by John Young
http://www.wvwnews.net/downloads/audio/john_young/jy20070825.mp3
Podcast is 45 minutes, so the mp3 is large.
Welcome to Western Voices, I’m John Young.
In the 19th and 20th centuries, America became a powerhouse that delivered living standards, levels of personal freedom and class mobility that made it the envy of the world. As developments in the European homeland were not analogous, the unparalleled prosperity of the United States cannot be explained on an ethnic basis alone. The main difference
was ideological. The ideas and conditions that gave America the crucial edge continue in many forms to this very day, and can be seen in rates of ownership of real property that aren’t even approached anyplace else in the world.
Thomas Jefferson laid the foundation that would separate the United States from Europe, and create the greatest nation the world has ever seen with his often-misunderstood words in the Declaration of Independence that “all men are created equal.” His true intent was given life in the U.S. Constitution, in Article I, Sections 9 and 10 in which both the United States and the Several States were expressly prohibited from granting titles of nobility; and in Article III, Section 3 in which Attainders of Treason are specifically prohibited from working Corruption of Blood.
The importance of these matters to our Founding Fathers can be seen in the fact that they were included in the Constitution itself, rather than in the subsequently ratified Bill of Rights. They didn’t want to entrust it to the amendment process. And the amendment process was a risk. Today, we think of the first ten amendments to the
Constitution as a monolithic article containing only ten amendments. But what most Americans don’t realize is that the Bill of Rights, as sent to the States for ratification, actually contained twelve amendments, two of which weren’t ratified at the time.(1)
As a result of this strong foundation, with a few setbacks along the way, the United States guaranteed that all citizens would be treated equally under the law without regard to social class, abolished the system of inherited aristocracy, and eliminated the most severe abuses employed by the ruling classes of Europe. In this environment, class mobility flourished with people like Thomas Edison, impoverished as children, founding business enterprises on their own ingenuity and industriousness. These success stories became celebrated and known throughout the country, and every school child had faith that with a little education — or even self education — and some hard work, a fulfilling life lay just ahead. When America put men on the moon, the thousands of scientists and engineers required for that task often had parents or grandparents who had been farmers.The destruction of inherited class distinctions served to mobilize an entire population to achieve to its highest levels, and brought a much larger proportion of our population to its highest level of productivity compared with our cousins in the European homeland. For the first time, ordinary Americans of European descent had the ability to build for a long range future, and work to ensure their children had greater opportunities than themselves. To top it all off, the Bill of Rights, at least in theory and quite often in practice, created a system that ensured liberty and justice for all, and protected a citizen’s property and effects from abuses of a government controlled by a handful of individuals. These ideas energized the new nation. While our brethren in Europe were struggling under the yoke of a vast aristocracy that they later replaced with the even more destructive yoke of socialism, we in America were experiencing the greatest levels of class mobility ever seen on earth.
Our Constitution even ensured that inventors and thinkers wouldn’t have their ideas and inventions stolen, by guaranteeing them a period where they could exclusively use and profit from the products of their mind and imagination. This fostered an environment that inspired Americans, no matter how humble their origins, to be the hardest working and most innovative people on earth. The results can be seen in history, and all around us even today.
But inventing a new philosophy or changing a law doesn’t change human nature or the psychological traits that have been expressed by people of European origin for millenia. Class mobility is not only the exception rather than the rule in all human societies to this very day, but a departure from known European history. Strict social stratification has been a prominent feature of European societies since such societies existed, and as such a philosophical and legal change such as that wrought by America’s founding fathers will ultimately succumb to the weight of history and revert to prior methods unless it is vigilantly guarded and energetically maintained.
So let’s take a look at the social conditions prevailing in Europe prior to America’s founding.
European society was characterized by extreme social stratification and lack of not only class mobility, but lack of even the most basic mechanisms to allow a person to achieve based upon personal merit if that person were born in the lower social strata. In fact, many of our ancestors here in America were Europeans sent here as indentured servants for committing the unspeakable crime of being poor. This mindset was long-established and deeply ingrained in the European psyche. Some of our earliest myths, such as the Lay of Rig(2), attribute the establishment of the social classes to divine intervention, and support the idea of inherited social class based upon blood. Even the more modern Arthurian legends justified Arthur’s kingship through resort to blood and supernatural forces.
