactics as the jewish quotas that were implemented a hundred
years ago in the name of white supremacy.

Resentment and discrimination towards a successful minority is nothing new,
only now the resentment is in the name of a rainbow coalition rather than just
white people from western europe.

------
lycidas
Despite the lack of content in the article, this post seems have to attracted
a few comments. Before everyone comes in here with explanations of "oh it is
because Asians work harder, are smarter, and have better culture" argument -
thus not only further propagating the harmful model minority stereotype but
also implying that certain other races aren't as smart or don't have 'good'
culture - I'd like to propose it is simply because of socioeconomic status and
selection effect.

Your adult income levels is heavily correlated to the socioeconomic status of
the family you grew up in. Asian Americans have the highest average family
income out of any major immigrant groups because Asia is a huge place with
many wealthy and educated citizens who then decide to immigrate over to
America. The selection effect comes from the fact that the people who do
immigrate from Asia are usually either wealthy or well educated or both,
because the lack of these factors prevent poorer families from doing so. These
families then have higher than average socioeconomic status and their children
go on to become well educated and get better paying jobs (1). As for why Asian
Men are specifically higher earning, we still live in a non post gender world.
For an example of institutionalized sexism in tech I would recommend this
recent documentary that just came out (2). As a last point, income isn't
everything. Asian Americans, though facing less severe issues than other
minority groups in America, still have to deal with everyday issues such as
the model minority stereotype or with being perceived as the perpetual
foreigner.

(1) Education and Immigration -
[https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0745648320](https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0745648320).
This is a great read about how basically everything people associate with
immigrants comes down to socioeconomic status.

(2) [http://www.codedocumentary.com/](http://www.codedocumentary.com/) \-
Documentary about females and minorities or lack thereof in tech.

~~~
omonra
I'm afraid the 'asians are smarter, work harder and have better culture' makes
a whole lot more sense.

Let's leave US and look at Asia instead - compare performance of
Japan/Korea/Taiwan (can also through in Singapore and HK) and more recently
China to other countries (Indonesia/Philippines/Malaysia/Thailand etc) post
WW2. They all started out dirt poor yet some countries have made tremendous
progress while others are still pretty undeveloped.

------
wrong_variable
Oh boy.

Asian Men in america are a anomaly. Its strong selective bias.

Open your borders to all of Asia an see what happens.

~~~
sotojuan
I wonder if they're counting the thousands (tens of thousands? hundreds?) of
Asian men who work manual labor or the shipping industry in areas like
Manhattan's Chinatown or Brooklyn's Sunset Park. Probably not as they're
mostly likely paid under the table, but they'd skew results quite a bit.

~~~
gyc
Yet a disproportionate number of sons of daughters of these laborers are
attending Stuyvesant and Bronx Science.

~~~
sotojuan
Yep, I am dating one :-) Well, she went to Brooklyn Tech.

------
asenna
Out of curiosity, by Asian males, do they also include Indian men? It drives
me crazy why Indians and people from other nationalities from the subcontinent
do not get counted as "asians" in the US.

~~~
brownbat
Interesting... subcontinent is definitely part of Asia, but I would have
expected criticism the other direction, that "Asian" lumps together too many
really distinct groups, not concern that it was not inclusive enough.

Hmong households have slightly lower median incomes than the total US
population, for instance.[0]

[0] [http://www.hndinc.org/cmsAdmin/uploads/dlc/HND-Census-
Report...](http://www.hndinc.org/cmsAdmin/uploads/dlc/HND-Census-
Report-2013.pdf)

~~~
zo1
>" _that "Asian" lumps together too many really distinct groups_"

So does white/caucasian, and probably all the other race "colors" as well.
I.e. They lump together many different geographically-isolated/defined peoples
and cultures into one singular entity for simplicity. And then we're led to
believe statistics that are somehow indicative of something regarding that
"race".

------
Red_Tarsius
From now on, I'm going to downvote any article that exploits shallow politics
and clikbait titles. If the writer thinks his work needs such tricks to gain
attention, it's not worth reading.