Because so many attributes of an individual are the result of genetic inheritance, and because the abilities of individuals differ markedly even within the same ethnic group, the idea of a natural aristocracy cannot be entirely dismissed. This is especially the case in circumstances where the aristocratic class takes upon itself the burden of upholding and defending the lives, property and freedoms of the other classes. When this occurs, the aristocratic class
effectively becomes the servant and guardian of the other classes, outward appearance notwithstanding.
As in so many things, the practice of inherited aristocracy fell far short of the ideal. In practice, the aristocracy became corrupted, and ultimately became a parasite upon the body politic that ill-served the people. Rather than manifesting traits that would be expected of an inherently superior class of people, they instead showed themselves to be nasty, brutish, short-sighted and unfit to rule. Hordes of essentially unemployed aristocrats became wastrels supported on the backs of those least able to afford it. Nevertheless, the idea of the aristocratic class being an inherently superior grade of human being, separate from the rest of the ethnic group, persisted in the European zeitgeist.
Against this backdrop, then, we see a Europe in which starvation figured prominently, persons were owned as property, people were persecuted over minor theological differences and people were wholesale accused of a variety of crimes simply to deprive them of their property. Justice was capricious and seldom punished wrongdoers of the upper classes severely if the victim was of a lower class.(3) This echoes the Frisian Laws, some of the oldest recorded laws of Europe, that established different punishments for crimes based upon the social classes of the perpetrator and the victim.
When it came time for America to assert its independence, these observations were clearly in the minds of our nation’s founders; and it is within THIS context that Thomas Jefferson penned his most famous words — that “all men are created equal and endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights.” When Jefferson wrote these words, race was the furthest issue from his mind. Instead, the idea of birthright nobility was foremost.
But as I mentioned earlier, words on paper prohibiting the existence of titles of nobility did nothing to change either human nature or the mindsets peculiar to European-derived peoples. The worship of aristocracy was simply replaced with the worship of wealth. Folks who were able to garner great wealth were therefore given all of the access, influence, rights and respect that had previously been reserved for aristocracy. Early in our nation’s history there was at least some basis for this. People like Edison, Ford and Whitney gained wealth through a combination of intellect, hard work, luck and honorable behavior. But as stock markets and fiat currency came to the fore, the process of amassing wealth came to rely more on connections than upon hard work and honorable behavior. The man who had inside information on a company’s new product details could make more money in a day than the designer of that new product could make in a year. So at some point after 1913, we reached a tipping point where wealth could no longer be equated with creativity, hard
work and virtue in a majority of cases.
Nevertheless, in spite of this change in the character of too many persons with wealth, the idea of aristocracy is so entrenched in the European-American mind that far too many of us subconsciously think of fugitive financiers, stock swindlers, bad musicians, vapid actors and people who make a living by destroying our jobs as if they were royalty. So
this faux aristocracy, unlike the older European aristocracy that at least had to present the illusion of acting in the best interests of the people at large, and even acted within certain gentlemanly moral codes … this faux aristocracy of wealth in a new land of radical individualism saw the end itself — wealth — as adequate justification for its actions. Combined with the ingrained notion of the upper class being an entirely different People than the lower classes, we created a ruling class accountable to nobody with no loyalties other than to itself. This is why, with so many wealthy European Americans in positions of influence, very few can be counted among the friends of their ethnic group. They don’t consider themselves to be part of the ethnic group from which they hailed, and therefore owe it no loyalty whatsoever. So in this sense, the aristocracy of wealth is worse than the system it replaced.
I discussed the influence of money on politics in the preceding Western Voices. Money is a determinative factor on the positions supported by our politicians, and he who has the gold makes the rules. We don’t get to elect who becomes wealthy. Instead, we usually get to choose between candidates supported by people with money. So we end up with an oligarchy.
Just as the old aristocratic system had barriers to entry, our ruling oligarchy has erected barriers as well. These barriers run the gamut from a “progressive” income tax that assures that even people with high incomes won’t be able to amass substantial wealth … to a federal reserve system that diminishes the value of people’s savings every day of the week. It also includes a maze of regulatory systems that can only be navigated by the anointed. If you don’t believe me, just do a little research into the regulatory requirements of building an electric power plant, starting a chemical factory or starting a television station. If you decide to build a small power plant, count on spending millions of dollars just in lawyers to figure out all of the paperwork.