The article itself is very shallow, and compares people by skin color AND home
continent. Apples and oranges. Except, 'Asian' is a whole casket of different
fruits.

~~~
infosample
> 'Asian' is a whole casket of different fruits

White isn't?

Edit: ""White" refers to a person having origins in any of the original
peoples of Europe, the Middle East or North Africa. It includes people who
indicated their race(s) as "White" or reported entries such as Irish, German,
Italian, Lebanese, Arab, Moroccan or Caucasian."

"many of the ethnic groups classified as white by the U.S. Census, such as
Jewish-Americans, Arab-Americans, and Hispanics or Latinos"

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Americans](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_Americans)

------
meric
>> All groups trail white men in earnings — except Asian men. They made 117
percent of what white men earned in 2015:

Why not just say:

>> All groups trail asian men in earnings — They made 117 percent of what
white men earned in 2015

~~~
ranit
Your version provides less information - it does not say that there are no
other groups between Asian men and white men on earning scale.

------
danso
As others have pointed out, Asians in America benefit from a sort of selection
bias, if you're looking at East Asians whose families immigrated as
doctors/academics/etc. Other Asian groups don't benefit as much, AFAIK. My own
family came over as war refugees, which is a sort of survivor bias but not the
same...it took me awhile to figure out why none of us kids were particularly
great at school growing up.

------
samfisher83
If you want break it down further Indian American's are the highest earning
group in America. Probably because so Indian American especially 2nd
generation one are doctors, dentists, etc.

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_U...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ethnic_groups_in_the_United_States_by_household_income)

------
venomsnake
And suddenly 85% of the content of left leaning blogs and media is outdated :)

On a more serious note - lumping coastal white males and mid-country ones into
a single group, while it is obvious that it is a bi-modal distribution is not
properly conducted statistics.

It will be interesting to see white v asian male showdown by geographic areas
and professions - and then you can claim outearning.

------
xyzzy4
Do they even out-earn people of Jewish descent? Honest question. I thought 10%
of billionaires are Jewish, or something like that.

------
GreaterFool
It would be interesting to see the geographic distribution of Asian population
in US. I assume that there aren't that many people of Asian descent in US and
I'd expect they're mostly located in big cities. That would certainly affect
the median income.

------
jgalt212
Keep this up and the villains on Lifetime will be Asian men instead of white
men.

~~~
gyc
Yeah but that would involve being willing to cast Asian men in leading roles
and romantic interests on TV and in movies.

------
Throwaway585250
Spoiler: Asian males, who have higher IQs and commit less crime than white
males, earn more than white males.

As no white male on HN has ever worked with an Asian male, this will of course
be a total shock to all readers.

~~~
moon_of_moon
Quit trolling. You know its selection bias.

~~~
Moshe_Silnorin
It's pretty well established that East Asians have significantly higher
average IQs than Europeans. High IQ predicts low crime rate. Ashkenazi Jews
and high-caste Indians are other examples of demographics with much higher IQs
on average and also lower crime rate and higher average income. Selective
immigration accounts for some of this but is not the whole story.

~~~
alexc05
I'm sorry, but I've never heard this. Can you provide a source? IQ as a test
has been criticized for cultural bias:

[http://wilderdom.com/personality/intelligenceCulturalBias.ht...](http://wilderdom.com/personality/intelligenceCulturalBias.html)

[http://www.theneuroethicsblog.com/2013/09/intelligence-
testi...](http://www.theneuroethicsblog.com/2013/09/intelligence-testing-
accurate-or.html?m=1)

Additionally, the very measure of IQ is based around the performance of the
mean (where 100 is legged as standard)

How can groups be measured across race with a culturally biased test and NOT
have the validity of the measure questioned?

I've got a lot of trouble believing there are any real studies that would make
such a claim as you've made.

~~~
Moshe_Silnorin
First, we have culture fair IQ tests. Raven's Progressive Matrices is entirely
symbolic:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raven%27s_Progressive_Matrices...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raven%27s_Progressive_MatricesIt's)
very hard to see how it could be culturally biased, and if it is, why do
Europeans do so poorly compared to Chinese and Japanese people?

Regarding differences in average IQ, Ashkenazi Jews are the most stark
example. It is indisputable that they score roughly a standard deviation above
gentiles:

[http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0160289606...](http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S016028960600033X)

[http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPag...](http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=458389&fileId=S0021932005027069)

Some claim this is purely cultural. But I think genetics is a much more
parsimonious explanation. Ashkenazi Jews are about 2% of the population yet
22% of nobel prize winners are
Ashkenazi:[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashkenazi_Jewish_intelligence#...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ashkenazi_Jewish_intelligence#Evidence_for_a_group_difference_in_intelligence)
The difference in culture between secular jews and gentiles is just not enough
to account for that.

Also note, I think acknowledging this fact prevents racism. Antisemites love
pointing out that jews are overrepresented in many high status occupations,
postulating crazy conspiracy theories for why this is the case. But once you
acknowledge the IQ gap, we have an entirely benign explanation and it's
evident that these conspiracy theories hold no water.

~~~
alexc05
> First, we have culture fair IQ tests. Raven's Progressive Matrices is
> entirely symbolic: >
> [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raven%27s_Progressive_Matrices...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Raven%27s_Progressive_Matrices..).
> very hard to see how it could be culturally biased, and if it is, why do
> Europeans do so poorly compared to Chinese and Japanese people?

So one hypothesis is that the test is unbiased and that Chinese & Japanese
people have a higher IQ than Europeans?

Perhaps another hypothesis is that Kanji based languages with a high number of
glyphs and characters gives a lifetime of practice to Chinese and Japanese
people who are then more adept amd practised at specially rotating random or
nonsense glyphs.

While the Ashkenazi Jews' IQ differences are interesting, your conclusions
remain spurious and based on correlation & epidemiology.

One of the studies you cite for example examines a cohort of Jews who settles
in Britain from Germany between 1908 and 1940. Wealth and connections could
account for a massive "selection bias"

Additionally "high caste Indian" would also speak to other possible
confounding variables.

For example: a very high socioeconomic status appears to be a common thread to
all your examples which don't point to race as the dependent variable.

It's all interesting, but I'm not sure the interpretation you're presenting
really stands up.

~~~
Moshe_Silnorin
Raven's Progressive Matrices aren't really based on spacial rotation, but an
interesting point. One thing we might look for to test this idea would be
Raven's Matrices tests of illiterate Chinese farmers. They were developed in
the late 30s, so it's possible such studies were done. Though we'd need to be
wary of the Flynn effect.

We see similar IQ differences in Ashkenazi immigrants to America and Canada,
and these differences have persisted over multiple generations. You would
expect regression to the mean if it is purely a selection effect. Also,
selection effects can't explain 27% of United States Nobel prize winners in
the 20th century, 25% of Fields Medal winners, and 25% of ACM Turing Award
winners, for obvious reasons. 10x overrepresentation isn't something selective
immigration can explain when the the global Ashkenazi population is so small.

Wealth is tied with cognitive ability. Look at Jewish immigrants in the 1930s,
most of them were extremely poor, but their children grew up to be
disproportionately successful. Most people desire wealth. Intelligence is your
ability to realize your desires. Intelligent people will tend to acquire more
wealth than less intelligent people. As intelligence is highly heritable, this
has class implications that can't be ignored.

~~~
telotortium
Regarding Progressive Matrices, you could try comparing Japanese and Chinese,
who use kanji; Koreans, who use hangul, which is derived from kanji; and
Vietnamese, who use the Latin alphabet (albeit with a lot of diacritics).

------
okket
Please change the clickbait title to "Asians are the top earners in USA now"
or something.

~~~
ThomPete
That is the title though. We don't normally change titles when they are
correct.

~~~
IKqDaSojoHFkj3h
[https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html](https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html)

"Otherwise please use the original title, _unless it is misleading or
linkbait_."

~~~
clamprecht
And sadly it seems like half of the titles these days are linkbait. And this
article is from the Washington Post! We aren't even talking about nautilus or
one of those sites.