In the late 1990’s, employee stock options for software ventures started turning a lot of highly intelligent engineers, scientists and technical workers into overnight millionaires. The oligarchy was unprepared for this — a situation unprecedented in history — and articles started appearing about the emergence of a new elite class composed of engineers, scientists and computer programmers — almost all of whom were European-American, individual thinkers, and not terribly concerned about what other people thought of them. The ranks of unconventional nouveau riche started new charities, created trusts to protect and pass down their wealth across generations and trust management offices started popping up like daisies across the country. It soon became apparent that engineers and scientists were on the verge of converting their wealth into political power, with a number of engineers running for public office. Prominent engineering journals started running articles describing how much better Congress would work if it were populated by engineers and scientists rather than by lawyers.
Scientific and engineering fields in the United States have been overwhelmingly staffed by European Americans for decades. There can be little doubt that an emergent scientific class in the mid-to-late 1990’s would have been so overwhelmingly white in composition that at least some of its members would have to look around and say: “Hey, has anybody noticed that almost all of us are white?” So the emergence of this new class, and its solidarity, posed a significant threat to the existing order.
The oligarchy struck back. The dot-com crash was not based strictly on a lot of vaporware coming home to roost. Rather, a deliberate contraction of the money supply through the raising of interest rates put the brakes on many companies. This was accompanied by a number of “reforms” including new limitations on the distribution of stock options to employees(4) in order to prevent the re-emergence of a scientific elite that could challenge the existing oligarchy, and bolstering the H1 and L1 visa programs in order to push wages lower and create a multicultural scientific and engineering workforce that would lack the unity inherent in a homogeneous workforce.
Certainly, even though I am both a scientist and an engineer, I don’t suffer any illusion that an engineer put into our extremely corrupt political system would automatically do any better than a lawyer at resisting temptation. Replacing lawyers with engineers without changing the underlying flaws in the system would be like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic. And if the system were fixed, a lawyer would be able to do just as well as an engineer.
But science and engineering are crucial fields of endeavor for the United States and for European Americans generally. They are so important that scientific labor has been called by some observers the “new wealth of nations.”(5) The reason for this is the comparative rarity of scientists and engineers among the population. You see, the completion of an undergraduate scientific or engineering curriculum requires not only a strong grasp of advanced mathematics, but an IQ of 130 or higher. Only 2% of European Americans have IQs that high, and of those, a goodly number could choose to pursue high finance, medicine, law or other highly compensated professions. These latter professions are, of course, well within the hands of the existing oligarchy.
Nevertheless, the scarcity of any needed resource makes it valuable. At one point during the late 1990’s, it was not unusual for a hardworking Unix(6) expert to take home more income than a doctor or lawyer.
Going back to scarcity for a moment, there are a finite number of people in the United States who are capable of becoming scientists or engineers, and of that finite number, some percentage has no particular inclination in that direction. Meanwhile, engineers and scientists stand at the center of all of our consumer products such as cars and cell phones and our most vital infrastructure like electricity generation, the telephone system, and the Internet. Naturally, the new biotechnology field is almost entirely a purely scientific undertaking. These are the sorts of things that not only drive our economy, but even make it possible. So demand for scientists and engineers is rising, but the supply is limited by genetics and inclination. This latter factor, inclination is largely governed by the perceived status and expected salary of such jobs.
Because our Federal Reserve system is designed in such a way that infinite growth is necessary in order to prevent collapse, the need for technical personnel — just like the need for taxpayers to support social services — is growing.
This situation is, of course, a man-made problem. It is man-made to the extent that our monetary system is in need of drastic reform, but it is also man-made by virtue of the values we push to kids via television and movies that undervalue the hard work that even a highly intelligent person will have to undertake to become a scientist. We also undervalue intelligence in and of itself, and push anti-intellectualism in movies, music and television. Our educational system has been re-oriented so that its primary purpose is to produce equal outcomes for some 100 ethnic groups and keep them all from squabbling rather than to educate each child to the fullest extent of his or her own potential. In other words, our current system is doing practically everything it can to make sure that even the 2% of children we produce who have the potential to become scientists never realize that potential. As a result, in many of our engineering and science schools, over half of the student body is composed of Asians rather than European-Americans, and the business community is clamoring for expansion every year of the H1-B program.
Let me take this back, now, to the wealthiest European-Americans, people like Bill Gates. I explained the fundamental mechanisms earlier that led to the wealthiest European-Americans having no loyalty to the people from whom they sprang. But it goes beyond that. Bill Gates has established a scholarship fund, for example, for whom only people of non-European ancestry are qualified.(7) While people are dying from AIDS in this country, he has donated $100M to fight AIDS in India. This should be no surprise because India constitutes his preferred talent pool, as his endless and prestidigitory Congressional testimony in favor of expanding the H1 visa program will attest.(8)
This is nothing more than a way to force down the wages of the very people who should be earning the most, while people like Bill Gates who already have enough money to buy their own countries get to pocket the difference. Even worse, the never-ending flood of H1 workers has forced huge numbers of European-American workers out of the engineering and scientific job markets altogether. This discourages bright European-Americans from even trying to enter fields for whom the primary job requirement seems to be the possession of an unpronounceable name. Just this past weekend I was speaking with a European-American who is an IT worker and a member of EAU. I was discussing some options for upgrading his IT skills when he stopped me and pointed out that in his area, highly qualified European-Americans with those credentials can’t find work.
He isn’t exaggerating. In 2001, for example, 9 out of 10 newly-created jobs in the computer field were filled by H1 visa holders. Nine out of ten!(9) And that wasn’t because we didn’t have enough native talent.
Despite the fact that we faced record unemployment after the 9/11 tragedy, and high tech workers were laid off left and right with the dot-com crash, 312,000 new H1 visas were issued in 2002. Every year the cap is expanded, and there are currently nearly two million H1 workers in the United States.
Things aren’t all wine and roses for the H1 workers, by any means. The attitudes among our upper classes that drove the Irish and African slave markets, indentured servitude, child labor and a host of other humanitarian disasters in our past are still with us today. Indentured servitude was not finally abolished in this country until the early 20th century, but the H1 visa program gives daddy Warbucks a way to bring it back.
It is here that I must interject that H1 and L1 workers are not automatically evil or bad people. Most of them come from countries with serious problems developing even the most basic infrastructure outside the major cities, like India and Pakistan. These societies are hampered by a lack of class mobility, institutionalized corruption that is truly breathtaking, and difficulty feeding their own populations. A person from such a country who takes advantage of our
H1 and L1 visa programs is following the natural human tendency to try to better his circumstances and that of his family. Blaming someone for that is fruitless. Rather, the blame lies with the governments of these Third World countries, with our own government and with our own aristocracy of wealth. It is important that if we are going to vent our righteous indignation, that we vent it in the right direction. And taking the brightest and best from the Third World further impoverishes these nations in the interests of the First World oligarchs, constituting a new form of imperialism and exploitation.
So, as I was saying, H1 and L1 workers are the new indentured servants. A 2003 article in Business Week makes this abundantly clear:
“Immigrants have long complained about employers who cheat or abuse them and threaten to have them deported if they protest … nowadays, the weak economy has sparked an outbreak of abusive treatment among the legions of white-collar employees who flocked to the U.S. on perfectly valid visas during the late-1990s boom. … Indeed, labor law violations involving workers on H1-B visas … have jumped more than fivefold since 1998, according to the Labor Dept. … there could be thousands of H1-B workers who don’t file complaints because they fear the loss of their visa. … The abuses have been particularly widespread in high tech, which used H1-Bs to bring in tens of thousands of programmers and other professionals when companies were desperate for help during the boom. But with the jobless rate among computer scientists and mathematicians at 6%, vs. a mere 0.7% in early 1998, many workers are more vulnerable. Experts point out that the U.S. work-visa system gives employers tremendous power over immigrants. … says Eileen Appelbaum, a professor of labor economics at Rutgers University. “You’re essentially an indentured servant.””(10)
Hardly a week goes by when the news doesn’t carry a report about some company being fined for underpayment of H1 workers.
The repercussions of this among our own best and brightest cannot be overstated. For one thing, it distinctly discourages our own people from even attempting to enter these fields. There are just too many stories about experienced Americans being forced to train low-paid foreign replacements before being laid off. The fields are now considered just too unstable to justify the extraordinary time, effort and dedication necessary to obtain the training and keep up to date. I know a PhD chemist who is now a salesman. I know a software engineer with 20 years of experience who works at a convenience store.
Kids in high school look at their own fathers and wonder why they should even invest the effort in high school, much less college.
Because H1 & L1 workers are essentially indentured servants, it is extremely difficult for free labor to compete against them. But wage differential is only one reason. The other is that such workers are an incredible tax-dodge for corporate America. According to Donald Barlett and James Steele:
“Visit most any large American company and you will find two people working on the same computer project. One is a permanent company employee who pays taxes through withholding. The other a temporary employee who enjoys the kind of payday that more than 100 million American workers can only dream about – a full paycheck with zero deductions.
“Because they are employed by the consulting firm that recruited them, many of these foreign workers are paid either in cash or by check – and no money is withheld for U.S. income tax, Social Security, Medicare, state, or local taxes… Still others receive a paycheck that is banked in India, and, while they’re living and working in this country, they’re paid an ‘allowance’ that is also free of all U.S. taxes.”(11)
In some cases, no taxes need to be paid at all due to special tax treaties. One such outrageous example is outlined by professor Norm Matloff of University of California: “there are many other related dodges. Did you know that universities don’t have to put taxes on [withhold their teaching/research assistants from China, due to a tax treaty?”(12)
Most Americans are unaware of the fact that their employers have to pay additional taxes on their employees beyond what is withheld from paychecks. For example. employers are required by law to match the employee’s social security contribution. This tax-free edge for H1 and L1 workers, even if their wages were identical to those of our home-grown workers, gives them a crucial competitive edge. Because of this, major U.S. corporations are donating big money to political campaigns in order to make the H1 and L1 programs even more lucrative.
For example, between 1997 and 1999, Microsoft spent over $2 million on political campaigns because of this issue.(13)
And that’s where we are left today. We have an aristocracy of wealth and celebrity, too many of whom have no loyalty to the European-American people from whence they came. This aristocracy of wealth has left the American people behind, and rather than comply with the hard-won laws protecting American workers, has opted to replace us with indentured servants with the support of our corrupted elected officials.
And, of course, true to their lack of caring for anyone, they are enabling the largest brain-drain that the Indian subcontinent has ever seen. Since intelligence is a heritable characteristic and their brightest people are leaving their shores for opportunity in the West, subsequent generations of Indians will be less intelligent than the current generation. As the average IQ in India is only 81(14), the physical removal of hundreds of thousands of Indians with IQs of 115 or higher from the country is an unspeakable crime that will impoverish that nation for generations to come. This will doom a billion people to lower standards of living than they would otherwise have. But our business leaders don’t seem to care about THAT either. They just care about money in their bank accounts. Morality, ethics, and even basic humanitarian instincts are just baggage to them. If it were otherwise, they wouldn’t be simultaneously destroying our own best and brightest while dooming the Indian subcontinent to a darker future.
Clearly, it is not enough to merely “reform” the H1 and L1 laws. In order to protect American workers, keep the wages for scientists and engineers high enough to make the training worthwhile and provide incentives for our own population by making sure these careers are accorded the social status they deserve, AND to improve the future prospects of the developing world we need to utterly ABOLISH these visas. It’s really that simple.
To that end, we have initiated a campaign to abolish the H1 and L1 visas. The campaign is a petition drive, and you can find both the petitions and informational handouts at the www.wvwnews.net website. Just click on the link in the left hand column.
I covered the procedures for conducting the petition drive in the spring membership newsletter, but we’ve had a lot of new members join since then, so I want to go through the procedures again today.
For collecting petitions, you need at least the informational handout and petition that you can download from the wvwnews.net website. You should also have pens, a clipboard, and a partner.
Neither the petition nor the information sheet is labeled with the name of our organization. You’ll see why shortly.
As I mentioned, you need a partner. People these days are often scared to open doors for strangers, and I can’t really blame them. Probably the most scary thing in the world at your door is an unaccompanied male, particularly if he is poorly dressed. So at a minimum, dress well. Carry your clipboard with petitions and handouts, and bring a partner. It works best if the partners are male and female, but they can be the same sex in a pinch. This is just because of certain aspects of human psychology that I won’t get into today, so for now take my word for it.
Before you get started you need to choose a community. Once the community has been chosen, check the local ordinances or call the local police department to check whether you have to register before collecting signatures door to door. Collecting signatures to petition for redress is constitutionally protected, so they won’t shut you down; but you may need to register in order to stay on the right side of the law. The reason for this is because there are a lot of people who will be scared to death when a stranger knocks on their door, and instead of opening the door will call the police once you walk away. If the police know you are in the neighborhoods and why, they can instantly put the concerned citizen’s mind at ease. Not all towns require registration, but check just in case.
Naturally, do not go anywhere that has a “no soliciting” sign. But everything else is fair game. When you knock on the door, stand back away from it far enough that the resident can see you from a side window, and can open the door without hitting you. Make sure your clipboard is displayed prominently. When the resident opens the door, remain at least a pace from the door, and introduce yourself: “Hi, I’m Joe Schmoe and this is Bryan Doe. We’re collecting signatures on a petition to abolish the H1 and L1 Visas.” Because our materials aren’t labelled in any way, you can confidently approach people of ANY ethnicity with the petition.
A likely question from the resident who answers the door is: “Who are you with?” At this point, you can be honest. “We are with an advocacy group called European-Americans United.” Another likely question is “What are H1 and L1 visas, and why should I want to abolish them?” In preparation for this question, you should have already reviewed the material in our informational handout. You can give the handout to the person, and briefly explain that we have hundreds of thousands of highly-skilled Americans either out of work or underemployed, and they are being replaced with below-market labor from overseas that doesn’t even pay taxes. Most people will be sympathetic to this.
Your time is valuable. Don’t waste it in arguments. If the person tries to argue or object, or simply refuses to sign, politely excuse yourself and go on to the next house.
As I said, when properly expressed, a lot of people are sympathetic to what we are trying to accomplish. When you are interacting with our fellow citizens, pay close attention to their reactions and comments, and look for people who express views that would make them good prospects for membership. For such people, tell them that European Americans United shares their views; then leave them with the informational handout, and write our web addresses (www.wvwnews.net and www.europeanamericansunited.org) on the top of it if they express interest.
Doing it this way, rather than handing them an EAU brochure, gives the general public a feel that any recruiting efforts we are making are spontaneous. Writing the web addresses down for a prospect gives him or her a personal touch: this isn’t some flyer littering the lawn from some anonymous distributor. Rather, it is a personal reference written face-to-face. In all likelihood, the prospective member will have looked up the websites before you get back to the sidewalk.
This sort of activism is a double-win for us. Lots of people, black and white, will sign the petition and help us make an impact on our elected officials. At the same time, we’ll be making personal one-on-one contact with our people in a positive way that bypasses media. Some of our people will be referred to our websites, and a proportion of those will see fit to join their efforts to ours.
And this is the whole point. EAU’s approach to activism is unambiguously positive. It is good for our members, good for our target demographic and good for America as a whole. Obviously, this campaign will only be as effective as the number of people we can mobilize to get out into neighborhoods and reach out to our Folk. So your participation is important. If you are one of the many people sitting on the fence and wondering if there is anything you can contribute to our efforts, now is the time to join. Our people deserve a bright future, and it is up to us — up to you — to make it so.
This has been John Young with European Americans United, thank you for joining me again today.
(1) One of these was finally ratified in 1992, and the other was never ratified.
(2) Hollander, Lee “The Poetic Edda” p. 120
(3) Bishop, Morris (2001) “The Middle Ages”
(4) Technet, 2005 http://www.technet.org/StockOptions/
(5) Marie-Pierre Bès (2006) “The division of scientific labor: the new Wealth of Nations?”
(6) Unix is the computer operating system at the core of the Internet.
(7) http://www.gmsp.org/
(8) Perrotti, Dino (2007) http://www.computerworld.com/blogs/node/5136
(9) Zazona http://www.zazona.com/ShameH1B/
(10) Skilled Workers–or Indentured Servants? As jobs dry up, abuse of power over visas is on the rise http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/03_24/b3837076.htm
(11) Donald L. Barlett and James B. Steele, “The Great American Tax Dodge: How Spiraling Fraud and Avoidance Are Killing Fairness, Destroying the Income Tax, and Costing You” pages 37 & 40.
(12) Matloff, N. http://heather.cs.ucdavis.edu/itaa.html
(13) Zazona, http://www.zazona.com/ShameH1B/H1BMoney.htm
(14) Lynn, Richard & Vanhannen, Tatu (2002), IQ and the Wealth of Nations